I was raised in Utah, and as one of the few non-Mormons in my community, I experienced plenty of discrimination and abuse, both emotionally and physically.  (Everyone knew if you didn't attend their church, so secrecy wasn't an option)  Likewise, I couldn't choose not to interact with the community either.  If I wanted to have any friends at all, they pretty much had to be LDS, and there were indeed more open-minded and tolerant folks, usually those who had migrated to Utah from other states where they themselves had experienced what it was like to be a minority.  So I had plenty of time to analyze Utah culture from the perspective of a person who was an unwanted member of the community; an outsider in my own home.

One thing I can say about the Mormon church is that it does not have a record of fiercely standing by its own dogma when dominant cultural attitudes in the country oppose its views.  Polygamy is the obvious example (although it is definitely still practiced by some behind closed doors).  But African-Americans, for example, were once seen by the LDS church as the descendents of Caine, the son of Adam who murdered his own brother.  This sin was said to be borne by Caine's descendents in the form of a mark, ie. colored skin.  Thus, people with more melanin in their skin than an average Caucasian were considered to be inherently sinful and were not allowed to become members of the LDS church (If we're all born of original sin, then why should that matter?  No answer, of course).  But along comes the human rights movement and, lo and behold, people of color are suddenly allowed to become members of the Mormon church, and the old belief is quietly swept under the rug.  These are only two examples of how this church has changed its policies and rewritten its records to hide the historical truth from its members, and to allow them to continue to grow and recruit more members, which is something the Mormon church takes very seriously (one of my friends was disowned by his family when he decided not to serve a "mission", that is, a 2-year term devoted to recruiting new members that all active male members are expected to serve).

This isn't to say they change their views easily.  The government more or less forced them to formally denounce polygamy before Utah could become a state.  But, unlike the Catholic church and its refusal to even turn a blind eye to the use of contraception, the LDS church has proved to behave more like a corporation.  Members give 10% of their income to the church.  "Good" members give 10% of their gross income, not net.  They own lots of real estate and plenty of stock.  They have money and, like big corporations, they use it to promote what they believe to be their best interest.  That best interest changes as times change, and the church leaders have shown a lot of acumen in keeping the church relevant by adapting to that change, albeit slowly.  I believe it is only a matter of time, maybe a long time, before the gay community is accepted by the Mormon church.  I also believe that gay rights will have to be widely accepted and enforced in the US before that change is possible.  They will probably have to be put in a position where church leaders must accept that continued discrimination against gays is only hurting its own prospects for the future.  Then they'll change, and they'll pretend that it was always that way.

But right now the general Mormon perspective on homosexuality is similar to the general conservative perspective on global warming: refusal to acknowledge its legitimacy as a debateable issue (the head-in-the-sand stance, aka the put-your-fingers-in-your-ea rs-and-shout-la-la-la stance).  This kind of ignorance is exacerbated by the fact that Utah is one of the most isolated states in the country.  The states around it are similarly low in population and largely supportive of Mormon attitudes, which have bled into them as their church's influence and membership have expanded in the region.  If you look at the 2008 Presidential election map, you can see their part of the country, together with the South, are the current strongholds (or last bastions, perhaps) of the right wing.  You can also see their spheres of influence shrinking as more moderate views gain ground in the suburbs and exurbs, as minority populations increase, and as younger generations come of age who have grown up in communities and with media that are filled with people of all colors, creeds and nations.

The whole situation actually makes perfect sense and is following a clear historical pattern of intolerance and acceptance.  We definitely need to keep an eye on the Mormon church to make sure it doesn't get away with any more prop 8's in the future.  But I don't think we need to be particularly concerned by the Mormons, per se, any more than we already are of any other brand of right winger.  If they attempt more of these attacks on civil liberties, we should lean on them as hard as we can and not be intimidated by their threats and false accusations.  Remember, the constitution is on our side, and it's much harder to look a person in the face when you tell them that you don't believe in allowing them their due rights.  The Mormon church hates bad press because it hurts their reputation and makes recruitment of new members more difficult.  It would probably be helpful to create an aggressive online campaign to strongly associate the Mormon church with homophobia.  They don't want to change their homophobic policies, but they don't want to be called homophobic either.  Katz was right to point out that their stance on gays is just another case of separate-but-equal hypocrisy.

It's a shame, because Utah truly is a place of great natural beauty.  Nice to visit, but, as Cenk would say, Can't have it.  Can't live there, Can't work there, Can't buy beer that's over 3.2% alcohol there (except in state-run liquor stores.  You see?  The hypocrisy never ends).