Dear 100 Hour Board,
Hypothetically, if I wanted to vote for Buttigieg, and a family member told me that is immoral and against church teachings because he is gay, are they right? Please tell me, would it actually matter if the president of the United States were openly gay? I do believe in the sanctity of marriage and it being between a man and woman. I don’t believe the current president lives according to my moral beliefs either. So I wonder how important that really is and where to draw the line. Could my vote really be against church teachings?
Dear vote me tender,
I don't think the sexual orientation of someone in office is a reason to vote or not vote for them, one way or the other. Their policies should be what are most important, and if they treat other people respectfully.
The short answer is no, it isn't.
The long answer is that your hypothetical family member is being far too hyperbolic, and we don't have some sort of sacred obligation to keep gay people out of political office simply because of who they are. Believing in and sustaining the Church's doctrine on marriage does not require you to shy away from, reject, or otherwise keep your distance from people who believe differently than you do. Vote based on his policies, not his identity.
Voting for Buttigieg is in no way a statement on what you believe marriage is or ought to be. Your vote might encompass all of his policies, or only a few, or none at all: maybe you're voting for him for some other reason. But in any case, voting for an openly gay man is in no way some sort of concession about the definition of marriage, and it most certainly isn't "against church teachings." You are entirely free to believe that marriage should be defined a certain way and still elect someone who believes and behaves differently than you do (all of us have to compromise with our chosen candidates on issues somewhere), and membership in the Church does not (and should never) compel you to vote for a candidate on the basis of whether or not they pass some sort of institutional smell test. The Church doesn't have any "teachings" as far as politicians go, except that good can be found in both parties and each member should earnestly seek to do what they feel is best for the nation. We don't have any sort of obligation to keep LGBTQ+ candidates out of office because of their behavior, and if we did hold every politician to this nebulous standard of whether or not they live according to "church teachings," our pool of morally acceptable politicians would be shallow.
Pete's platform isn't his sexuality. If you like the rest of his policies you are more than welcome to vote for him and it isn't against church teachings. If anything, to judge him unrighteously based purely on that aspect of his identity is more against Church teachings.
Not to mention, lots of Mormons voted for Trump and he sexually assaults women, supports the separation of families, is racist, bigoted, violent, and corrupt. He openly discusses his use of sex workers, he probably was in cahoots with Epstein, he's a liar and a cheat. If you "aren't allowed" to vote for someone who does things against Church teachings, everyone would have voted independent in 2016. But they didn't.
Anyway, don't let your family tell you what to do with your vote, especially if you can't find anything that the Church explicitly says about it. If you're still torn up about it, you can research the other candidates to see who you like as an alternative.
As the other writers have emphasized, you aren't going to find hardly any politicians who abide by church teachings.
When you vote for people, you aren't voting for their personal morality; you're voting for how well you think they will perform in the given office. It is absolutely not immoral to vote for an openly gay person.
I also want to point out that people who live by different moral codes aren't inherently bad/evil.