There were many groups that wanted to ban guns in schools and churches, period. These are off limits locations in some other States with concealed weapons permits. There was an active, citizen petitoin under way to place the issue on the ballot. Some churches were giving it support and the LDS church was considering joining the efforts so as to have legal teeth to ban guns from their sacred property.
Yes, they were pushing for a change. They were also willing to accept what is now current law with its default position of carrying in churches allowed unless notice is given, so long as the notice did not have to be a sign on the door of their buildings. The ban also applies ONLY to the interior of houses of worship themselves, rather than parking lots, parks, or other religiously owned property as the citizen petition may well have required. Not only do we retain our rights to carry on government property including schools, but our government employees including teachers are protected in their rights to carry on the job.
I won't say it was a great piece of legislation or that I liked it. But it certainly prevented the LDS church from throwing its considerable political weight behind the "gun free schools and churches" petition drive which then failed miserably. I will also point out that the penalty for carrying into a "posted" church is less than the penalty for tresspassing. And at the end of the day, we really ought to consider the rights of churches--in particular--to control and limit access to their sacred property.
I respect your personal view of religion. Just realize that most people, including the VAST MAJORITY of those who support RKBA, do not share it.
The LDS Church uses the King James Version of the Bible and it contains our favorite RKBA scripture in Luke. And if you think that particular scripture is any less suspeptible to interpretation or "context" arguments than any other scripture, you need to be better understand how EVERY religion functions.
And at the end of the day, we have NO RIGHT to be on private property unless invited and the owner is allowed to set pretty much any condition he likes. You have a first amendment right, but don't expect to bring porn into my home. A business open to the public is a slightly different matter. But religious or sacred property has ALWAYS been given the greatest deference possible.
As an active member of the LDS Church, I do not understand nor even agree with the decision of church leadership to ban lawful, privately owned guns from their buildings. But my faith trumps my politics and I'm not going to get too uptight over the issue. As others have said, I follow the counsel of my church clergy on this matter and intend to do so short of some kind of personal and specific revelation that I should do otherwise on some specific occassion. However, in that case, I pray the revelation is not to carry a gun to church, but instead to take the family to visit a relative's congregation or even keep everyone home sick. I don't ever want to have to use my gun against another person.
Those who feel strongly about this issue should simply avoid visiting LDS churches or other congregations that ban guns. But I HIGHLY doubt that any amount of "pressure" is going to change this policy. Spend your time and efforts elsewhere in more productive pursuits.