Reader comments
LDS Church urges pro-Proposition 8 calls
319 comments | Read story
Are you serious? | 11:27 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
The LDS church has always taught love and tolerance for all? Were we raised in
the same church, or were you not paying attention?
Tom | 11:31 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Grew up in Utah, live in CA. No way this will pass. You guys lost. I've
even donated money.
To Just the Facts @8:36pm | 11:32 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
If indeed it is an argument of just what label you use, it would seem to me that
I am a car mechanic, but I would like to be a Doctor. If I start labeling myself as a Doctor and practicing medicine, then I would expect those who have legally been labeled Doctors ( and have followed the requirements to be called that ) get upset and I think rightly so.
I would like to be President of the US, but there are several proplems
1) I am under 35
2) I have not been elected and
3) The majority of the other citizens don't seem to think the same way.
If I get letterheads printed with the Presidential seal and use the label "President". I think I would expect troubles.
I don't think this is just about labels ... and I support the established concept of marriage as being between a man and his wife. Other relationships can have other labels, but sorry "marriage" is already taken.
My comparisons are clear to me, I hope they are to you also.
I am a car mechanic, but I would like to be a Doctor. If I start labeling myself as a Doctor and practicing medicine, then I would expect those who have legally been labeled Doctors ( and have followed the requirements to be called that ) get upset and I think rightly so.
I would like to be President of the US, but there are several proplems
1) I am under 35
2) I have not been elected and
3) The majority of the other citizens don't seem to think the same way.
If I get letterheads printed with the Presidential seal and use the label "President". I think I would expect troubles.
I don't think this is just about labels ... and I support the established concept of marriage as being between a man and his wife. Other relationships can have other labels, but sorry "marriage" is already taken.
My comparisons are clear to me, I hope they are to you also.
Comments continue below
Thought | 11:37 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Some things shouldn't be redefined to appease a few vocal activists. Why
don't we allow 5 year olds to purchase alcohol? Why don't we
eliminate any defined age of when someone can consent to sexual activity? Leave
marriage alone!
to Laker Fan | 11:41 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
No, straight people will still rule the world. ;) cause if gays ever start to
rule the world, there would be no world. People would cease to exist.
Fred Vader | 11:45 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Many LDS think that if Prop 8 is defeated then Gays will sue to marry in the LDS
Temples. Unfortunately, that is not where it will start.
Where it will start will be when an LDS Gay couple has a civil marriage and they are excommunicated from the LDS Church. Then that Gay couple will sue because the "LDS Church discriminated against them for being gay and getting married under the Constitution of California."
Don't think that's coming? Just wait...
I also correctly predicted back in the late 90s that Gays would not stop with "civil unions", eventhough at the time they all claimed that was all they wanted.
Where it will start will be when an LDS Gay couple has a civil marriage and they are excommunicated from the LDS Church. Then that Gay couple will sue because the "LDS Church discriminated against them for being gay and getting married under the Constitution of California."
Don't think that's coming? Just wait...
I also correctly predicted back in the late 90s that Gays would not stop with "civil unions", eventhough at the time they all claimed that was all they wanted.
from BYU | 11:45 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I wish LDS people knew how hurtful the Church's involvement with Prop 8 has
been to their gay and lesbian brothers and sisters in the Church. Several
people killed themselves around the time the Church was promoting Prop 22, and I
pray that the same thing will not happen this time. I view this issue as being
similar to past civil rights movements. Interracial marriage, now generally
accepted, was met with the same attempts to constitutionally ban it and to
obstruct people of different races from marrying.
In the Book of Mormon, Alma 30:7 it says that it is "strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds." Proposition 8 is such a law, and so I oppose it.
VOTE NO ON PROP 8!
In the Book of Mormon, Alma 30:7 it says that it is "strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds." Proposition 8 is such a law, and so I oppose it.
VOTE NO ON PROP 8!
lindaj | 11:51 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I am so pleased to see so many good people taking a stand for Proposition 8. I
can't add anymore to what has already been said in favor of this
proposition, except this: Please take heed to the words from the person who
lives in Canada. That person is saying, if you want to know the ramifications of
legalizing gay marriages, then look at what is happening to us. Thank you all
for your yes votes to Proposition 8.
Destroying marriage in Europe | 11:54 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
The question was asked how legalizing gay marriage will affect traditional
marriage. This is too limited a forum to address all the issues. However, a
recent study was released in Denmark. Married parenthood has become a minority
phenomenon. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage,
Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is
outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock
parenthood, is acceptable. There is data for this assertion. Google it.
Why would any society want to risk such an 'experiment', with such potential for destroying the very underpinnings of society itself without sufficient knowledge of the results? Some might say there is no iron-clad correlation to any data against gay marriage. If gay marriage is a legitimate, non-threatening proposal for changing the definition of society, prove it.
Why would any society want to risk such an 'experiment', with such potential for destroying the very underpinnings of society itself without sufficient knowledge of the results? Some might say there is no iron-clad correlation to any data against gay marriage. If gay marriage is a legitimate, non-threatening proposal for changing the definition of society, prove it.
To Cali girl (2 posts above) | 12:04 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Then the court judged wrongly. Homosexuals are held under the same restrictions
and laws concerning marriage as everyone else is, thus they are treated equally
under the law. They just don't like the law and think it shouldn't
pertain to them. To me, that doesn't qualify the need to change it.
Reality | 12:09 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
If anybody should be tolerant of gay-marriage it should be the LDS Church. The
early members suffered much persecution for practicing polygamy.
Now it appears that they are persecuting gay people for wanting marry.
It doesn't make much sense.
Now it appears that they are persecuting gay people for wanting marry.
It doesn't make much sense.
Two Languages | 12:13 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
hit the nail on the head. Quite often those who advocate gay marriage preface
their comments with, "explain how it will hurt families, keeping God out of
your explanation." I've personally heard or read this this several
times. That is entirely the point, many want to take God out of the discussion.
There are many reasons it will damage society beyond repair, but ultimately it is wrong because God declaired it is wrong, and I submit he (and his prophets) have the right to claim so.
If there is EVER a discrepancy between societal 'wisdom' and a prophet, my family and I will follow the prophet.
There are many reasons it will damage society beyond repair, but ultimately it is wrong because God declaired it is wrong, and I submit he (and his prophets) have the right to claim so.
If there is EVER a discrepancy between societal 'wisdom' and a prophet, my family and I will follow the prophet.
Lyn | 12:21 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Wow, Canadiandy, thanks for your post. I never thought of those things
happening. Well, okay, the LDS Church leaders are not being
"homophobes" here, but they can foresee a Pandora's box opening
and more disgraceful troubles ahead. Maybe we ought to listen to our prophet?
Straitagnst8 | 12:22 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I live in California, recently moved from Utah. Hardly ANYONE here is even
talking about 8, only the Mormons. They are the only one's who've
called me about it (and only because my wife is a 'Member of Record'
and they have her number). All the polls I've seen suggest Californians
are not interested in changing the State constitution, and there is a resentment
of an out of state Church trying to spearhead the effort to for the change (many
here know the Mormons have lead the charge). So don't count on 8 passing,
and YES, Obam will be president. Suck on that Utah!
LDS4gaymarriage | 12:33 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Michael B - Protect the family. Protect the family. Protect the family...
LDS - A 2004 study among 695 various Protestant ministers nationwide, asked them to identify the three strongest threats to families in their own community.
The biggest threats were divorce (listed as one of the top three by 43% of all ministers), negative influences from the media (38%), and materialism (36%). These were followed by absentee fathers (24%) and families that lack a stay-at-home parent (22%). The rest of the list included:
�Co-habitation before marriage (18%)
�Pornography (17%)
�Morality not being taught in schools (14%)
�Poverty, unemployment, and/or a poor economy (13%)
�Parental alcohol use/abuse (12%)
�Parental drug use/abuse (11%)
�Drug use/abuse among teens or children (8%)
�Teen sexual involvement/activity (8%)
�Alcohol use/abuse among teens or children (6%)
�Adultery (5%)
�Poor schools or quality of education (4%)
�Teen pregnancy (2%)
�Sexual predators or sexual abuse (1%)
�The expense of child care (1%)
�Other issues (12%)
Please note that gay marriage didn't even make it into the top 20 threats to families PER THE CLERGY.
LDS - A 2004 study among 695 various Protestant ministers nationwide, asked them to identify the three strongest threats to families in their own community.
The biggest threats were divorce (listed as one of the top three by 43% of all ministers), negative influences from the media (38%), and materialism (36%). These were followed by absentee fathers (24%) and families that lack a stay-at-home parent (22%). The rest of the list included:
�Co-habitation before marriage (18%)
�Pornography (17%)
�Morality not being taught in schools (14%)
�Poverty, unemployment, and/or a poor economy (13%)
�Parental alcohol use/abuse (12%)
�Parental drug use/abuse (11%)
�Drug use/abuse among teens or children (8%)
�Teen sexual involvement/activity (8%)
�Alcohol use/abuse among teens or children (6%)
�Adultery (5%)
�Poor schools or quality of education (4%)
�Teen pregnancy (2%)
�Sexual predators or sexual abuse (1%)
�The expense of child care (1%)
�Other issues (12%)
Please note that gay marriage didn't even make it into the top 20 threats to families PER THE CLERGY.
Cowgirl in the sand | 12:35 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Yes, i too frown on the church having once enslaved woman into living the
horrible lifestyle of polygamy, but i also firmly believe in marriage to ONE Man
and ONE Woman ONLY, and NEVER EVER of the same sex. Immorality is immorality,
and anyway you may look at it!
Tax status | 12:36 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I am not sure why people are bringing up the tax status of the church being in
jeopardy for supporting prop 8. Any church can support a cause that it believes
in without any tax status problems. It is when a church or other organization
becomes partisan and promotes a particular party or person that it runs into
trouble. Many churches do just that however, like Obama's former church
was very partisan. Nothing will ever happen to churches like this. Nobody ever
goes after them
To Bob in Boise | 12:40 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Bob in Boise | 11:15 a.m. Oct. 8, 2008
"I have often wondered about what the war in heaven was like. I believe we are seeing something close to it in California right now."
If I remember right, the war in heaven was about "free agency." Are we not taking the free agency of gays in California away by passing Prop 8? Do they have the right to pursue their version of happiness if we take away their right to marry? (and they do have this right as of today.) Are we not playing Satan's role by forcing them to live by our standards?
"I have often wondered about what the war in heaven was like. I believe we are seeing something close to it in California right now."
If I remember right, the war in heaven was about "free agency." Are we not taking the free agency of gays in California away by passing Prop 8? Do they have the right to pursue their version of happiness if we take away their right to marry? (and they do have this right as of today.) Are we not playing Satan's role by forcing them to live by our standards?
Dave | 12:44 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
We've been warned about those who would call evil good and good evil.
History shows civilizations that embrace homosexual relationships fall (e.g.
Rome, Sodom, etc.).
Why would the church leaders be so involved in a moral issue? Do you believe the Lord reveals his secrets to his prophet, Pres. Monson?
I'm starting to think gay rights is going to be the "polygamy" or "blacks-and-the priesthood" issue of our day.
Why would the church leaders be so involved in a moral issue? Do you believe the Lord reveals his secrets to his prophet, Pres. Monson?
I'm starting to think gay rights is going to be the "polygamy" or "blacks-and-the priesthood" issue of our day.
Seektruth | 12:51 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
For sincere seekers of truth, no matter what...
Alma 1:12 But Alma said unto him: Behold, this is the first time that priestcraft has been introduced among this people. And behold, thou art not only guilty of priestcraft, but hast endeavored to enforce it by the sword; and were priestcraft to be enforced among this people it would prove their entire destruction.
D&C 134
4...but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
Ether 8:23 tells us to not let combinations get above us, though they are among us now.
Legalizing same-sex marriage creates a situation where conscience will be controlled--it puts the police power (enforcing by the sword) in charge of punishing us when we say and ultimately think something that makes a homosexual uncomfortable or inferior.
(Librarians: Christian books make 'gays' feel inferior)
My question is where does it end? History says in the destruction of the nation that upholds it.
Alma 1:12 But Alma said unto him: Behold, this is the first time that priestcraft has been introduced among this people. And behold, thou art not only guilty of priestcraft, but hast endeavored to enforce it by the sword; and were priestcraft to be enforced among this people it would prove their entire destruction.
D&C 134
4...but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
Ether 8:23 tells us to not let combinations get above us, though they are among us now.
Legalizing same-sex marriage creates a situation where conscience will be controlled--it puts the police power (enforcing by the sword) in charge of punishing us when we say and ultimately think something that makes a homosexual uncomfortable or inferior.
(Librarians: Christian books make 'gays' feel inferior)
My question is where does it end? History says in the destruction of the nation that upholds it.
LDS4gaymarriage | 12:52 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
American Mormon - I refuse to be Republican or Democrat. Both parties have too
many ideas that are contrary to gospel teachings. America is divided! What ever
happened to the constitution and 1 one nation under God?
LDS - But the question remains...Whose God? OUR God that forbids same-sex marriage or the God of those faiths which allow it?
LDS - But the question remains...Whose God? OUR God that forbids same-sex marriage or the God of those faiths which allow it?
LDS4gaymarriage | 1:04 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Mahler - ..in Massachusetts the Catholic church was forced to use their adoption
charity to give children to gay couples, or they could no longer perform that
benefit to society. So they simply had to quit. It is AGAINST thier religion!!
Right or wrong, they are being forced to do something they don't believe is
good.
LDS - Sorry Pal, but it's YOU who have it all wrong. Catholic Services took state money and therefore agreed to abide by anti-discrimination laws. LDS Family Services doesn't and therefore is free to only give babies to LDS recommend holders. The catholics simply need to give up the government money.
LDS - Sorry Pal, but it's YOU who have it all wrong. Catholic Services took state money and therefore agreed to abide by anti-discrimination laws. LDS Family Services doesn't and therefore is free to only give babies to LDS recommend holders. The catholics simply need to give up the government money.
lightitup | 1:05 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Diversity is about things we can not control, such as the color of our skin, our
gender, and our culture. It is not about our sexual orientation anymore than it
is about our propensity for chocolate or gambling. We can choose, even to be
abstinent.
And being against the homosexual act does not equate with being homophobic; it is about believing in morality and unchanging values. If someone is against those with same gender attraction, that could be considered homophobic, because SSA does not involve sin and is beyond the person's control.
And being against the homosexual act does not equate with being homophobic; it is about believing in morality and unchanging values. If someone is against those with same gender attraction, that could be considered homophobic, because SSA does not involve sin and is beyond the person's control.
re: Are you serious? | 1:08 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
If you really are LDS, please read "Abomination of Desolation" in the
Bible Dictionary. The Lord has called upon his people in the Latter-Days to
raise a warning voice because of His compassion for His children. He wants us to
come home to Him and nothing unclean can enter the kingdom of Heaven. He loves
us, but hates the sins which would keep us from His arms if we do not repent. I
do not want my children being taught homosexuality in schools, tempting them to
experiment with that choice. I do not want my Church to be accused of hate
crimes and punished because we believe the Word of God. The Lord has seen where
this will lead. I will trust Him over the arm of flesh. I do not think I know
better than God.
LDS4gaymarriage | 1:09 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Mahler - For any reading that support the gay movement AND believe in the Holy
Bible. Ponder these words: Malachi 4:5-6
LDS - 1 Cor. 10:29 - ( Note - the Greek word for "to judge" used here is also rendered "to determine" elsewhere in the KJV ). In other words, our liberties / freedoms aren�t to be determined by others� consciences (moral opinions). In verses 27-33 Paul says that we should limit our otherwise allowed behaviors if they offend others, which offense may cause them to reject the Gospel. In verse 29, though, Paul says that we do this only for the sake of the others' conscience and rejects the idea that the moral opinions of others can limit our freedom. The laws which the Jews observe have no claim on us and our liberty is not to be judged by another law's (man's) conscience. Just as their laws have no power over us, neither do our laws, in a non-theocratic society, hold sway over them. We have no right to impose our laws, beliefs or opinions on others.
LDS - 1 Cor. 10:29 - ( Note - the Greek word for "to judge" used here is also rendered "to determine" elsewhere in the KJV ). In other words, our liberties / freedoms aren�t to be determined by others� consciences (moral opinions). In verses 27-33 Paul says that we should limit our otherwise allowed behaviors if they offend others, which offense may cause them to reject the Gospel. In verse 29, though, Paul says that we do this only for the sake of the others' conscience and rejects the idea that the moral opinions of others can limit our freedom. The laws which the Jews observe have no claim on us and our liberty is not to be judged by another law's (man's) conscience. Just as their laws have no power over us, neither do our laws, in a non-theocratic society, hold sway over them. We have no right to impose our laws, beliefs or opinions on others.
Re. from BYU | 1:10 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
This amendment is not putting men on unequal grounds. If we said that
homosexuals could not marry at all, period, then that would be putting men on
unequal ground. Under prop 8 homosexuals would still be able to marry, just not
people of the same sex. In the same way, I, as a heterosexual, could not marry
someone of the same sex, even if I wanted to for a reason other than sexual
attraction.
LDS4gaymarriage | 1:19 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Matt - please explain to me how gay marriage will hurt society.
LDS - In 2004, a study of 695 various Protestant church ministers nationwide asked them to identify the strongest threats to families in their own community.
The most commonly named threats were divorce (listed as one of the top three by 43% of all ministers), negative influences from the media (38%), and materialism (36%). These were followed by absentee fathers (24%) and families that lack a stay-at-home parent (22%). The rest of the list included:
�Co-habitation before marriage (18%)
�Pornography (17%)
�Morality not being taught in schools (14%)
�Poverty, unemployment, and/or a poor economy (13%)
�Parental alcohol use/abuse (12%)
�Parental drug use/abuse (11%)
�Drug use/abuse among teens or children (8%)
�Teen sexual involvement/activity (8%)
�Alcohol use/abuse among teens or children (6%)
�Adultery (5%)
�Poor schools or quality of education (4%)
�Teen pregnancy (2%)
�Sexual predators or sexual abuse (1%)
�The expense of child care (1%)
�Other issues (12%)
Please note that neither homosexuals or gay marriage didn't even make the top 20 threats to families PER THE CLERGY.
LDS - In 2004, a study of 695 various Protestant church ministers nationwide asked them to identify the strongest threats to families in their own community.
The most commonly named threats were divorce (listed as one of the top three by 43% of all ministers), negative influences from the media (38%), and materialism (36%). These were followed by absentee fathers (24%) and families that lack a stay-at-home parent (22%). The rest of the list included:
�Co-habitation before marriage (18%)
�Pornography (17%)
�Morality not being taught in schools (14%)
�Poverty, unemployment, and/or a poor economy (13%)
�Parental alcohol use/abuse (12%)
�Parental drug use/abuse (11%)
�Drug use/abuse among teens or children (8%)
�Teen sexual involvement/activity (8%)
�Alcohol use/abuse among teens or children (6%)
�Adultery (5%)
�Poor schools or quality of education (4%)
�Teen pregnancy (2%)
�Sexual predators or sexual abuse (1%)
�The expense of child care (1%)
�Other issues (12%)
Please note that neither homosexuals or gay marriage didn't even make the top 20 threats to families PER THE CLERGY.
Cougar Blue | 1:19 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
The reason people cannot give a good explanation of how legalizing marriage
between 2 persons of the same sex is harmful is that, frankly, there aren't
any. All you hear are emotional platitudes. And please, quit saying that
marriasge has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman. The scriptures are replete
with a "man and many women." I've already made my donation to
the defeat of Prop 8 and I hope it fails miserably.
Son of Liberty | 1:22 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I am amazed at how many people from California read the Deseret News. I
didn't realize it was so popular there. It actually makes me wonder how
many people actually cared about the story or just cared about ranting and
railing. I would hope that wasn't the main reason for those who did. I
don't see why the church is looked at as evil for standing up for something
it believes in. For something I believe in. We all have that right. My Mom
taught me as I'm sure a lot of yours did that that I should stand for what
I thought was right. Why does it make us evil to do that? Not only that the
church has a constitutional right to expression on political and social issues
as stated on an earlier comment. I'm glad there are churches and
organizations that formed this coalition and stood up for something good.
Anonymous | 1:25 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
"...a recent study was released in Denmark. Married parenthood has become a
minority phenomenon. Instead of encouraging a society-wide return to marriage,
Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is
outdated, and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock
parenthood, is acceptable."
"In Denmark, for example, the marriage rate had been declining for a half-century but turned around in the early 1980s. After the 1989 passage of the registered-partner law, the marriage rate continued to climb; Danish heterosexual marriage rates are now the highest they've been since the early 1970's. And the most recent marriage rates in Sweden, Norway, and Iceland are all higher than the rates for the years before the partner laws were passed. Furthermore, in the 1990s, divorce rates in Scandinavia remained basically unchanged." M.V. Badgett, May 20, 2004
What study are you talking about? This is NOT True!
"In Denmark, for example, the marriage rate had been declining for a half-century but turned around in the early 1980s. After the 1989 passage of the registered-partner law, the marriage rate continued to climb; Danish heterosexual marriage rates are now the highest they've been since the early 1970's. And the most recent marriage rates in Sweden, Norway, and Iceland are all higher than the rates for the years before the partner laws were passed. Furthermore, in the 1990s, divorce rates in Scandinavia remained basically unchanged." M.V. Badgett, May 20, 2004
What study are you talking about? This is NOT True!
Anonymous | 1:27 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
"Why would any society want to risk such an 'experiment', with
such potential for destroying the very underpinnings of society itself without
sufficient knowledge of the results?"
Because they believe in the equality of ALL AMERICANS!
PS These arguments were all used to deny inter-racial marriages too, by the way!
Because they believe in the equality of ALL AMERICANS!
PS These arguments were all used to deny inter-racial marriages too, by the way!
Jake | 1:27 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Thank you LDS4gaymarriage for being someone who makes sense.
The mere idea of thinking one human being is worth more than another or deserves more rights is absolutely ridiculous! I sincerely doubt God would want us to vote to take away consenting adults agency. It just ring true to me.
You seem very well educated and you are right, the LDS church would NOT be forced to offer adoption to gay parents or temple marriage, etc...
The mere idea of thinking one human being is worth more than another or deserves more rights is absolutely ridiculous! I sincerely doubt God would want us to vote to take away consenting adults agency. It just ring true to me.
You seem very well educated and you are right, the LDS church would NOT be forced to offer adoption to gay parents or temple marriage, etc...
Anonymous | 1:35 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Re. from BYU
This argument was used to stop blacks and whites from marrying each other. The law allowed blacks to marry blacks and whites to marry whites, but it stopped them from marrying each other. When the supreme court ruled on these laws, they determined that those laws were discriminatory and did not allow Americans to marry whomever they wanted to as long as they were adults.
You, a heterosexual, may marry someone of your own sex right now in California. This is equal treatment under the law.
This argument was used to stop blacks and whites from marrying each other. The law allowed blacks to marry blacks and whites to marry whites, but it stopped them from marrying each other. When the supreme court ruled on these laws, they determined that those laws were discriminatory and did not allow Americans to marry whomever they wanted to as long as they were adults.
You, a heterosexual, may marry someone of your own sex right now in California. This is equal treatment under the law.
Guest | 1:38 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
This is not coming from the leaders of the church. This is not coming from the
church. It is coming from God. If you believe in your religion, that is what
it boils down to.
I love all of the left-wing trolls posing as troubled church members.
I love all of the left-wing trolls posing as troubled church members.
WindyWoods | 1:39 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
My perspective on gays changed dramatically about 15 years ago when I read the
book "Borrowed Time" by Paul Monette in which Paul tells about caring
for his partner who was dying from AIDS. Before the end of that book I realized
that a gay man can love another man just as much as a straight man can love a
woman. Since then I have become acquainted with 5 gay couples and have seen how
they live and LOVE. In their hearts they are married but their relationships
aren�t legally recognized where they live. Hopefully
Proposition 8 will be defeated and things will someday change. This latest
campaign of the church brought to mind 2 scriptures. 1st, in Timothy 4: 1-3
�in the latter times some shall depart from the
faith�forbidding to marry�. And 2nd,
D&C 49:15 �whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of
God�. And I ask myself, who today is forbidding whom to
marry?
LDS4gaymarriage | 1:39 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Inferno - I read that if gay marriage is allowed, then clergy who refuse to
perform gay marriage ceremonies on religious grounds could lose their state
authority to perform marriage ceremonies. This includes Mormon sealers, meaning
that our sealings would no longer be recognized as valid marriages by the
government. It could also mean that religious schools could face heavy fines
and/or lawsuits for refusing to accomodate same-sex couples in married student
housing.
LDS - What a load! BYU Law professor Morris A. Thurston addressed these and other points in his
Commentary on the Document -�Six Consequences . . . if Proposition 8 Fails�.
He shows what a crock those claims are.
inferno - We'll get married civilly first, then immediately go get sealed.
LDS - So, they do that in Europe and the vast majority of all temples.
LDS - What a load! BYU Law professor Morris A. Thurston addressed these and other points in his
Commentary on the Document -�Six Consequences . . . if Proposition 8 Fails�.
He shows what a crock those claims are.
inferno - We'll get married civilly first, then immediately go get sealed.
LDS - So, they do that in Europe and the vast majority of all temples.
Relocated Southerner | 1:42 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I have to agree with Betsy (10:46 p.m.) in that they want to force the rest of
society to conform to them and if we don't, they'll sue us. There was
another case in New Mexico last year where a photography studio did not want to
film a lesbian couple's commitment ceremony and respectfully declined. The
couple sued, and the photographers were fined $6000 by the State of New Mexico
under some sort of anti-discrimination law! As with the doctor in California
who didn't want to perform the artificial insemination, it's not that
there aren't others willing to perform these services; it's that most
"militant" gays want to force all of us to
accept/condone/promote/embrace their lifestyle, and if we don't,
they're ready to sue! Who would really want someone to treat (or film)
them that wasn't happy about it anyway? I would much prefer to have
someone perform a service for me that was happy about it and could share in my
joy rather than someone who disagreed. Also, whatever happened to the old
adage: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone". If
someone else is available, why not use them instead of forcing others?
Anonymous | 1:43 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Hey left-wing loons:
You're "messiah," Barack Obama is opposed to gay marriage.
Speaking of "forcing your beliefs down everyone's throat."
Isn't that EXACTLY what the gay activists are doing? The people voted. And liberal and gay activism overturned their will.
This is really about gay people forcing society to recognize their immoral relationships.
Left-wing radicals are the real bigots.
You're "messiah," Barack Obama is opposed to gay marriage.
Speaking of "forcing your beliefs down everyone's throat."
Isn't that EXACTLY what the gay activists are doing? The people voted. And liberal and gay activism overturned their will.
This is really about gay people forcing society to recognize their immoral relationships.
Left-wing radicals are the real bigots.
LDS4gaymarriage | 1:44 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Marriage -.. Yeah, marriage is no big deal. Yeah, family is no big deal. Yeah,
and you live on another planet or in a high rise apartment, suburban
neighborhood, or you don't have children in a poor city school. (gays
rarely place their children by adoption in our inner city school because gays
who adopt are rich and put them in liberal arts private academies) Gays know
nothing about the destructive nature of not having a stable family of mothers
and fathers. ..
LDS - Please explain how heterosexuals will be prompted to divorce if gays are allowed to marry? Do we believe in voodoo or something?
LDS - Please explain how heterosexuals will be prompted to divorce if gays are allowed to marry? Do we believe in voodoo or something?
LDS4gaymarriage | 2:03 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Betsy - A doctor in California was denied his religious rights. A lesbian woman
came to this doctor to request artificial insemination. The doctor refused based
on religious grounds however he gave that woman a referral for another doctor to
obtain that insemination. Therefore she was not denied the right to a child.
However she took the doctor to court and won. Catholic Charities is another
example they can no longer restrict adoptions even though it violates their
belief of marriage.
LDS - Both took money from the state and needed government issued licenses. Getting them requires that the licensee abide by the law, including non-discrimination statutes. LDS family Services in Boston still only gives babies to worthy LDS. We do it because we don't take government $.
Betsy - For the LDS church which also offers adoption services it is a matter of time. Also look for the lawsuit of a gay couple demanding marriage in the temple and the court rules with the couple.
LDS - Do you REALLY think that the churches in the state/country wouldn't pass an amendment, at speed of light, to prevent such? The sky isn't falling.
LDS - Both took money from the state and needed government issued licenses. Getting them requires that the licensee abide by the law, including non-discrimination statutes. LDS family Services in Boston still only gives babies to worthy LDS. We do it because we don't take government $.
Betsy - For the LDS church which also offers adoption services it is a matter of time. Also look for the lawsuit of a gay couple demanding marriage in the temple and the court rules with the couple.
LDS - Do you REALLY think that the churches in the state/country wouldn't pass an amendment, at speed of light, to prevent such? The sky isn't falling.
Steve | 2:08 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
In Boston , MA (where gay marriages
are now legal) the Catholic Charities have closed their doors because the
state has required them to allow adoptions to same sex couples, and they
refused. They are a large and worthwhile charity with great power in the
state, and they were overruled.
'A Methodist church has lost their tax exempt status because the minister
refused to perform a marriage of a same sex couple (they were not of his
congregation).
'A physician who refused to do fertility treatments on a same sex couple
because of religious beliefs was sued, lost, and the state is requiring
him to treat everyone as equal.
'These effects are far-reaching! I
would not want to offend anyone, but I believe this issue is not a
political issue at all, but a moral issue that affects all of society.
are now legal) the Catholic Charities have closed their doors because the
state has required them to allow adoptions to same sex couples, and they
refused. They are a large and worthwhile charity with great power in the
state, and they were overruled.
'A Methodist church has lost their tax exempt status because the minister
refused to perform a marriage of a same sex couple (they were not of his
congregation).
'A physician who refused to do fertility treatments on a same sex couple
because of religious beliefs was sued, lost, and the state is requiring
him to treat everyone as equal.
'These effects are far-reaching! I
would not want to offend anyone, but I believe this issue is not a
political issue at all, but a moral issue that affects all of society.
lds4gaymarriage | 2:08 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Common Ground - What's wrong with this? Gays can enter into a civil union.
They get rights such as visitation, inheritance and cannot be discriminated
against for housing, employment, etc.
LDS - Why were Blacks upset because they, like gays, had "separate,but equal" accomodations? They had separate drinking fountains and the water coming from theirs was just as cool and clear as the water from the White's Only fountain. Why should they complain? Well...?
LDS - Why were Blacks upset because they, like gays, had "separate,but equal" accomodations? They had separate drinking fountains and the water coming from theirs was just as cool and clear as the water from the White's Only fountain. Why should they complain? Well...?
Re: Californian Trapped in Utah | 2:14 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Are you in prison or locked in someone's basement?
If not you are not trapped and are free to go back to California.
If not you are not trapped and are free to go back to California.
Sorry, I'm just right | 2:37 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
If the LDS church was FOR gay marriage, not a single liberal would complain
about a "violation of church and state." However, because the church
is against gay marriage (and other perversions), suddenly these hypocrites are
up in arms about "church and state."
Please note: The U.S. Constitution does NOT have a provision about the "separation of church and state." I defy anyone to find this concept anywhere in the constitution. In fact, I dare you to find it.
Please note: The U.S. Constitution does NOT have a provision about the "separation of church and state." I defy anyone to find this concept anywhere in the constitution. In fact, I dare you to find it.
Jana | 2:45 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
For those LDS members posting here who view the church as going astray on this
issue, remember these words-- The Prophet of God and his Apostles do NOT go
astray and they are NOT misled! We are to heed their council despite what is
popular culture today.
LDS4gaymarriage | 2:46 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
RE - Absentee fathers (24%) : With two lesbians, obviously the father would be
absent.
LDS - IOW, they'd be better than a SINGLE mother. If the lesbians have brothers, fathers, uncles, etc..they can involve their kids with them to pick up the slack.
RE - Stay-at-home parent (22%) : Generally speaking, a lot more mothers are the stay-at-home parent, therefore the strong influence of a mother is obviously critical. Two gay men = no motherly influence.
LDS - Any gay couple wanting to adopt a kid would probably be more than willing to have one parent stay home.
The bottom line is that having a gay couple be parents isn't probably ideal. I believe that myself, but many straight couples aren't ideal parents. They may have poor morals, do drugs, subject kids to second hand smoke, drink, belittle education, put the kids in day care every day, live in a poor/dangerous neighborhood, don't provide a well balanced diet, etc...Why are such sub-ideal couples allowed to marry, but a lesbian couple, who is ideal in every other way, isn�t?
having gay parents is better than being bounced around in Foster Care. The enemy of the "good" is the "ideal".
LDS - IOW, they'd be better than a SINGLE mother. If the lesbians have brothers, fathers, uncles, etc..they can involve their kids with them to pick up the slack.
RE - Stay-at-home parent (22%) : Generally speaking, a lot more mothers are the stay-at-home parent, therefore the strong influence of a mother is obviously critical. Two gay men = no motherly influence.
LDS - Any gay couple wanting to adopt a kid would probably be more than willing to have one parent stay home.
The bottom line is that having a gay couple be parents isn't probably ideal. I believe that myself, but many straight couples aren't ideal parents. They may have poor morals, do drugs, subject kids to second hand smoke, drink, belittle education, put the kids in day care every day, live in a poor/dangerous neighborhood, don't provide a well balanced diet, etc...Why are such sub-ideal couples allowed to marry, but a lesbian couple, who is ideal in every other way, isn�t?
having gay parents is better than being bounced around in Foster Care. The enemy of the "good" is the "ideal".
Jim | 2:51 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
People the large and spacious building has plenty of vacancies. The voices of
disention are loud and clear and are from that building. Those who profess to
be LDS, and are making disparging comments are either in that building or making
rapid progress towards it.
SS | 2:56 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Why do gays want to get married? A few years ago, everyone on the left was
always saying, "I don't need a piece of paper to tell me I'm in
love!"
Marriage is a religious institution. You have crossed a line.
You deserve rights and respect, but you can make all the laws you want and you will never force most people into saying gayness is normal or not a sin. That is their right to believe how they want to believe.
You have the right to believe otherwise, but you cannot take away the right of dissention.
Because I disagree with you doesn't mean I hate you. Because you disagree with me doesn't mean you hate me.
Marriage is a religious institution. You have crossed a line.
You deserve rights and respect, but you can make all the laws you want and you will never force most people into saying gayness is normal or not a sin. That is their right to believe how they want to believe.
You have the right to believe otherwise, but you cannot take away the right of dissention.
Because I disagree with you doesn't mean I hate you. Because you disagree with me doesn't mean you hate me.
Kosmo | 3:10 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
I don't see why the church is looked at as evil for standing up for
something it believes in. For something I believe in. We all have that right. My
Mom taught me as I'm sure a lot of yours did that that I should stand for
what I thought was right. Why does it make us evil to do that? Not only that the
church has a constitutional right to expression on political and social issues
as stated on an earlier comment. I'm glad there are churchs and
organizations that formed this coalition and stood up for something good.
LDS4gaymarriage | 3:11 p.m. Oct. 8, 2008
Destroying marriage in Europe - a recent study was released in Denmark. Married
parenthood has become a minority phenomenon. Instead of encouraging a
society-wide return to marriage, Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the
message that marriage itself is outdated, and that virtually any family form,
including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.
LDS � The cause of those isn�t gay marriage. 2 things did -
#1 Socialism. Women no longer need men. They get so much welfare from the state, that they don�t need a man. They don�t need him to provide health insurance either. Because of this, women often don�t feel the need to marry. Men see all of the state benefits women get and don�t feel a need to provide and so don�t marry.
The other factor is laws being based on objective equality rather than on subjective religious beliefs. Adultery isn�t a big deal. Neither is having kids out of wedlock. There is no social stigma against either. Churches are empty and religion is ridiculed.
Acceptance of gay marriage is, like rising number of out-of-wedlock births, a co-symptom of the above and NOT the cause of of the rising number of out-of-wedlock births.
LDS � The cause of those isn�t gay marriage. 2 things did -
#1 Socialism. Women no longer need men. They get so much welfare from the state, that they don�t need a man. They don�t need him to provide health insurance either. Because of this, women often don�t feel the need to marry. Men see all of the state benefits women get and don�t feel a need to provide and so don�t marry.
The other factor is laws being based on objective equality rather than on subjective religious beliefs. Adultery isn�t a big deal. Neither is having kids out of wedlock. There is no social stigma against either. Churches are empty and religion is ridiculed.
Acceptance of gay marriage is, like rising number of out-of-wedlock births, a co-symptom of the above and NOT the cause of of the rising number of out-of-wedlock births.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Cautiously optimistic Bernanke 1:22 p.m.
- TCU's BCS game missing something 1:18 p.m.
- Snowstorm sweeps across West 1:17 p.m.
- Pilots blame air traffic controllers 12:55 p.m.
- Senate confronts abortion in debate 12:46 p.m.
- 2 bombs kill 34 in Lahore 12:41 p.m.
- U.N. climate conference opens 12:29 p.m.
- Messy Monday morning commute 12:28 p.m.
- Stocks extend gains 12:06 p.m.
- Top 3 stay same in AP Top 25 12:05 p.m.
- Letters: Liberal because LDS
268 - Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing244
- Hate not limited to 1 in-state rivalry190
- TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl188
- Aggies shoot past Cougars179
- N.Y. Senate rejects gay marriage135
- Cougars going back to Vegas128
- George lost in rivalry hatefest117
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony98
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil98
Amazon.com, Target.com, Sears.com, Walmart.com, Kmart.com and...
That does it — I'm having an affair! Thanks to Tiger Woods, David...
First, a big thank you to all who posted questions here for me to ask...
Latest comments
Hey Boise Fan - BYU - One National Championship Boise - Zero National...
Until he started taking steriods. You may be missing Barry but I do not miss...
"because Max Hall hates me and I'm proud!!" This was my problem with all...
Carbon Dioxid is a Greenhouse gas Venus - Atmosphere = 97% Carbon...
BYU fans routinely packed the Holiday Bowl for many years. How many Utah...
You Zoobs....already explaining to everyone why Utah will win yet another...
This story is horrifying. I fill prescriptions for my family at that...
"Regardless, people with homosexual tendencies or any other tendency for that...
12:24 p.m. You state that "we've had cloud seeding for over 100 years"......
We don't need no stinkin' ethics reform. 'Specially not ordered by the likes...
Advertisements