Deseret News | Calls about Prop. 8 not imminent

Reader comments
Calls about Prop. 8 not imminent

243 comments | Read story

From the OC | 1:25 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I just have to laugh when I keep reading posts about people who know gay people or have gay children, so that makes gay marriage OK. We all know people who have made that choice. Those of us on the yes on prop 8 side try to love them, but we still know that homosexuality is wrong. If your son turns out to be a child molester, are you then going to think that child molesting is OK also. I have a relative that is an adulterer. I still love him, but I know adultery is wrong. Same thing with Homosexuality, it is wrong. Don't legitimize it. Vote yes on prop 8.

Anonymous | 1:40 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

The greatest threat to the family right now is the economy and the greed in the world. It's to bad it took the bubble to burst before the Church mentioned it.

I guess I don't understand why the Church feels it needs to meddle in a civil act. If the word offends then ask for the word to be changed. Maybe "partnership" would be acceptable? Everyone is entitled to a stable relationship, and right now the laws interfere with some peoples ability to have one. The Church accepts other things that are in direct confrontation with teachings, such as allowing alcohol sales (and that is a threat to the family unit).

If you believe in God and feel it's a sin, then they will be punished. But not acting in a Christian way because someone is different could also lead to consequences? I think the Church may be overreacting and missing the forest burning while looking at a grove of trees. I hope not.

to: dsore1218 | 1:52 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I work in international law. Your claim about European and Canadian LDS bishops being forced to marry gays, and that they no longer marry man and woman, are absolutely completely false. The Church in Canada thrives, the Church in Europe grows, nobody is forcing the LDS to change any of our doctrines, teachings or practices. It is simply not true, whoever told you that was misleading.

From a legal point of view I can say with confidence: A) the 1st Amendment protects the LDS Church from being told what to do or think about homosexuality;
B) the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution, as held in Lawrence v Texas, protects the equality of all citizens including homosexuals.
C) These rights are not contradictory.

Comments continue below

Let's Heed History's Warning | 4:23 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Marriage reflects the natural moral and social law evidenced the world over. As the late British social anthropologist Joseph Daniel Unwin noted in his study of world civilizations, any society that devalued the nuclear family soon lost what he called "expansive energy," which might best be summarized as society's will to make things better for the next generation. In fact, no society that has loosened sexual morality outside of man-woman marriage has survived.

Analyzing studies of cultures spanning several thousands of years on several continents, Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin found that virtually all political revolutions that brought about societal collapse were preceded by a sexual revolution in which marriage and family were devalued by the cultureï¿½s acceptance of homosexuality.

Kinship is Important | 4:25 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

When marriage loses its unique status, women and children most frequently are the direct victims. Giving same-sex relationships or out-of-wedlock heterosexual couples the same special status and benefits as the marital bond would not be the expansion of a right but the destruction of a principle. . If the one-man/one-woman definition of marriage is broken, there is no logical stopping point for continuing the assault on marriage.
If feelings are the key requirement, then why not let three people marry, or two adults and a child, or consenting blood relatives of any age? .

Marriage-based kinship is essential to stability and continuity in our state. Child abuse is much more prevalent when a living arrangement is not based on kinship. Kinship imparts family names, heritage, and property, secures the identity and commitment of fathers for the sake of the children, and entails mutual obligations to the community.

Coalition | 4:31 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Re: None of our business
The true issue isn't limited solely to equitable tax treatment or health insurance coverage for homosexuals...it's much more than that. As the brethren have said time and again, legalizing homosexual marriage strikes at the very foundation of the institution of marriage; in other words, legalizing their cause will have negative ramifications NOT ONLY for them, but for the rest of us as well.

============================================

I am so glad to know that there is a coalition of churches--people not of our faith--who are supporting this. Before we think that we're the only ones who stand up for what's right, let's keep in mind that there are other churches pushing for proposition 8 to pass. I find comfort knowing that there are men and women outside our church who want to support that which is right.

Ida | 5:13 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I'm against Gay marriage, if they want to call it a Union let them, but leave marriage to men and women how it is suposed to be. They are humans treat them as such, they have the same rights to choose and free agency as we have, if there choice is wrong they have to take the consequences and not you or me.

EVERYONE | 5:50 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Everyone must stand or fall for what they believe in. Many cannot understand the long term effects here, but then again many others can. It is important for those who can see afar off to help those who who don't, as best they can. It is not about hate and it therefore becomes important out of love to help others see what is happening here. It is a matter of love and helping others to understand what is really going on. We must all get involved.

Lefty Mormon | 6:36 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

This really isn't about gay marriage. It's about protecting the meaning of straight marriage. If my marriage means the same thing that a gay marriage does then why is the purpose of mine to have children and create a family? What is the purpose of gay marriage? To show commitment? To have a public declaration of love? They don't need to defeat prop 8 to do that. They don't need to defeat prop 8 to have health benefits, hospital visitation or any of that stuff. They need it only to say that they are married, but the purpose of a committed gay relationship is not the same as a straight marriage by the very definition of male and female. I have 3 biological children and 1 adopted child. I love them all equally--gay couples can adopt but their bodies were not made to create families like the bodies of straight couples are. End of story...It's physiological.

BYU '80 | 6:54 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Watch out for "BYU '96, Harvard Law '01." He claims that gay couples have no right of inheritance. True, they lack the automatic right of intestate inheritance in the absence of a will. This can be overcome with ANY will, even a handwritten, holographic will.

He claims gay couples cannot provide health insurance benefits to each other in Utah, yet Salt Lake City is now doing just that.

He claims gay couples cannot visit each other in the hospital, where visitation is limited to "family members." Just sign a "living will" document that Ralph has the right to make life or death decisions on behalf of Roger, and Ralph can visit Roger as much as any family member.

Two gays can live together, they can provide spousal-type rights to each other. They need not demean marriage by calling their relationship by that name. Call it a "civil union" or a "homosexual union" or a "gay union." Just don't call it marriage.

In other words, "BYU '96, Harvard Law '01" is either misrepresenting himself or he's misrepresenting the law.

I agree with Sarah Palin | 7:03 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I have read a lot of the comments on Prop 8 and as a mother of four I think what a lot of people are forgetting are the children and their rights. Do we, as a society, truly believe that given a choice over parents that a child would rather have two dads or two moms versus a mom and dad? I know a lot of you out there would say it doesn't matter just as long as the parents love their children.

I disagree with those who say it doesn't matter. Many child development studies show that there is a valuable benefit for a child to be raised by a mother and a father.

That is what the LDS Church is trying to protect- the rights of the children. Shouldn't that be our biggest concern-what is right for them? I agree with Sarah Palin that if the main concern about Prop 8 is the right to health benefits then give those in a gay relationship the same access to heath benefits and call their relationship what it is- a civil union. A marriage should remain what it is between a husband and wife.

The Church has a right | 7:08 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

...to join with other groups supporting marriage between a man and a woman. Some will not support the decision and be angry, but this is where we stand.

Emily Hayes | 7:28 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

So many are missing the point. We cannot push our religious views on the rest of the population. That's it. The church should put its efforts into strengthening the LDS family. I have 3 LDS friends who went to BYU who are divorced already. The church does not offer any type of pre-marriage counseling, and quite frankly, the instruction is often entered into lightly and quickly. If a homosexual couple wants to have a family and be married, what's it to you? How does it hurt you personally? I think that the church is misusing their power, and I find it extremely inappropriate. I am actually considering leaving the church over this because I feel that I can not sustain leaders who use their influence to try to hurt others. I find it morally repugnant. The words of our early leaders have been lost in modern times and I find it extremely disheartening.

TED | 7:33 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

TO SAY THAT THIS IS NONE OF OUR BUSINESS, IS TO SAY IT'S NOT THE BUSINESS OF AN OLDER PERSON TO STOP A CHILD FROM PLAYING WITH MATCHES IN THE MIDDLE OF DRY GRASS AND FRIENDS. COME ON PEOPLE, LOOK BEYOND THE MATCHES TO THE PROBLEMS IT COULD CAUSE!

Cali Girl | 8:05 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Once again:

We are ALL Male & Female.....CREATED by a male and a female!! My kids get this. It's not rocket science!

Keep the DEFINITION of traditional marriage the way it has been since the beginning of time and stop trying to change something that can't be.

YES on Prop 8!!!!

Support Religion's Right | 8:20 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Marriage is a religious and moral issue. Therefore, it should not be odd or surprising for religious and moral groups to step in and voice their concerns--or even organize to protect rights in a more direct way.

I am truly uncomfortable with confrontation, and therefore hesitant to become vocal. But, if this passes, we would eventually see the effects of changing the core society of marriage and family (and it has many possible repercussions, some we understand and can predict, some we cannot). Could I then look my children in the eyes and say I did not speak out in support of marriage between a man and a woman when I could have spoken?

Support Religion's Right | 8:26 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I'm sorry, I should have said, "if this proposition does not pass--if the definition of marriage is changed to allow gay couples to marry, then we will see the effects . . . "

Anonymous | 8:29 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Careful Mormons,
If you start allowing discriminatory legislation, it's only a matter of time before your Evangelical "friends" turn and start coming for you.

shirley | 8:45 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I believe wholehardly with our Apostles of the LDS church. And I too am for prop 8. Sometimes we don't understand things and what can happen so that's why we have Prophet's and Apostles to lead us and guide us. I am definitely for marriage meaning man & woman. Old fashioned had the right words and I agree with that position. Wrong is wrong and right is right and God's way will always have oppositon from the evil one. Have any of you thought to pray about this issue and for those who don't believe so sorry for you. Have a great day. Keep up the great work all who are saying yes to prop 8.

Steve P. | 8:48 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

There are some sins so bad that they are considered in the Bible as an abomination. Homosexuality is considered an abomination. When we talk about freedom in the United States it is "freedom within the law". The true doctrine of separation of church and state (not found in the Constitution) only refers to not having the United States set up one national religion that everyone is forced to join. It does not inidicate that persons or a church cannot voice their opinion. While the Mormon church does not select a party to which its members must conform, it does speak out on moral issues. And the issue of homosexual marriage is definitely a moral issue. The act is a sin and should not be condoned by society. However, the choice is there and when the majority chooses evil then the Lord will allow calamity to follow. (That's something out of the Book of Mormon -- definitely paraphrased.) I'm wondering which way the majority of society will choose. Isaiah referred to our day when he said that in the last days the people will begin to call "evil good and good evil". It seems that day has arrived.

Concerned | 8:48 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Most of the "hate" talk here is from those who would quiet the Church and anyone who opposes homosexual views, or those who don't believe that religion has any right to guide it's members. To give "marriage" a new definition - one can see easily how words such as "mother" and "father" become "hate speech" instead of parent and parent. This proposition reaches far greater depths than just union. In California, a legal union is already in place for those of any sexual orientation who want to live life together. Marriage is not just a romp in the sheets. It's a commitment to make a life together and create a family. Only a male and a female can create a child and thus a family where every child should have the right to a mother and a father - not just a parent and a parent. I have no hate feelings about any gay person who wants to commit to a lifetime union. But redefining what marriage is, is not the way.

C. Harris | 8:54 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

After reading through these comments, I find it interesting that nobody is slamming the other churches, organizations or groups in support of Prop. 8 other than the LDS Church. I'm not from Utah or California. I find it interesting that individuals get so caught up on the LDS Church and it's views. Maybe because those in favor of the proposition are right!

This is EVERYONE'S business no matter where you live, just like all the other social issues. Teen pregancies, gay relationships, divorces, drugs and alcohol abuse, etc. all cause adverse social problems to deal with. Let's put the fence at the top of the hill and not the ambulance at the bottom!

Anonymous | 9:13 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

A San Diego fertility doctor was sued for refusing to perform artificial insemination for one partner of a lesbian couple for religious reasons. The doctor referred the patient to a colleague,

Catholic Charities in Boston and San Francisco ended adoption services altogether rather than be compelled by anti-discrimination laws to place children with same-sex couples.

A Lutheran school in Riverside was sued under California's Unruh Act (which forbids discrimination by businesses) for expelling two students who allegedly were having a lesbian relationship, in contravention of the religious views of the school.

Those same folks who go to church LIVE OUTSIDE of church. They go to work, they go to school, they run businesses and etc. Our beliefs go beyond the walls of a church and affect everything we do. Gay rights WILL trample upon our freedoms because now if our beliefs are "hurtful" and proven to be "hateful" then we won't be able to exercise that belief ANYWHERE - and eventually even including the church! It's already happening in Canada.

Anonymous | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

My stepson is gay and I do NOT support gay marriage, nor do I support his "lifestyle".

kathyn | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I don't understand how faithful LDS can pick and choose which commandments and teachings they want to follow. Either you believe the Apostles and the Prophet are called of God and follow Him or you don't. If you don't, you ought to reconsider your membership. Non-LDS are under no obligation but if you're a faithful LDS, you've made commitments and promises; therefore I have to conclude that you don't really understand the gospel.

Prop. 8 speaks to the very core values and morals of the Church. The leaders must warn the members of these things. It's up to us to heed them or not. I have my own free agency to follow the Brethren or not. Everyone does.

Prophets are always unpopular in their own times because it's their duty to call people to repentance or to warn them of dangers. People take the truth to be hard.

Life | 9:19 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

life is ALL about one man and one woman.

Skip | 9:31 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Some of the posters fail to understand that in society we are always legislating morality... the question is, whose morality? Outcomes are a true guide and should be judged appropriately. Saying that you can't legislate it is a stupid argument: family law, criminal law, and business law are all based in morality. History, if consulted, points out the dire effects of societies that have chosen to follow such a superficial, vapid lie.

Protecting Families | 9:46 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

One of the great dangers of legalizing gay marriage is that schools will be able to teach my children, without my consent, that gay marriage is acceptible. If you don't believe me look into what has happened in Massachusets since they approved gay marriage. They introduce these subjects through books to children in Kindergarten! As a parent who loves my children and those who struggle with same gender attraction I feel compelled to stand up and let my voice be heard. I do not want my children to have others moral beliefs taught to my children as acceptable or normal. I believe that all human beings should be treated with love and kindness. I do not believe that we can suppose to change the definition of what marriage is because it comes from God. Of course the LDS church and many other churches are getting involved in this issue. If they didn't what would it say about thier beliefs in marriage? I believe that marriage between a man and woman is worth protecting and living! My marriage has brought me the greatest happiness of my life. As a father I believe my family is worth protecting! Yes on Proposition 8!

Hatemonger | 9:54 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Opposing Gay Marriage does not make you a hatemonger. And the church is right. Read the last page of this article on the reasons why the church opposes allowing gay mariage. It is protecting itself from the religious hatemongering that is being spewed by the left. The LDS church teaches homosexuality is a sin. The Bible teaches homosexuality is a sin. From the beginning of recorded history, homosexuality has been a sin. And the political correctness crowd now want us and everyone in history to be labeled as hatemongers for this belief. That is the real truth here. This is not a question about whether gay couples can get insurance or have any other right. It is a battle over whether they can have this ammunition to prove that Religion is the problem not them. It is a direct attack on Religion. If you are part of the LDS Church or any other Church, you are being attacked and some of you don't even realize it. The Constitution does not say Freedom From Religion. And it absolutely did not intend take away Religious Rights, In fact, it intended to protect them. The Judges in California were WRONG.

Kevin in the Terrace | 10:05 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

We have many things that are outlawed because they are wrong. For example stealing, murder, assault, lying under oath, sodomy, prostitution, drug use, are all wrong morally and are thus outlawed. Why then should we change the definition of marriage to allow something wrong to occur. Homosexual behavior is wrong, homosexual relationships are wrong, and marriage between same sex partners is wrong. The church holds marriage between man and woman as one of the central tenants of our beliefs. Most sins that the church considers serious are violations against marital relationships. The church should be involved when it comes to moral, especially when the very basic unit of our society is under attack.

Enough of the hype | 10:09 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

One man, one woman rhetoric... from members of a church who's early prophets and apostles proclaimed that plural marriage was necessary for exaltation, and that monogamy was the cause of the ills of society.

"It is a fact worthy of note that the shortest lived nations of which we have record have been monogamic. Rome...was a monogamic nation and the numerous evils attending that system early laid the foundation for that ruin which eventually overtook her." --George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p.202

Wait--was it homosexuality or monogamy that brought about the destruction of the Roman Empire??? Which was it?

re: Freedom Whaler | 10:14 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I am not sure you have read the US Consititution lately - my copy does not have any special rights granted to those that choose or support any sexual preferences in particular. What is there is the protection to exercise your religious beliefs in protecting the family as a core of society.

You have got to be kidding | 10:15 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Utah law does allow "domestic partners" to be on one or the other's health insurance. There are plenty of homosexual men and women where I work and they have their partners on our companies insurance. Hospitals don't check id's so anyone can visit anyone. I've never even been asked in a hospital if I am family when I visit friends. You can will your estate to anyone you want including your cat or dog, to the exclusion of your family. You can own property with anyone. Utah has a form of common law marriage and allows it.

All of the arguements about Utah not allowing this or that are idiotic at best.

Marriage is between one man and one woman.

To none of our business | 10:16 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Civil Unions or Domestic Partnerships in California allow and ensure all the same legal rights as a married heterosexual couple has, including health insurance benefits (if a couple is lucky enought to have them), ownership of homes (if a couple is lucky enough to have and keep one), right to make financial and medical decisions, inheritance etc. etc. Proposition 8 in California will not change any of that or eliminate any rights. Gay and lesbian couples have all the same rights as a married couple in California. Proposition 8 simply states that the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman.

All 4 Presidential/Vice Presidential candidates are in favor of traditional marriage, which is between a man and a woman. So this is not a Democrat versus Republican issue.

Any person who believes in God and accepts the Bible as the word of God has no basis on which to fight this definition. Check what the Bible says about marriage being ordained of God and between a man and a woman.

This is a moral issue and MANY (not just LDS) churches and denominations are in a coalition to support Proposition 8.

BYU 96 HLS 01 | 10:19 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

BYU '80:

I know I am winning an argument when the adversary stoops to personal attacks. All the extra steps for gay people that you describe are government burdens placed on some citizens and not others, therefore unconstitutional by any reasonable interpretation of "no state shallï¿½ deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Don't like gay people? Think the government has a justified interest in discriminating against homosexuals as second-class citizens? Just admit it without pretending the law in Utah provides equal protection: It does not, and that is shameful.

Cali Bro | 10:21 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

All of you that against Prop 8. Let me ask you this. How did you get into this world? I hope you have a Mom and a Dad.

I can't believe how many LDS memebers who disargeed with the Prophets. (Amos 3:7) Get on your knees and ask for forgiveness.

VOTE YES ON PROP 8. The Church is TRUE! LOVE IT AND LIVE IT.

to Anon 9:19 | 10:21 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

You will be judged for judging. I pity you more than I pity your stepson.

Mike, CPA | 10:21 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

As an expert in not for profit organizations I find the comments on this post suggesting the LDS Church should loose it's tax exempt status for taking a position on this issue surprising. Anyone with experience in 501(c)(3) tax exempt organizations would realize that there are not for profit organizations both for and against this proposition. To take away the LDS Church's tax exempt status over their position would necessitate the taking away the tax exempt status of the Human Rights Campaign and Gay Pride organizations as well as other organizations that are against the proposition. Or are all of you suggesting that the tax exempt status of varying organizations be allowed or revoked based on whether or not you personally agree with their tax exempt purpose? That is a slippery slope!

Donovan | 10:21 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I want six wife's and sixty children, and thats is just hunky dorey in the eyes of the religious. But two of Gods gay children wanting their American rights are sinfull.

Such nutjobs.

Jax | 10:26 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I don't understand everyone saying this is about protecting the children. If Prop 8 passes it is not going to stop gay couples from forming families, it is not going to stop gay couples from raising children, it is not going to stop gay and lesbian couples from searching out ways to have a child that is at least one partners biological child. What it is going to do is deny those children the legal protection they need and deserve. How is this a benefit to the children? How is this protecting the children?

re Aaron | 10:31 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Hi, I just watched a video on the internet where a couple in Mass. sent their 5 year old son to school and they received a diversity packet home from the school for their child. In this packet was a book explaining gay marraiges and telling the child this was alright and good. When the parents went to the school to talk about this they were told that because of the laws there it was perfectly legal and that they did not have to contact the parents before hand about this at all. There was also no way for the parents to be able to shield there 5 year old child from this and they ended up arresting the father over this...... PEOPLE WAKE UP!!!! what about our RIGHTS! why are you trying to denie me the right to raise my children as I see fit!! why is gay whatever being pushed down my throat everytime I turn around!! TV movies ..etc The bible says it wrong - I am a Christian and I want to be able to follow the dictates of my religious beliefs the school system (law) saying what my children will be taught

to Kathyn | 10:31 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

What you don't understans is called Agency, which is fundamental to Latter-day doctrine and faith.

Anonymous | 10:31 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

When one spouts that a religious person is guilty of bigotry because they believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, doesn't that make them a bigot and a hate monger too? The 1st Amendment grants all Americans the freedom to exercise their religious beliefs, the freedom to express them, and the freedom of the press to promote them. Our great nation would have never been founded if it weren't for religious people who were tired of royalty saying what they could believe and do. We benefit from these so-called zealots.Who,by the way,paved the way for us with their blood. We all are human and without laws we are thrown into chaos. Case in point:Mortgage lenders who decided that the all mighty dollar was more important than following laws. This is a great example of what happens when we say 'what does it matter if we let them do what they want, it won't affect me.' And sadly, 14 years later we're all paying the price,including future generations. Do we not long for that time back to do things differently? This is a proposition not a political party. There is a huge difference. Open your eyes!

Jax | 10:33 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Do all you people who are so concerned about Catholic Charities no longer practicing in Boston and San Francisco wonder why LDS Family Services is still operating in those same areas? It's because Catholic Charities accept public funds and are bound by public law. If they want to operate using only their own funds and capital they can do as LDS Family Services does and discriminate all they want.

Anonymous | 10:37 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I just posted the comment about opening our eyes and realized I forgot to enter my name. My real name is Leigh, not Anonymous. Thank you for listening.

ExMoWeHoMo | 10:38 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

As a gay man and former Mormon, I find the LDS church's stance absolutely appalling. My (now, for the moment, husband) and I, due to an unfortunate circumstance, have taken in three children where no one else would. It wasn't our choice to start a family, but if we hadn't, these siblings would have been adopted out separately; a family torn apart.
We are trying desperately and at great expense to give these children a loving, stable household and have been thwarted every step of the way by supposed family value Christians.
Tell me again how Mormons are all about families.

re:Kathyn | 10:45 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

"I don't understand how faithful LDS can pick and choose which commandments and teachings they want to follow."

I will try to help you understand. I will not engage in homosexual activities, I will be true to my wife and a father to my children.

I will also follow the tenents of the LDS faith.

As to the morality of others, I will claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of my own conscience, and allow all others the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

If the Law allows gay marriage, I will be subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

If someone chooses an alternative lifestyle to my own, I will believe that they will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression.

I will not impose my belief system on others, as they have the free agency through the plan of the Savior, and not compell others to live a certain way (I can't remember the name of the guy who had that plan, I think it was Satan, or smething like that).

I hope that helps.

JanSan | 10:47 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

I just had a thought go through my mind... If this does not pass and gay marraige is approved as alright - how would that affect the missionaries in there teaching of gay marraige as not accepted in the church. Would this be considered hate speech and could they be arrested for this??any one with ideas that knows what they are talking about please feel free to respond..

To None of Our Business | 10:47 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

Same-sex couples in California already have the insurance benefits, etc. of domestic partnerships; this proposition will not take those away. This proposition is just to protect marriage, and protect our freedom of speech and our rights to practice and preach about what we feel morally and religiously.

I live in CA | 10:54 a.m. Oct. 9, 2008

To "CA Prop 22/8": Thank you for leaving California. I feel bad for the state in which you now live.

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.