Reader comments
California group delivers petition to LDS headquarters in S.L.
65 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
weez30 | 7:50 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
Gay right IS NOT a civil rights issue. Voting no to prop 8 has NOTHING to do
about discrimination. It is about morality - something this country was found
on. I am not a bigot, nor do I discriminate, but I do not accept the homosexual
lifestyle. I tolerate it. Whatever happened that if people have an opinion on
something they are labeled as hateful. I hate the color red so am I a bigot? Am
I discriminating the color red? NO. So stop comparing homosexual lifestyles as a
civil right issue. It is a lifestyle, and a choice. Not a constitutional right
nor should it be protected as one with my tax dollars!
Who's Fault? | 7:58 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
People are natural individualists. They do not unite and form groups unless they
are forced to do so to protect themselves. If there are a few pockets of
organized gay and lesbian advocacy groups, it is a direct result of the
religious bigotry and persecution they are experiencing!
Kids under the age of about 10 rarely talk about sex. They are more concerned with other things. But lately our schools and communities have been overrun with discussion of sex, sexual orientation, and related matters. Why? Because religious zealots are taking it upon themselves to attack the fundamental civil rights of a group of Americans for no other reason than because they disagree with how they practice sex. So if you don't like your children being exposed to talk of sex at such a young age, you shouldn't try to discriminate against people on the basis of their sex practices.
The religious bigot agenda is directly responsible for the problems they are complaining about! Leave gays alone and you won't have these problems.
Kids under the age of about 10 rarely talk about sex. They are more concerned with other things. But lately our schools and communities have been overrun with discussion of sex, sexual orientation, and related matters. Why? Because religious zealots are taking it upon themselves to attack the fundamental civil rights of a group of Americans for no other reason than because they disagree with how they practice sex. So if you don't like your children being exposed to talk of sex at such a young age, you shouldn't try to discriminate against people on the basis of their sex practices.
The religious bigot agenda is directly responsible for the problems they are complaining about! Leave gays alone and you won't have these problems.
Comments continue below
LDS Texas | 8:18 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
FUNDING????
Oh that's right!! That's what that collection plate is for, in Sacrament Meeting!
Are you kidding me with these deceitful LIES about our church??
Oh that's right!! That's what that collection plate is for, in Sacrament Meeting!
Are you kidding me with these deceitful LIES about our church??
PDH | 9:02 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
Even deeper than being a political or civil issue, this is a moral issue.
Imagine that the government attempts to pass a law to burn every Bible. How
many of us would really sit back and say, "Oh, well; separation of church
and state. As a church we have no opinion."
We can see that the destruction of what we regard as sacred texts is an assault on the foundation of our faith and our rights. Marriage is perhaps even more of such a foundation, and we regard it, too, as sacred and given of God. Therefore, for those of us now voicing our opinions on this issue, it would be wrong for us to ignore our faith and the responsibility we have to our children by staying quite.
The Church has a clear position on this, yet as an organization, not one penny has been offered. Only individuals have donated, which is absolutely within their rights.
This issue is vital to residents of other states as well. As one nation, such a bold new policy in California will affect every state. If it were possible to contain this to only those who desire it, there wouldn't even be conflict.
We can see that the destruction of what we regard as sacred texts is an assault on the foundation of our faith and our rights. Marriage is perhaps even more of such a foundation, and we regard it, too, as sacred and given of God. Therefore, for those of us now voicing our opinions on this issue, it would be wrong for us to ignore our faith and the responsibility we have to our children by staying quite.
The Church has a clear position on this, yet as an organization, not one penny has been offered. Only individuals have donated, which is absolutely within their rights.
This issue is vital to residents of other states as well. As one nation, such a bold new policy in California will affect every state. If it were possible to contain this to only those who desire it, there wouldn't even be conflict.
Anonymous | 10:50 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
This has nothing to do with the "rights" of homosexuals. They already
have rights. The homosexual community is attempting to force feed their
lifestyle down the throats of everyone else. It has everything to do with the
LDS belief that children are best raised in a home with one mother and one
father. The Church and it's members have every constitutional right to
express that sentiment.
I'm quite frankly disgusted with the other side telling me how bigoted I am, while at the same time they want to deny the rights of people of faith to practice their own religion, or private hospitals or schools to operate in a manner they see fit. I'm really tired of this particular community calling me "homophobic" when in reality, I'm not scared of them. I don't even have anxiety about them. So how is that homo "phobic"? Find a word that means disgusted or shocked, and you can call me that word - of course, name calling is acceptable from the other side, so I'm sure they'll come up with something. It's called tolerance people.
I'm quite frankly disgusted with the other side telling me how bigoted I am, while at the same time they want to deny the rights of people of faith to practice their own religion, or private hospitals or schools to operate in a manner they see fit. I'm really tired of this particular community calling me "homophobic" when in reality, I'm not scared of them. I don't even have anxiety about them. So how is that homo "phobic"? Find a word that means disgusted or shocked, and you can call me that word - of course, name calling is acceptable from the other side, so I'm sure they'll come up with something. It's called tolerance people.
Don | 10:53 a.m. Nov. 1, 2008
Why is it that you rarely see heterosexuals calling homosexuals anything that
would be considered offensive, but the homosexual community and far left are
never questioned for name calling? Which side has been accused of intolerance
again?
One Human Family | 2:39 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
I am Mormon and am very disturbed by the involvement in the church in this. My
brother is gay and should have every right to marry the person he loves. This
amendment does nothing more than hurt people like him. I do not see gay people
trying to amend the constitution to limit the beliefs and rights of Mormons. It
is the other way around. Everyone of that is supporting this amendment should
be ashamed of themselves.
Anonymous | 3:07 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
In response to:
"The homosexual community is attempting to force feed their lifestyle down the throats of everyone else."
Who is amending the constitution to limit the beliefs of others?! It is Mormons that are force feeding their lifestyle on others. I find that very disturbing, especially considering our history of being persecuted for our marriages.
"The homosexual community is attempting to force feed their lifestyle down the throats of everyone else."
Who is amending the constitution to limit the beliefs of others?! It is Mormons that are force feeding their lifestyle on others. I find that very disturbing, especially considering our history of being persecuted for our marriages.
Dan A Robson | 5:27 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
Slavery brought the judgments of God upon our nation. Thousands of lives were
lost due to a group of people accepting an immoral act. I believe that
Proposition 8 is a similar question of moral acceptance, and ultimately will
yield a consequence from God, be it good or bad.
Benjamin Franklin said that a nation cannot pay for its transgressions in the next world, so it must pay for them in this one.
Accepting morally incorrect practices as a nation will bring the judgments of God upon our country, be it war, famine, pestilence, or any other calamity.
Increases in catastrophes, earth quakes, hurricanes, etc. have been positively correlated with the moral degradation of our world. I believe the only way to stop the judgments of God is to change our acceptance of moral perversion.
You may consider me a religious fanatic, but I know these thing to be true. God will never reward a nation�s tolerance of evil, no never.
Benjamin Franklin said that a nation cannot pay for its transgressions in the next world, so it must pay for them in this one.
Accepting morally incorrect practices as a nation will bring the judgments of God upon our country, be it war, famine, pestilence, or any other calamity.
Increases in catastrophes, earth quakes, hurricanes, etc. have been positively correlated with the moral degradation of our world. I believe the only way to stop the judgments of God is to change our acceptance of moral perversion.
You may consider me a religious fanatic, but I know these thing to be true. God will never reward a nation�s tolerance of evil, no never.
In response to Dan Robson | 6:31 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
You said:
"Slavery brought the judgments of God upon our nation."
Oppression of a group of people is always wrong. That is why I am AGAINST proposition 8.
"I believe that Proposition 8 is a similar question of moral acceptance, and ultimately will yield a consequence from God, be it good or bad."
I complete agree with you. Do we accept discrimination and put it into our constitution, or do we reject it?
"Slavery brought the judgments of God upon our nation."
Oppression of a group of people is always wrong. That is why I am AGAINST proposition 8.
"I believe that Proposition 8 is a similar question of moral acceptance, and ultimately will yield a consequence from God, be it good or bad."
I complete agree with you. Do we accept discrimination and put it into our constitution, or do we reject it?
John Pack Lambert | 7:15 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
There is nothing courageous about these people. They lob their protest
against a small minority, which has already had people part angry vans in front
of thier houses accusing them of being bigots.
John Pack Lambert | 7:26 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
To FG,
You need to do a study of the operation of democratic governments. There is nothing wrong with trying to legally chage the law. If we were deliberately breaking the law to force a change, but having a desire to change the law through legal actions is no failure to follow the law.
You need to do a study of the operation of democratic governments. There is nothing wrong with trying to legally chage the law. If we were deliberately breaking the law to force a change, but having a desire to change the law through legal actions is no failure to follow the law.
John Pack Lambert | 7:56 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
To the 4:21 poster,
Your analogy to Loving v. Virginia is wrong on many levels. There is no equivalent of the 14th Admendment that makes the laws against same-sex marriage invalid.
They are also truely eqaully applied to all people. There is also no proof that laws against same gender marriage have discriminatory purposes, which was clearly the case with laws against inter-racial marriage.
The last issue, is that the claim that most Americans opposed inter-racial marriage's legality in the 1960s is hard to justify because at least 2/3rd of states had no laws against it, while in the United States all except for three states have laws against same gender marriage, and those states have only done so by judicial fiat, where as Utah and many other states had repealed laws against inter-racial action by legislative action.
Your analogy to Loving v. Virginia is wrong on many levels. There is no equivalent of the 14th Admendment that makes the laws against same-sex marriage invalid.
They are also truely eqaully applied to all people. There is also no proof that laws against same gender marriage have discriminatory purposes, which was clearly the case with laws against inter-racial marriage.
The last issue, is that the claim that most Americans opposed inter-racial marriage's legality in the 1960s is hard to justify because at least 2/3rd of states had no laws against it, while in the United States all except for three states have laws against same gender marriage, and those states have only done so by judicial fiat, where as Utah and many other states had repealed laws against inter-racial action by legislative action.
John Pack Lambert | 8:06 p.m. Nov. 1, 2008
To the 4:41 commentator,
The acusation that the LDS Church is busing people into California is absolutely false. The church has not even mobilized citizens of California temporarily living out of state to make calls.
It is church members who live in California who have made the donation to the campaign, attended the rallies in the street, put up signs and on and on. However there are many, many, many people other people than Mormons involved in this campaign.
The acusation that the LDS Church is busing people into California is absolutely false. The church has not even mobilized citizens of California temporarily living out of state to make calls.
It is church members who live in California who have made the donation to the campaign, attended the rallies in the street, put up signs and on and on. However there are many, many, many people other people than Mormons involved in this campaign.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
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.
- Vegas, Poinsettia bowls or bust 2:01 a.m.
- Wildcats face tough defense 1:59 a.m.
- Aggies look to Idaho for an example 1:58 a.m.
- Aggies host Southern Utah 1:53 a.m.
- Cougars turn back Wildcats' 1:44 a.m.
- Cougar women lose at home 1:41 a.m.
- Sloan's two point guard lineup 1:39 a.m.
- BYU football: 5 keys to victory 1:36 a.m.
- RSL's Movsisyan departs 1:36 a.m.
- Glover gives Utes last-second upset 1:27 a.m.
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
264 - Protests against Phoenix LDS temple211
- Thunder rolls by Jazz136
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin133
- Boys basketball rankings128
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin112
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies109
- Letters: Trump card for believers93
- Rivalry Week is highly profane84
- Utah, BYU are top choices for bowls75
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
"You are the very epitome of self-indulgence liberal crassness. You care...
I thought it was a great parade. Isn't it the only one in Salt Lake County?...
is struggling in some aspects of his game. We saw what he did last year early...
Having explored caves as a youth and spent 31 yrs working occasionally...
How do the Utes continue to do this? They are bad enough to lose to lousy...
A little help here. Harmon says Utah should be on a 3-0 win streak. I assume...
disgruntled parents need to stay off the blogs...
Honk if you intercepted Max Hall.
however it pertinent to look at their schedule and then look at ours. Because...
and there are no ute fans, only bandwagon fans, nice try though
Advertisements
"During a celebration of National Ally Week, Tara Miller, a teacher at the Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, Calif., passed out cards produced by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network to her class of kindergartners.
"The cards asked signers to be "an ally" and to pledge to "not use anti-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) language or slurs; intervene, when I feel I can, in situations where others are using anti-LGBT language or harassing other students and actively support safer schools efforts."
I wonder who is pushing who's agenda now.
Just so you know I am now worried.