Reader comments
Hundreds protest over Prop. 8
476 comments | Read story
Tyler | 2:11 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Just be patient. It will all pass very soon. Of course, I find it ironic that
the same people who claim that Prop 8 was a hate-based initiative are the same
people who are so outwordly expressing all their hate for anyone who disagrees
with them.
Pam in Southern Cal | 2:12 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I voted yes on Proposition 8. We did the RIGHT thing here in California, and no
amount of name calling, protesting, etc. changes that.
Comments continue below
RR | 2:13 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
This is EXACTLY why I'll never ever live in CA. How about all these people
get their own island, have their own laws, and in 50 years when no babies are
born and no one is around to run their island, they'll see that way of
living makes zero sense.
Skippy | 2:14 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Everyone has to pick on the Mormons to justify their behavior. Lets face it
Mormons are scapegoats for everything. What is with that?
Sick and tired of "CIvil RIghts" | 2:16 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
For anyone confusing marriage as a civil rights should Google the following:
"Is Marriage a Civil Right? by Matt Kinnaman" It is not a "Civil
Right".
Fervent Supporter of Gay Rights | 2:16 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
The Mormons faced persecution during their development as a progressive society
built out of social protest, experimentation, and new found ideals in religion.
They had a strong communal society ardently opposed to excessive individualism
and eventually they became a staunch advocate of polygamy due to a new
revelation founded by Joseph Smith.
The same persecution is being set forth upon the gay community and it is completely unjust. I feel extreme indignation towards the Mormon Church for their hypocrisy throughout their own challenging history. Granted their ideals and principle have changed (about polygamy among other things) due to a malleable society, so why can't they accept the changing times and step aside to allow equal rights to the gay community. We live in a secular country now, the views of the Mormon Church should stay within the Mormon Church and not hinder society's progress.
The same persecution is being set forth upon the gay community and it is completely unjust. I feel extreme indignation towards the Mormon Church for their hypocrisy throughout their own challenging history. Granted their ideals and principle have changed (about polygamy among other things) due to a malleable society, so why can't they accept the changing times and step aside to allow equal rights to the gay community. We live in a secular country now, the views of the Mormon Church should stay within the Mormon Church and not hinder society's progress.
anne | 2:17 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Many members of the LDS church wanted prop 8 to pass. Many of them donated money
and time to helping it pass.
Are we supposed to disenfranchise them because they are LDS? Free speech does not apply to LDS people?
The LDS church will not fall because they do not fall into political correctness guidelines.
I am not as Christlike as I should be. I do love the sinner and hate the sin but it is really hard to "love those that despitefully use you".
Why did you deface the temple gates? Why do you put messages on signs that show either ignorance of truth or disregard? Why do you call people who don't agree with you bigots? Why do you claim the 'higher road' while doing these things?
I honestly don't understand it. Don't go casting stones when you have such a log in your eyes. It may get the headlines but does it win your side's cause?
If people trusted gay people to not try to interfer with their marriage ceremonies and kid's educations this might never have happened. But you have proven yourselves deceitful too many times. Try winning back trust honestly. Leave our kids alone.
Are we supposed to disenfranchise them because they are LDS? Free speech does not apply to LDS people?
The LDS church will not fall because they do not fall into political correctness guidelines.
I am not as Christlike as I should be. I do love the sinner and hate the sin but it is really hard to "love those that despitefully use you".
Why did you deface the temple gates? Why do you put messages on signs that show either ignorance of truth or disregard? Why do you call people who don't agree with you bigots? Why do you claim the 'higher road' while doing these things?
I honestly don't understand it. Don't go casting stones when you have such a log in your eyes. It may get the headlines but does it win your side's cause?
If people trusted gay people to not try to interfer with their marriage ceremonies and kid's educations this might never have happened. But you have proven yourselves deceitful too many times. Try winning back trust honestly. Leave our kids alone.
JDS | 2:17 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
LGBT supporters have taken to the streets of California and Utah to protest the
newly-passed proposition 8, but their efforts do not go far enough to promote
social equality. These couples are just as in love and just as committed as
monogamous heterosexual couples and should be allowed the same rights and
privileges. It is time we lift the ban on homosexual procreation!
re: Sarah | 2:21 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Marriage is a social practice preceding the US and the constitution. Government
determined to pass civil code using "marriage" as a qualifier for
certain legal status and related benefits. The use of a long-standing
social/religious institution, "marriage," to qualify social policy was
based on cultural assumptions of the benefit of a man and a woman being
committed to a "marriage."
Argue those cultural assumptions are wrong, fine. BUT "MARRIAGE" WAS USURPED BY SOCIAL POLICY, NOT INVENTED BY IT. If social policy needs to change to reflect a new kind of union, then people can debate it and vote. Eliminate "marriage" from law and social policy if you must, but leave "marriage" alone as it represents something religious (not civic) to many, many people.
These are rational arguments that don't make me a bigot or a hater. The Catholic, LDS, etc. churches are NOT against social policy regarding civic unions, they are against people defaming a traditional religious practice simply because it is being used as a qualifier for government policy.
Hint: You will get a lot further eliminating "marriage" as a legal qualifier than you will with your attacks on religion. Get some brighter lawyers.
Argue those cultural assumptions are wrong, fine. BUT "MARRIAGE" WAS USURPED BY SOCIAL POLICY, NOT INVENTED BY IT. If social policy needs to change to reflect a new kind of union, then people can debate it and vote. Eliminate "marriage" from law and social policy if you must, but leave "marriage" alone as it represents something religious (not civic) to many, many people.
These are rational arguments that don't make me a bigot or a hater. The Catholic, LDS, etc. churches are NOT against social policy regarding civic unions, they are against people defaming a traditional religious practice simply because it is being used as a qualifier for government policy.
Hint: You will get a lot further eliminating "marriage" as a legal qualifier than you will with your attacks on religion. Get some brighter lawyers.
Rover (again) | 2:22 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Going off of what I said earlier, if gay marriage passes, then LDS bishops will
be FORCED to marry same-sex couples, against the bishop's, majority of
members', and the Church's moral stance. With how I view marriage as
sacred, that would mean that same-sex couples would be able to marry AGAINST ANY
religion's stances.
The problem with this is that Prop. 8 is being seen by the gay community as a Political issue, while the LDS, Catholic, etc. churches view this as a Moral issue. The gay community will keep trying to force their political views on what these churches view as moral, I feel. The problem is is that these religions will have their rights (to believe what is sacred, true, etc.) infringed upon by a relatively small group who seek to redraw lines to their own liking. In other words, the tail will wag the dog (pun not intended).
The problem with this is that Prop. 8 is being seen by the gay community as a Political issue, while the LDS, Catholic, etc. churches view this as a Moral issue. The gay community will keep trying to force their political views on what these churches view as moral, I feel. The problem is is that these religions will have their rights (to believe what is sacred, true, etc.) infringed upon by a relatively small group who seek to redraw lines to their own liking. In other words, the tail will wag the dog (pun not intended).
Wow! | 2:22 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
How foolish for those protestors that think Mormons are polygamists! Here is a
word of advice: STUDY UP AND BE AWARE OF PEOPLE THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO BASH!
That way...you might look slightly more intelligent for the next time! Just a
thought :)
anne | 2:23 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
marriage=covenant between a man and woman to live together as husband and wife
to support, protect and honor each other and to raise, protect and care for any
children born to the union.
I am sure it could be said longer and probably better but since you demanded a definition immediately and apparently don't know how to use google to find an online dictionary there you go. :D
I am sure it could be said longer and probably better but since you demanded a definition immediately and apparently don't know how to use google to find an online dictionary there you go. :D
aaron | 2:24 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
It is inevitable that the LDS church will loose its reputation among those who
disagree with their ideals, even if they are in the minority.(which fortunately
in the case of prop8 they are not.)
Public relations do not come before moral convictions.
I'm sure the leadership of the church is well aware of that.
Public relations do not come before moral convictions.
I'm sure the leadership of the church is well aware of that.
Get it straight | 2:28 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
So many accusations:
Mormons are not tolerant. Mormons lied. Mormons are prejudice and discriminate (on and on).
Murderers, thieves, adulterers all have the same complaint. What gives!
Yet, no evidences are ever given:
Quit asking for acceptance of wrongdoing in the name of tolerance. Don't claim that being gay is the same thing as race or gender, because that is the lie. You can choose who you have sex with as can the rest of us, so technically we can all be gay. Stop protesting due process.
Problem solved. The reality is that an emotionally charged argument has left you without any substance to your argument. This isn't about civil rights. No proof has been given that Mormons, government, or anyone else has discriminated against your basic human rights.
The debate has actually proven that you already have the same human rights as the rest of us. What you want are extra benefits the government has deemed necessary to give to marriage, but not to other unions. You are barking up the wrong tree, and you are getting offensive. Mormons could care less what you do in your household, just quit trying to redefine our household.
Mormons are not tolerant. Mormons lied. Mormons are prejudice and discriminate (on and on).
Murderers, thieves, adulterers all have the same complaint. What gives!
Yet, no evidences are ever given:
Quit asking for acceptance of wrongdoing in the name of tolerance. Don't claim that being gay is the same thing as race or gender, because that is the lie. You can choose who you have sex with as can the rest of us, so technically we can all be gay. Stop protesting due process.
Problem solved. The reality is that an emotionally charged argument has left you without any substance to your argument. This isn't about civil rights. No proof has been given that Mormons, government, or anyone else has discriminated against your basic human rights.
The debate has actually proven that you already have the same human rights as the rest of us. What you want are extra benefits the government has deemed necessary to give to marriage, but not to other unions. You are barking up the wrong tree, and you are getting offensive. Mormons could care less what you do in your household, just quit trying to redefine our household.
It's not their fault... | 2:36 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
You have to realize it's not just the No on 8 people who are causing
problems. It was a Yes on 8 person who broke the peaceful protest by punching
someone in the face. I know two of the people via an AFI message board who were
arrested at the protest in LA. The media doesn't know the real story.
wow | 2:36 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I very calmly answered the Julia who wanted chapter and verse from the Book of
Mormon where it documents black as less than white. I very politely asked her
not to yell in her posts.
Other posters pro-8 are literally ranting in their posts. I guess the DN definition of abusive is rather lenient.
Theirs got published. Mine did not. Not sure how I violated "the rules" of getting published.
Other posters pro-8 are literally ranting in their posts. I guess the DN definition of abusive is rather lenient.
Theirs got published. Mine did not. Not sure how I violated "the rules" of getting published.
Be an Example | 2:37 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Yes, I KNOW the church is true, please don't mock me. Last I heard that was
unchristian...no? If you would like to know the truth yourself read The Book of
Mormon from start to finish, pray about it, then you will also KNOW. :) All this
arguing is sure doing a lot of good, so I will end with this quote and scripture
for those interested...
Matthew 10:27-40
Quote from Ezra Taft Benson to ponder: "As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words, but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him. When the prophet points out the sins of the world, the worldly either want to close the mouth of the prophet, or else act as if the prophet didn't exist, rather than repent of their sins. Popularity is never a test of truth. Many a prophet has been killed or cast out. As we come closer to the Lord's second coming, you can expect that as the people of the world become more wicked, the prophet will be less popular with them."
Matthew 10:27-40
Quote from Ezra Taft Benson to ponder: "As a prophet reveals the truth it divides the people. The honest in heart heed his words, but the unrighteous either ignore the prophet or fight him. When the prophet points out the sins of the world, the worldly either want to close the mouth of the prophet, or else act as if the prophet didn't exist, rather than repent of their sins. Popularity is never a test of truth. Many a prophet has been killed or cast out. As we come closer to the Lord's second coming, you can expect that as the people of the world become more wicked, the prophet will be less popular with them."
Bert | 2:40 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Old people eventually die off and so do their voices of discrimination. Not soon
enough for me though.
Anonymous | 2:45 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
To JDS: "...and should be allowed the same rights and privileges..."
UMMM hello? If you knew your facts gays have all the same rights and priviledges...they just want the wording of marriage changed to include them. That goes against everything I and thousands(the majority) believe!
UMMM hello? If you knew your facts gays have all the same rights and priviledges...they just want the wording of marriage changed to include them. That goes against everything I and thousands(the majority) believe!
Do your homework | 2:50 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Proposition 8 does NOT nullify California Family Code Section 297.5, which
states that domestic partners have the same rights as "spouses" or
married couples.
The only thing in prop 8 is that the definition of a marriage is being defined.
It is making a distinction between the two types of unions.
Again,
NO rights are being taken away from gay couples through prop 8.
The only thing in prop 8 is that the definition of a marriage is being defined.
It is making a distinction between the two types of unions.
Again,
NO rights are being taken away from gay couples through prop 8.
Seperate is not equal | 2:51 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I keep hearing the same things...
"I believe in equal rights, but not gay marriage."
"Civil unions have the exact same benefits as a marriage, why do gay people keep complaining about this?"
Why do they complain? Because they want to be considered EQUAL and not subhuman like they are being treated. In the 1960's there were seperate facilities for white people and "colored" people. Now in the 2000's there's marriage and civil unions. Sometimes I paint over swastikas and sometimes I take down prop 8 signs, I just want this crap to stop already!
SEPERATE IS NOT EQUAL!!!
"I believe in equal rights, but not gay marriage."
"Civil unions have the exact same benefits as a marriage, why do gay people keep complaining about this?"
Why do they complain? Because they want to be considered EQUAL and not subhuman like they are being treated. In the 1960's there were seperate facilities for white people and "colored" people. Now in the 2000's there's marriage and civil unions. Sometimes I paint over swastikas and sometimes I take down prop 8 signs, I just want this crap to stop already!
SEPERATE IS NOT EQUAL!!!
Tired of it all | 2:51 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
To those in California who are angered:
There are roughly 13 million LDS church members in the WORLD. The 5 million or so that didn't support your right to marry are not all LDS. The PEOPLE of California have spoken twice about the issue. Secondly, you must now feel what supporters of Proposition 8 were feeling when the court decided to override the people's voice on this issue. Supporters, like I, of traditional marriage, have felt that you are trying to push and force your views on us about what you think of marriage. Now that the California voters have spoken, your not willing to accept the vote and "think" that the LDS church is to blame and that they are shoving their belief of marriage down your throat.
The LDS church has and does support civil unions, etc. We do not preach or tolerate hate, we dislike and disapprove of the sin.
Lastly, gays in relationships reject the thought and foundation of what marriage has always been, yet they are actively demanding that they should marry. Marriage is not a right, it doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution, it is a privilege. There is a major difference.
There are roughly 13 million LDS church members in the WORLD. The 5 million or so that didn't support your right to marry are not all LDS. The PEOPLE of California have spoken twice about the issue. Secondly, you must now feel what supporters of Proposition 8 were feeling when the court decided to override the people's voice on this issue. Supporters, like I, of traditional marriage, have felt that you are trying to push and force your views on us about what you think of marriage. Now that the California voters have spoken, your not willing to accept the vote and "think" that the LDS church is to blame and that they are shoving their belief of marriage down your throat.
The LDS church has and does support civil unions, etc. We do not preach or tolerate hate, we dislike and disapprove of the sin.
Lastly, gays in relationships reject the thought and foundation of what marriage has always been, yet they are actively demanding that they should marry. Marriage is not a right, it doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution, it is a privilege. There is a major difference.
Carlos | 2:58 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Wrong is what GOD says is wrong. This sort of sexual behavior has been wrong
since the beginning of time. No matter how you cut it, redefine it, explain it,
parse it, boil it, fricasee it, fry it, grill it, or sautee it, it is against
the laws of God and always has been and always will be. Two men cannot get
married and will not be able to get married in the temple in the future. God
sanctions men and women. He has been pretty clear on this point. Any other
relationship is pretty destructive to his purposes. Who are you to redefine
what God has already defined?
Rob | 3:00 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has the right to stand up its
values. Why arn't we seeing protests against all the Liberal groups (move
on.org, etc.)around the nation that are active in fighting for what they believe
in. But when a church stands up for a valued principle people start attacking
the church. Separation of church and state means that there will not be a state
sponsored religion. A Church has the right to guide it's members on moral
issues. It is funny how freedom of speech only applies to liberal groups. A
conservative group or church are harrassed and bullied when they exercise there
free speech.
THH | 3:03 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
The people have spoken? 48 percent voted no - that's a very big minority to
ignore...
The Deuce | 3:30 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Why do we continue to hear from those on this site that appear to have misread
the facts. For Robert Johnson, the LDS Church did not finance the Yes on Prop 8
campaign. How many times does this have to be said. The LDS Church did encourage
their members to support the cause. It was then left up to those individuals
whether or not they would donate, as private citizens. You can direct all of
your hate and misunderstanding at the LDS Church but you fail to understand that
this proposal was supported by a broad coalition of people from many faiths and
diverse backgrounds. If the gay/lesbian side wants to protest, be sure and
include all who voted last Tuesday. As one who travels extensively around the US
this topic is starting to wear thin on many. I feel there are more constructive
things to be working on. I am afraid that this show of protest is awakening a
storm that the gay/lesbian side does not want to see. There are alot of opinions
out there that see California as something very different already. Where can we
find common ground to work on?
I'll tell you why | 3:39 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Being single I guess I have less civil rights
...all because no one will define my status as married.
(If only the government defined my singlehood as marriage, then I could be happy. After all, if people say I'm married then I must be).
What lies and flawed thinking. This will get you no where, and those who advocate this approach are hindering you more by acting like this imitation of marriage will ever work. You want the benefits of marriage without the definition of marriage. That's ridiculous! If you don't want marriage as defined between a man and a woman, then you don't want marriage.
What you want are just the government benefits. Frankly as individuals, live-ins, boyfriend/girlfriends, and singles who care about siblings (or other relations) have just as much argument to having those as you do. Why don't you fight for their cause?
Why shouldn't I, as an individual, get to say who visits me in the hospital, or who shares a bank account, or uses my insurance, or whatever? You are selfish. Why should only gay unions and marriage unions have automatic government benefits for themselves and their partner?
B/c benefits aren't rights, that's why!
...all because no one will define my status as married.
(If only the government defined my singlehood as marriage, then I could be happy. After all, if people say I'm married then I must be).
What lies and flawed thinking. This will get you no where, and those who advocate this approach are hindering you more by acting like this imitation of marriage will ever work. You want the benefits of marriage without the definition of marriage. That's ridiculous! If you don't want marriage as defined between a man and a woman, then you don't want marriage.
What you want are just the government benefits. Frankly as individuals, live-ins, boyfriend/girlfriends, and singles who care about siblings (or other relations) have just as much argument to having those as you do. Why don't you fight for their cause?
Why shouldn't I, as an individual, get to say who visits me in the hospital, or who shares a bank account, or uses my insurance, or whatever? You are selfish. Why should only gay unions and marriage unions have automatic government benefits for themselves and their partner?
B/c benefits aren't rights, that's why!
RE: RE: Who Cares? | 3:40 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Well yeah, I'm pretty sure the God of the Bible who destroyed Sodom (sodomy
anyone?) and Gomorrah is OK with banning gay marriage...
Love | 3:43 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Jesus said love EVERYONE
Treat them KINDLY too
When YOUR heart it is filled with love
OTHERS will love you
I love my gay brother just as much as Jesus does.
Treat them KINDLY too
When YOUR heart it is filled with love
OTHERS will love you
I love my gay brother just as much as Jesus does.
Anonymous | 3:46 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
To Dan in CA: You say your marriage has been annulled please define marriage
for me.
To Robert Johnson: Sources please of "The mormon church helped finance . . ." I know the news media here in California has not been very clear about this so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. The church asked members to volunteer time, effort and money to a civic coalition which many did, but others did not. No coercion.
To Fervant Supporter of Gay Rights: You stated that "the same persecution is being set forth upon the gay community (as the Mormons)." I can name four states the Mormons were driven from. What was that one state the gay community was driven from? Oh thats right none.
To Anne: I think you and I are on the same side of this issue. At least we have the same definition. My challenge was to the opponents of 8 to give me their definition. I know it sounds like a broken record, but they seemed really stumped by this question. I don't think they would want to Google it because the Google definition would not be broad enough for them.
To Robert Johnson: Sources please of "The mormon church helped finance . . ." I know the news media here in California has not been very clear about this so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. The church asked members to volunteer time, effort and money to a civic coalition which many did, but others did not. No coercion.
To Fervant Supporter of Gay Rights: You stated that "the same persecution is being set forth upon the gay community (as the Mormons)." I can name four states the Mormons were driven from. What was that one state the gay community was driven from? Oh thats right none.
To Anne: I think you and I are on the same side of this issue. At least we have the same definition. My challenge was to the opponents of 8 to give me their definition. I know it sounds like a broken record, but they seemed really stumped by this question. I don't think they would want to Google it because the Google definition would not be broad enough for them.
Sasha Pachev | 3:48 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Being an active LDS I feel honored that of all the churches that worked to pass
Proposition 8 ours is getting the all of the credit for the success. This is
going to do us great service in the way of sharing the gospel with others.
People who have access to sufficient measure the Holy Ghost see plainly that marriage is between a man and a woman. When we approach them, if they know that we played a major role in asserting that such is the case, it serves as a validation of our message. It makes it easier for us to preach to them as they now have more respect for us.
The protests are an honorary ceremony for us. They will help us in the long run. We have not been ashamed of the truth, and we are reaping the rewards.
People who have access to sufficient measure the Holy Ghost see plainly that marriage is between a man and a woman. When we approach them, if they know that we played a major role in asserting that such is the case, it serves as a validation of our message. It makes it easier for us to preach to them as they now have more respect for us.
The protests are an honorary ceremony for us. They will help us in the long run. We have not been ashamed of the truth, and we are reaping the rewards.
Blame | 3:57 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
The reason the LDS church is being singled out is because they are the single
group that provided 43% of the Prop 8 funding. But it wasn't the church.
They didn't donate a penny. They encouraged the sheep to donate their money
instead. You see, if the LDS church had donated their own money, they would be
in jeopardy of losing their tax exempt status.
What does that tell you about whether they overstepped their bounds or not? Pretty clear to me and any thinking person. I can see how a sheep might not understand this.
Remember, baaaaa means no.
What does that tell you about whether they overstepped their bounds or not? Pretty clear to me and any thinking person. I can see how a sheep might not understand this.
Remember, baaaaa means no.
RE: Sherry | 4:00 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
It is true that Christ supported those whom many others shunned. But he
didn't legalize leprosy, he healed it. He tolerated people, not conditions
nor actions.
To Seperate is not equal | 4:00 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
". . . there's marriage & civil unions. . . ." Yes we use
different words to describe nuances and subtleties of slightly differnt
ideas in our language. We use marriage to refer to a man and a woman's
union as husband and wife. We use the words civil unions to describe a union of
two people of the same sex. The rights of the two could be the same if one
could get society (laws passed) to make them the same, which California has for
the most part.
Unpersuaded | 4:10 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
"This is America, we stand for freedom of religion and freedom from others
religious views."
This if a falacy. As long as all people have a right to vote, there is nothing prevents anyone from voting for anything or anyone they choose for whatever reason--religious or otherwise.
Cliches and reality aren't the same thing.
This if a falacy. As long as all people have a right to vote, there is nothing prevents anyone from voting for anything or anyone they choose for whatever reason--religious or otherwise.
Cliches and reality aren't the same thing.
To: Such Fools | 4:12 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
"The Mormon church and its members were duped by the Catholic and other
churches who requested their support of Propositon 8."
Considering the LDS Church has been speaking out against homosexuality for decades, and specifically against homosexual marriage for at least 15 years, I don't see how that can possibly be the case.
Considering the LDS Church has been speaking out against homosexuality for decades, and specifically against homosexual marriage for at least 15 years, I don't see how that can possibly be the case.
To THH (3:03 pm) | 4:14 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
48% voted no? Well nearly that many voted against Obama for President, but you
don't see those people yelling and ranting and raving that they want the
election overturned by some judges, do you? When we start trying to get judges
to overturn what the majority of the people voted in, we are headed down a very
slippery slope. The same people in California who voted pro-marriage for Prop.
22 a few years ago probably felt their rights, as VOTING citizens, were trampled
upon when the liberal judges overturned the VOICE OF THE PEOPLE through a legal
vote. I don't see what the people who are opposed to Prop. 8 can't
get about this. When we start allowing judges or anyone to override the
majority vote, we ALL lose in the long run. What if Prop. 8 had failed, and now
the "yes" people were running to the courts asking it to be overturned
by some judge? You would all be outraged then, too. We live in a country where
the majority is supposed to rule by VOTE. When we start losing/changing that,
we are all in danger of losing ALL of our rights eventually.
Unpersuaded | 4:14 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
"You want the benefits of marriage without the definition of
marriage."
I disagree that this is what the homosexual community is after. What they want is validation so that they can be feel better about themselves. If you can get your relationship labeled as a "marriage" and can obtain a few token kids to adopt, then you can graduate up to calling your contrived arrangement a "family".
Sounds pretty politically correct, doesn't it? The bonus is: it alleviates you of any responsibility to address your illness.
I disagree that this is what the homosexual community is after. What they want is validation so that they can be feel better about themselves. If you can get your relationship labeled as a "marriage" and can obtain a few token kids to adopt, then you can graduate up to calling your contrived arrangement a "family".
Sounds pretty politically correct, doesn't it? The bonus is: it alleviates you of any responsibility to address your illness.
To THH: | 4:15 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
To clarify that was Prop 8 and not the presidential elction you were refering to
wasn't it?
proud in ca | 4:25 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I for one am proud to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints. I am proud of the way we conducted ourselves in our efforts in the Yes
on prop.8 campaign. We respectfully worked within the system provided for us by
this great country. I have enjoyed working with those of other Faiths, and in
so doing found my own faith renewed and my testimony stronger. Thanks to all,
of every faith'. who gave of thier resourses and time
No one cares if they are gay | 4:26 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Tired of it all,
"Now that the California voters have spoken, your not willing to accept the vote and "think" that the LDS church is to blame and that they are shoving their belief of marriage down your throat."
They don't care what the majority says because they believe that a minority has the right to define an institution created by the majority to promote the nuclear family.
But the majority will not be forced to recognize relationships it doesn't approve of and to try to force us to do so violate our rights.
"Marriage is not a right, it doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution, it is a privilege. There is a major difference."
I think we need to be careful in calling marriage a privilege because it's not a privilege either. The legal institution of was created by the majority to promote nuclear families.
How it's defined is decided by the majority. Not by a minority who wants to be included under different conditions.
They have a right to marry a person of the opposite sex and won't be discriminated against because of sexual-orientation just like we need to be 35 to be President. No discrimination.
"Now that the California voters have spoken, your not willing to accept the vote and "think" that the LDS church is to blame and that they are shoving their belief of marriage down your throat."
They don't care what the majority says because they believe that a minority has the right to define an institution created by the majority to promote the nuclear family.
But the majority will not be forced to recognize relationships it doesn't approve of and to try to force us to do so violate our rights.
"Marriage is not a right, it doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution, it is a privilege. There is a major difference."
I think we need to be careful in calling marriage a privilege because it's not a privilege either. The legal institution of was created by the majority to promote nuclear families.
How it's defined is decided by the majority. Not by a minority who wants to be included under different conditions.
They have a right to marry a person of the opposite sex and won't be discriminated against because of sexual-orientation just like we need to be 35 to be President. No discrimination.
Prop 8 is only a small victory | 4:38 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I don't have strong opinions either way on this issue, but I do feel that
this is only the beginning not the end of the debate. While all this hubbub in
California was going on Connecticut courts found in favor of gay marriage. I
guess I'm just saying don't get too excited/or complacent over the
passage of prop 8.
To Blame (3:57 pm) | 4:47 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I am sick and tired of being referred to as a "sheep" because I belong
to a church that espouses my views, values and principles, and I CHOOSE to
belong to that church -- (I am a convert, i.e., I made the CHOICE, as an adult,
to join this church and follow its principles) -- no one forces me to do
anything against my will. In fact, if you knew me personally, you would know
that about me -- I am very strong-willed. Has it ever occurred to you that many
of the LDS members follow the teachings because they feel they best represent
their viewpoints and not because they are blindly being led around? I will
grant you that there are some that "blindly follow", but I would also
be willing to bet that the majority of them are involved because they truly have
the same VIEWS, VALUES, and PRINCIPLES that our church teaches. Please get off
the "sheep" argument; it is so childish and tiresome and really holds
no water.
Unpersuaded | 4:49 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
"I can see how a sheep might not understand this."
I agree it's gratifying to think that the LDS Church herds us. I can't speak for others, but it is because of my beliefs that I am a member of the LDS Church. Had the LDS Church not supported Prop 8, I would've looked for another church to join.
So, who herds you? NAMBLA? Note that it doesn't matter if it's true or not. You've established the precedent that mere association is enough.
I agree it's gratifying to think that the LDS Church herds us. I can't speak for others, but it is because of my beliefs that I am a member of the LDS Church. Had the LDS Church not supported Prop 8, I would've looked for another church to join.
So, who herds you? NAMBLA? Note that it doesn't matter if it's true or not. You've established the precedent that mere association is enough.
I have Pres. Monson's back | 4:53 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I stand with President Thomas S. Monson on this issue and all others he
supports. He is inspired. He is right. He is a man of God. He is the prophet,
not just to the LDS Church, but to the world. That is a fact of which I am
completely certain.
To accuse him of hate is ludicrous. His life has been devoted to loving and serving others. He is a Christlike person with love for all of God's children. I am sure it is painful for him to see the strife that has come of this situation. However, he has a responsibility as the Lord's representative to decry evil. I personally thank him for his courage in doing what many were unwilling to do.
President Monson...I have your back. Thank you for being who you are!
To accuse him of hate is ludicrous. His life has been devoted to loving and serving others. He is a Christlike person with love for all of God's children. I am sure it is painful for him to see the strife that has come of this situation. However, he has a responsibility as the Lord's representative to decry evil. I personally thank him for his courage in doing what many were unwilling to do.
President Monson...I have your back. Thank you for being who you are!
Alisa | 5:01 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I am amember of the LDS church in So. CA. I put many hours into the Prop 8
campaign for several reasons. I spent many hours walking door to door and
standing on street corners with my sign. I stood next to "No on 8"
supporters. I was never rude to anyone! If you don't agree with my
position, keep driving. I was flipped off, cursed at, and told I was going to
hell. You did not see "Yes on 8" supporters doing that kind of
behavior. We are the bigots? I have a brand new perspective of the other side
that is not positive!
Amazing.... | 5:04 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
Writings on the concrete posts of the LA Temple? Where is the decency for
respecting private property or someone's property? If I show up and write
some derogatory words on some gay and lesbian couple's front door, I bet I
would get in trouble big time and be accused of a hate crime. What a double
standard people you are, protesters...
Aaron | 5:15 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
I just hope the judges will respect the voice of the people. The people of
california voted yes on Prop 8 end of story. This is the 3rd time they've
voted on it and the results were the same each time.
Southerner | 5:21 p.m. Nov. 7, 2008
There are many people who have had homosexual tendencies who were able to
suppress them to pursue the life they really want. Homosexuality is a
behavioral issue plan and simple.
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.
Related content
- Obama: Troop drawdown gradual 9:29 a.m.
- Exports up 6th straight month 9:24 a.m.
- Austria passes gay civil unions bill 9:18 a.m.
- EU seeks united front on climate 9:16 a.m.
- Nobel returned to Iranian laureate 8:46 a.m.
- Stocks rise on trade deficit, jobs data 8:45 a.m.
- Gay-friendly curriculum phased out 8:43 a.m.
- Spanish gov't to change abortion bill 8:41 a.m.
- IOC OKs cycling, tennis changes 8:28 a.m.
- BCS = power conference monopoly 8:15 a.m.
- Crash landing next to I-15
- Palin signs books, chats with fans
- Psychologist: Mitchell schizophrenic
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill
- Hot Rod behind mic for Lakers
- Max Hall wants to look ahead
- Nude bathers cited for lewdness
- Cougars use depth to beat ASU
- Non-BCS schools not given fair shot
- Jazz go up against 'the best'
- Letters: Global warming a lie
233 - TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl206
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall185
- Cougars going back to Vegas150
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil147
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax138
- Max Hall wants to look ahead120
- Palin signs books, chats with fans114
- Revive full food tax?100
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill97
Love him or hate him, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch knows how to get attention.
Latest comments
They are who they thought they were: alarmists and deceivers who did or are...
Of course, the gay community NEVER bullies, manipulates, or uses intimidation.
Have you ever watched a cat play with a mouse? If you saw the Jazz play the...
I live in Saratoga Springs, and the roundabout in Lehi is horrible. There...
Shame on the Utah County Sheriff department. Surely there are more important...
to Merry Christmas: Christmas tress are actually a Pagan tradition that was...
Sowell is right on, as usual. We are losing our freedoms every day by...
So BYU can't run their mouths because they haven't won in the tourney for...
Do you REALLY believe that President Obama has "a deep seated hatred for...
Advertisements
There are those who see marriage as merely an expression of love -
And there are those who believe it is a Divine institution which can only serve its purpose when understood as between two members of the opposite sex.
Moreover, the government depends upon families to produce and raise strong members of society. If the definition of marriage is merely an expression of love or sexual attraction, which in essence could encompass polygamy or incest, then it will need to be privatized. Because the definition is too broad. And If that is the case, will marriage serve as any benefit to the government or to society?