Reader comments
MormonTimes.com: LDS Church issues new Prop. 8 overview
212 comments | Read story
RE: tashekor | 9:28 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
Unitarian Churches in San Francisco, Rabbi's at Jewish Synagouges, and
other Pro-Gay Churches DONATED money in the name of their Church. The LDS
Church did Not. All you have to do is look at the Donations website for
comfirmation. The Tax exmpt status works BOTH ways...Pros and Cons....
My BIGGEST problem was San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas & Electric donated money Against Prop 8. Frankly, Having gays marry has NOTHING to do with utilities or lobby efforts for utilities. It was just their "agenda" and we in So. Cal. in an indirect way by paying our electric and gas bill PAID FOR AGAINST 8 Messages.
Tashekor? Time to stop living in a never never land. Tax exempt is NOT going away. Give it up
My BIGGEST problem was San Diego Gas and Electric and Pacific Gas & Electric donated money Against Prop 8. Frankly, Having gays marry has NOTHING to do with utilities or lobby efforts for utilities. It was just their "agenda" and we in So. Cal. in an indirect way by paying our electric and gas bill PAID FOR AGAINST 8 Messages.
Tashekor? Time to stop living in a never never land. Tax exempt is NOT going away. Give it up
Canadiandy | 9:37 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
What is Roger talking about?
To say this has split the Church is incredibly naive if not misleading. This has done more to build, unify, and activate Church members than anything in a long while (okay except for President Hinckley's incredibly inspiring words).
And if there are any members who would leave over such a fundamental doctrine it is likely they were already looking for an excuse to go for some time. Infact, if those that are leaving are the same cynics I hear gossiping and grumbling in the hallways on occasion when they should be attending their gospel doctrine classes(wolves in sheep's clothing) I can only say, come back again when you can't stay so long.
This is one of those sifting moments that helps keep our faith alive, progressive, and strong. Our gospel roots are firm, and we aren't going anywhere this time.
To say this has split the Church is incredibly naive if not misleading. This has done more to build, unify, and activate Church members than anything in a long while (okay except for President Hinckley's incredibly inspiring words).
And if there are any members who would leave over such a fundamental doctrine it is likely they were already looking for an excuse to go for some time. Infact, if those that are leaving are the same cynics I hear gossiping and grumbling in the hallways on occasion when they should be attending their gospel doctrine classes(wolves in sheep's clothing) I can only say, come back again when you can't stay so long.
This is one of those sifting moments that helps keep our faith alive, progressive, and strong. Our gospel roots are firm, and we aren't going anywhere this time.
Comments continue below
Get a Grip Grandma | 9:41 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
Marriage has nothing to do with babies Grandma. People have babies out of
wedlock all the time. That is just as stupid as saying time wouldn't exist
without a wristwatch.
ROlling forward | 9:44 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
As much as I oppose the bigoted efforts of the same-sex oriented hate machine
toward Mormons, in a way we have to thank them. They have really helped the LDS
faith attract favorable media from many typically vehemently opposed to LDS
anything. Thousands have come to drop their preconceived erroneous notions of
the LDS faith and are seeing them as real people who stand up for good. The
eternal purposes of this religion shall roll on.
On the other hand, the gays are proving the LDS and other supporters to have been right in their opposition. Obviously the riots and defacing of property are the work of a minority of a minority, but sometimes a few bad apples spoil it for the rest. It is sad to see the gays get a worse wrap because of the few. May you see the good you can do and do it. God bless.
On the other hand, the gays are proving the LDS and other supporters to have been right in their opposition. Obviously the riots and defacing of property are the work of a minority of a minority, but sometimes a few bad apples spoil it for the rest. It is sad to see the gays get a worse wrap because of the few. May you see the good you can do and do it. God bless.
John Pack Lambert | 9:52 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
To the 9:41 poster,
The point is that marriage is set up for the best environment to raise children. If we classify things that have no such potential as "marriage" we undermine this link, and end up with a system where more people have children out of wedlock.
If we stand up and say "marriage has a clear meaning" then peope will see this, and act accordingly.
It would not surprise me if the rate of out of wedlock births in California falls in the next five years due to the Yes on 8 campaign. However, since there are so many factors that influence such things, it would not be possible to prove that any change in the rate of out-of-wedlock births was linked to the push to positively link marriage and child rearing.
The point is that marriage is set up for the best environment to raise children. If we classify things that have no such potential as "marriage" we undermine this link, and end up with a system where more people have children out of wedlock.
If we stand up and say "marriage has a clear meaning" then peope will see this, and act accordingly.
It would not surprise me if the rate of out of wedlock births in California falls in the next five years due to the Yes on 8 campaign. However, since there are so many factors that influence such things, it would not be possible to prove that any change in the rate of out-of-wedlock births was linked to the push to positively link marriage and child rearing.
Christy | 9:52 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
The gay community has the right choose to live their lives as they want, however
I have a right to cast my vote however I wish. The United States is based on
democracy and the outcome of the vote on Prop 8 is the voice of the majority of
the people. Just as we have to accept which way the Presidential election ends
up, so does the gay community. Attacking churches and certain groups does not
change what our countries founding fathers put into law over two hundred years
ago.
LDS in Cali | 10:28 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
homosexuals never had the right to marry in Ca. In 2000 prop 22 clearly stated
just as prop 8 did that a valid marriage in california is between one man and
one woman. San Fran mayor gavin newsom BROKE THE LAW BY PERFORMING HOMOSEXUAL
WEDDINGS ON VALENTINE'S DAY IN 2004. That is what started this whole mess.
The supreme court overturned prop 22. The people voted to make it a
constitutional amendment and we won. Evil politicians added the wording
"takes away rights" in the hope it would be defeated this time.
Didn't work. People can see and smell scum a mile away.
The irony | 10:29 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
I laugh now that the gay community equates themselves with the Civil Rights
movement. Martin Luther King Jr. was never the aggressor and protested
peacefully and condemned violence.
Too bad the homosexual community is counterproductive to their own cause.
Too bad the homosexual community is counterproductive to their own cause.
TO: Get a Grip Grandma | 10:49 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
I totally agree with Utah grandma, and your analogy on time would
not exist without a wrist watch is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
Have you ever thought that the human population would not exist without a man
and a woman? Nature and god have already paired these two together...talk about
the wrist watch needing the time.
nigeluk | 11:02 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
No matter how one cuts it, the LDS church does not approve of gay men and women.
It has every right to hold those views. I cannot imagine why any gay person
would want to be a member of the LDS church. I would hope that all gay Mormons
would leave the LDS church as quickly as possible.
The LDS church however, must not be surprised if gay and other people speak out against it. It is seeking to meddle in the lives of others and is over-stepping it's bounds and authority when it tells people how to vote. It has sought to make a group of people inferior to others, by it's actions and doctrines.
The LDS church likes to circle the wagons and declare it is being attacked unfairly even though it brought it on itself.
It tends to be too smug and self righteous by half.
By it's actions it has created it's own bad PR. I hope all of this ends up costing the LDS church millions. Gay people and same gender civil marriage are not going away. Some day the USA will join, Spain,Canada, Belgium, South Africa, and the Netherlands, in producing civil marriage equality.
The LDS church however, must not be surprised if gay and other people speak out against it. It is seeking to meddle in the lives of others and is over-stepping it's bounds and authority when it tells people how to vote. It has sought to make a group of people inferior to others, by it's actions and doctrines.
The LDS church likes to circle the wagons and declare it is being attacked unfairly even though it brought it on itself.
It tends to be too smug and self righteous by half.
By it's actions it has created it's own bad PR. I hope all of this ends up costing the LDS church millions. Gay people and same gender civil marriage are not going away. Some day the USA will join, Spain,Canada, Belgium, South Africa, and the Netherlands, in producing civil marriage equality.
Ab | 11:20 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
This keeps getting twisted. The LDS church is for marriage between a man
and woman. This does not mean the church hates gay people.I am not sure how that
keeps getting twisted.
RE: Ab | 11:34 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
Hey, Ab, that's the nature of the political discourse. If you support
marriage between a man and a woman, IN THE ANTI-PROP-8 POINT OF VIEW, you
automatically hate gay people. You're bigoted and prone to discrimination,
too.
Why does it keep getting twisted? The activists lobbying for this cause twist it. Keep in mind: We're dealing with people who don't believe this is about trying to understand someone else's point of view and work together. They're all about shouting everyone down--or worse--who opposes them.
Isaiah 5:20. Hope that helps!
Why does it keep getting twisted? The activists lobbying for this cause twist it. Keep in mind: We're dealing with people who don't believe this is about trying to understand someone else's point of view and work together. They're all about shouting everyone down--or worse--who opposes them.
Isaiah 5:20. Hope that helps!
Blondie | 11:50 p.m. Nov. 22, 2008
You go Utah Gramdma!
John Pack Lambert -- please put your fingers in time out or give them some ritalin to help them hyper down. Enough already -- oh, and spell check is good to know about.
On Polyandry -- what a great idea! One wife and several husbands! Now that has real possibilities!
About the bad PR hit on the LDS church? There's no such thing as bad publicity.
John Pack Lambert -- please put your fingers in time out or give them some ritalin to help them hyper down. Enough already -- oh, and spell check is good to know about.
On Polyandry -- what a great idea! One wife and several husbands! Now that has real possibilities!
About the bad PR hit on the LDS church? There's no such thing as bad publicity.
Hezekiah | 1:28 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
It is difficult to make a strong case regarding LDS members and their
"Church" with respect to the political process. The ancestors of this
group under the banner of 'Religious Freedom' attempted to define
marriage contrary to the Americian culture 120 years ago and lost in the
political posturing of the times. They not only lost the 'right' to
marriage as they defined it, but also lost the right to vote, the right to own
property, the right to a jury trial judged by their peers, the right to hold
public office, the right to teach in a public school, the right against unlawful
search and seizure, the right to bequest one's personal estate to their
children, the right to freedom of speach, and many more. If the ACLU had
existed at that time there would have been an entirely different outcome in that
political process. The LDS people have learned this lesson the hard way as
well, and they now adopt the necessity of "sustaining the laws of the
land" as opposed to the laws of God. There are things in this government
and culture that simply are not fair and not right.
California Reader | 2:00 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
To Roger: This is not a popularity contest. The Lord does not change His
commandments to gain the respect of those who disagree with Him. There are
plenty of other churches who are willing to compromise and change true doctrine
to be politically correct. That is definitly not going to happen in The Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am so thankful for that. There will be
more testings of our true discipliship in the future. Who's on the
Lord's side, who??
Tina | 9:16 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
Hey Blondie, I'm with you 100% on what you said. Sounds good to me too.
And yes, To:GRANDMA...... GO GRANDMA!!!!!
And yes, To:GRANDMA...... GO GRANDMA!!!!!
Oh Grandma | 11:16 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
I have loved your kind, but don't you see that the world has been very
populatated by heterosexuals? We are six billion and counting (we are not
looking to multiply and replenish the earth anymore) it's already been
done. People who feel that people don't deserve to be because that
can't produce babies are sad. Many heterosexuals also cannot have
babies...but they take care of those children that need them. Gay people do
this too. We need to stop looking at a relationship's value by whether or
not they can produce.
Oh But it does | 11:17 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
Get a Grip Grandma said.
�Marriage has nothing to do with babies Grandma. People have babies out of wedlock all the time. That is just as stupid as saying time wouldn't exist without a wristwatch.�
It has everything to do with it. Study the history of marriage and you will see that the majority of marriages were entered into with two main objectives in mind; to have a mate and partner and to have children. Posterity was very important for wedded couples and those who were childless were looked upon as incomplete by the rest of society.
Children born out of wedlock were a different story. Historically, being born out of wedlock was significant as it deprived a person of his otherwise inheritance, which was usually the only way to acquire real property. These children born out of wedlock were of such a lower caste in medieval England that Latin expressions were developed just for them, labeling them "son of nobody, sons of the people". They also had another more offensive term for them for which you no doubt know.
�Marriage has nothing to do with babies Grandma. People have babies out of wedlock all the time. That is just as stupid as saying time wouldn't exist without a wristwatch.�
It has everything to do with it. Study the history of marriage and you will see that the majority of marriages were entered into with two main objectives in mind; to have a mate and partner and to have children. Posterity was very important for wedded couples and those who were childless were looked upon as incomplete by the rest of society.
Children born out of wedlock were a different story. Historically, being born out of wedlock was significant as it deprived a person of his otherwise inheritance, which was usually the only way to acquire real property. These children born out of wedlock were of such a lower caste in medieval England that Latin expressions were developed just for them, labeling them "son of nobody, sons of the people". They also had another more offensive term for them for which you no doubt know.
Hey | 11:35 a.m. Nov. 23, 2008
Say what you want, but America appears to have a more favorable view of gays
than LDS folks.
muddererth | 12:06 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
I have many more questions than answers. I wish someone could answer one for
me. Why aren't the people of Ca. angry with the AG Jerry Brown for
allowing this to go to vote in the first place. He vetted it, titled it and
even rewrote it a second time. If it in fact is not constitutional-why was it
allowed to go forward to ballot? Challengers even brought suits to the court
which were dismissed last June without comment. If they needed a 2/3 majority
vote as some are now saying-why did the proposition go forward? It could have
saved a lot of time, money, energy and grief, otherwise. Hmmmmm, there must be
some legality in the prop 8 somehow?
Middle Earth | 1:23 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
The LDS church cannot seam to stop from embarrassing itself. Geez already the
church needs to stop commenting on the issue. Individual members need to back
off a bit a well. You are making yourself look silly and even if you have a
valid opinion, your tact and delivery harm the church. The church is in some
real troubles and I don't see how it can possibly mend fences. This wiil
take years if ever for the church to recover.
bilbo | 1:55 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
Middle Earth said: "..Geez already the church needs to stop commenting on
the issue".
First, we are wrong because we took the PIC position of backing/supporting Prop 8.
THEN, we are wrong because we take the position of defending our realier position.
I really don't care about mending fences with the homos.
I care about what is morally right...not what is politically corerect.
If you come to the chapel I attend, better bring your first aid kit if you plan on being rough....I am not, and never will be, a victim.
First, we are wrong because we took the PIC position of backing/supporting Prop 8.
THEN, we are wrong because we take the position of defending our realier position.
I really don't care about mending fences with the homos.
I care about what is morally right...not what is politically corerect.
If you come to the chapel I attend, better bring your first aid kit if you plan on being rough....I am not, and never will be, a victim.
re: bilbo | 5:01 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
"I really don't care about mending fences with the homos."
This was the Christ-like attitude we were talking about at church today. Thanks for sharing.
This was the Christ-like attitude we were talking about at church today. Thanks for sharing.
re: bilbo | 5:02 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
"I care about what is morally right.."
I stopped reading too quickly. Man, you are good.
I stopped reading too quickly. Man, you are good.
Stop mixing your religions | 5:46 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
opinions with government. We have something called Separation of Church and
State for a reason. Yes, in the passed it sometimes has mixed because we were
not so diverse. But this will not work anymore. People in religions have every
right to follow their churches as they see fit, but when you mix this with civil
rights it does not work. Back Off.
re: bilbo |1:55 | 5:58 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
You go boy. We will not resign what is right. If people can't take it, well
perhaps they read to much into it or just maybe they have a weak Testimony. Sure
we will lose some but the strong will never faulter in the footsteps of Christ.
re: re:bilbo | 7:05 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
"the strong will never falter in the footsteps of Christ."
As this relates to bilbo, you have got to be kidding.......
As this relates to bilbo, you have got to be kidding.......
Anonymous | 7:10 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
people are claiming the majority doesn't know what is right, with the
passage of prop 8. What about the 70% of Blacks that voted yes? They are a
minority and they definitely know what oppression and mistreatment feel like.
They saw through the lies and distortions and did what they could to strengthen
families. THANK YOU
Cali grandma | 7:12 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
You go Utah grandma!!! Send your reasoning to protect marriage dot com.
Re: Stop mixing... | 8:53 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
"Stop mixing your religions opinions with government."
We will, if you stop mixing everything that makes you who YOU are with government. Everybody in this country is allowed to vote for whatever they want, for whatever reasons they want to. Every single person who enters a voting booth does so with their values, morals, history, opinions and circumstances behind them. Religious people have just as much right to vote for something that is in line with their religious principles as the non-religious have to vote against it for the same reason.
By denying us the right to vote for the reasons we wish, you are denying us basic rights that are guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights - unlike marriage, which is not guaranteed anywhere except in Supreme Court decisions adding to the Constitution something it does not include.
You may not like the reasons we choose to vote the way we do, but those votes are valid, and they had every right to be heard as your vote did. You can't call an election invalid just because you don't like the outcome, that's not how this country works.
We will, if you stop mixing everything that makes you who YOU are with government. Everybody in this country is allowed to vote for whatever they want, for whatever reasons they want to. Every single person who enters a voting booth does so with their values, morals, history, opinions and circumstances behind them. Religious people have just as much right to vote for something that is in line with their religious principles as the non-religious have to vote against it for the same reason.
By denying us the right to vote for the reasons we wish, you are denying us basic rights that are guaranteed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights - unlike marriage, which is not guaranteed anywhere except in Supreme Court decisions adding to the Constitution something it does not include.
You may not like the reasons we choose to vote the way we do, but those votes are valid, and they had every right to be heard as your vote did. You can't call an election invalid just because you don't like the outcome, that's not how this country works.
Mike | 9:40 p.m. Nov. 23, 2008
I find it very misleading that people keep saying the Gay community lost rights
they had before Prop 8 When in fact they were knowingly breaking the laws of
California and S. F mayor was blatantly ignoring existing laws against gay
marriage. Clerks were ordered to ignore the law and perform the civil marriage
just for this very purpose. Now they have the fight they wanted and act like
over indulged spoiled children who lost at a game they cheated at to win.
So many seem to think this will set the church back, like an over-simplified persuading technique used to manipulate in court when in fact the one saying it is acting out of a position of desperation. In fact this will strengthen the position and respect the church gets from the people that matter, main stream America.
Indeed the gay committee may win this, in fact I have no doubt. But like many things in history and in scripture often those in the wrong, those who choose sin, and call it right get they're way. What would God have to judge them with if they were not allowed to act on the free will he gave them?
So many seem to think this will set the church back, like an over-simplified persuading technique used to manipulate in court when in fact the one saying it is acting out of a position of desperation. In fact this will strengthen the position and respect the church gets from the people that matter, main stream America.
Indeed the gay committee may win this, in fact I have no doubt. But like many things in history and in scripture often those in the wrong, those who choose sin, and call it right get they're way. What would God have to judge them with if they were not allowed to act on the free will he gave them?
re: Mike | 9:13 a.m. Nov. 24, 2008
"I find it very misleading that people keep saying the Gay community lost
rights they had before Prop 8"
It's not really that tough, Mike. They could get married before prop 8. After prop 8 they couldn't.
That wasn't so difficult was it?
It's not really that tough, Mike. They could get married before prop 8. After prop 8 they couldn't.
That wasn't so difficult was it?
Anonymous | 12:24 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
Gays got married for A FEW WEEKS before prop 8, after the supreme court
overturned prop 22. SF mayor BROKE THE LAW BY PERFORMING HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES ON
VALENTINES DAY IN 2004. That shows the mentality of these citizens, "who
cares what the law or society says, we'll do what we want."
Homosexuals are extremely immature. They act like 9 year olds in thinking the
opposite sex has cooties and in their childish temper tantrums and refusal to
follow the rules. We don't allow children to marry, we shouldn't allow
homosexuals to marry either. Oh wait, been there, done that.
Age of Consent | 12:43 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
Anonymous... If you don't allow children to marry, how old are Warren
Jeff's "wives"? 14 years old? 12 years old?
RE: Age of Consent | 4:25 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
Hmmm... I really don't know anything about Warren Jeffs' wives. Given
that the LDS have no association whatsoever with Jeffs, you might try asking HIM
that question. Write him a letter or something. Few if any people in THIS forum
would have any idea.
Anonymous | 4:52 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
No matter how you spin it, and no matter how much money you throw at your public
relations machine, you cannot justify taking away the civil rights of other
American citizens just because your religious beliefs and bigotry have you so
self-deluded you think seeing angels and having god answer your prayers about
finding your car keys are REAL!
listen for once | 6:03 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
I have seen so many comments here that completely bury every accusation and
complaint against the LDS Church. I�ve seen so many other
comments that erase the validity of every comment attempting to justify the
imposition of same-sex marriage on the country. The only conclusion I can draw
is that a good portion of the gay rights crowd simply are not listening. Those
people have likely been constructing their wall of complaints against the LDS
Church for years now. Every stone we remove will just get replaced by another
stone.
Just face it, already. Marriage rights for homosexuals is no different than weedy yard rights for people who choose to let weeds take over their lawns or nose-ring right for people that want to wear nose-rings while selling products for a the local business. The behavior is already allowed. But other people do not have to support it. Chosen behavior is not a foundation for demanding rights.
There is no bigotry, no self-delusion, not attack on civil rights. There is just people who will always be angry because they are incapable of listening and seeing beyond their own simple mindedness
Just face it, already. Marriage rights for homosexuals is no different than weedy yard rights for people who choose to let weeds take over their lawns or nose-ring right for people that want to wear nose-rings while selling products for a the local business. The behavior is already allowed. But other people do not have to support it. Chosen behavior is not a foundation for demanding rights.
There is no bigotry, no self-delusion, not attack on civil rights. There is just people who will always be angry because they are incapable of listening and seeing beyond their own simple mindedness
Pot calling the kettle black | 6:35 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
"Homosexuals are extremely immature. They act like 9 year olds in thinking
the opposite sex has cooties"
Wow. Now there is a deep understanding of homosexuality.
Wow. Now there is a deep understanding of homosexuality.
I'd read more | 6:38 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
"homosexuals never had the right to marry in Ca."
If you think that, you should read more. Approximately 18,000 gays legally married in CA until the state constitution was changed.
If you think that, you should read more. Approximately 18,000 gays legally married in CA until the state constitution was changed.
Just keep deluding yourself | 7:27 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
that things are that simple! They are not. Gay people have always been with
us, but now some of them want to be able to committ to others like you do. Are
they all good people? No. And neither are heterosexual people all good. But
do they deserve the same treatment under the law? (notice I said "Law"
not religion because religion is different than the government) Yes, they do.
Are they acheiving this? Yes, slowly they are. I believe that proposition 8
will be overturned.
2 I'd read more | 7:49 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
The legality of those 18,000 marriages will now be reviewed by the supreme
court. they never had the right, they stole it. Just like stealing
someone's identity. Just because you do it and get away with it,
doesn't make it right. They stole the identity of traditional,
heterosexual marriages and we're in the process of reclaiming our identity
and removing the tarnish homosexuals put on it.
Anonymous | 7:55 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
homosexuals can commit to each other. stop deluding yourself. ca family code
297.5 allows domestic partnerships and gives the same rights as a spouse. read
it for yourself. By calling their unions a marriage, it is stealing the
identity of a group of people that have existed since the beginning of time and
in every culture. Why don't you read what Sir Elton John said about gay
marriage. Guess what, he's on our side, the yes on 8 side!!!!!
Sorry | 8:42 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
"They stole the identity of traditional, heterosexual marriages and
we're in the process of reclaiming our identity and removing the tarnish
homosexuals put on it."
And my simple mind thought the Ca Supreme Court gave them that right. I guess it is "stealing" when the Supreme Court tells you you can do something. Didn't know. My bad.
And my simple mind thought the Ca Supreme Court gave them that right. I guess it is "stealing" when the Supreme Court tells you you can do something. Didn't know. My bad.
Domestic partnerships | 9:25 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
do NOT provide the same rights as marriage. for instance, you still must file
separately for federal returns and you get no social security survivor benefits.
marriage is a CIVIL issue.
as a straight person with many gay friends in long-term committed relationships i feel compelled to stand with them as they fight for equality. i'm very upset that the religion of my heritage (family have been members for over 150 yrs) chooses intolerance.
as a straight person with many gay friends in long-term committed relationships i feel compelled to stand with them as they fight for equality. i'm very upset that the religion of my heritage (family have been members for over 150 yrs) chooses intolerance.
Sir Elton John is or was | 10:27 p.m. Nov. 24, 2008
in a relationship with a domestic partner/marriage whatever you want to call it.
We are mincing words here. If you don't want to call a civil union a
marraige then don't. But this is the right we are talking about.
Proposition 8 refuses that right...don't kid yourselves. When it changes
around this is all it is...mincing words.
Anonymous | 1:25 a.m. Nov. 25, 2008
Sir Elton John didn't mince words. He said gays have civil unions and
heterosexuals have marriages. Marriage is not a right. It is a privelege you
must meet the requirements for. Period. One man one woman. Not children, not
the same sex, not your sibling......
2 sorry | 1:29 a.m. Nov. 25, 2008
Stalking, cybercrime, video voyeurism etc were legal too, simply because laws
had not been enacted making that behavior illegal. California citizens have
enacted laws now that make homosexual marriage illegal. Deal with it. Marriage
is not a right. Identity theft is not a right. Just because you want something,
doesn't give you the right to take it from others.
Question | 2:58 p.m. Nov. 25, 2008
So one thing I have never understood about this situation is that if we look at
the history of the LDS church, they practiced Plural Marriage on
"earth" and have always believed plural marriage was possible in the
after life. So why define marriage as One Man and One Woman when in fact your
own doctorine preaches something different. Any understanding would be
appreciated.
RAB RE:Question 2:58 | 4:12 p.m. Nov. 25, 2008
Why drudge up the past? Are southerners doomed to forever mistreat black people
just because many of their ancestors defended slavery to the death? Latter Day
Saints believe in continuing revelation see 9th Article of Faith). Contrary to
popular anti-Mormon propaganda, Mormons have only one doctrine
� find out what God wants you to do and do it.
It therefore does not matter what the LDS Church believed even 10 years ago, let alone 100 years ago. When Mormons believed God wanted them to practice plural marriage, they practiced it with dutiful obedience even when their freedom and property was threatened. A century ago, they believe God commanded them to stop practicing it. Now they defend THAT revelation with the same dedication.
They currently believe homosexual behavior leads to ultimate unhappiness and, like all people, Mormons act according to their own beliefs. Since Mormons seek to maximize happiness in the world, they can only do whatever they can to gently discourage homosexual behavior and slow legislation that clearly encourages others to pursue that pathway to unhappiness. It is possible that, in the future, God might reveal a different policy towards same-sex marriage. But that is God's business.
It therefore does not matter what the LDS Church believed even 10 years ago, let alone 100 years ago. When Mormons believed God wanted them to practice plural marriage, they practiced it with dutiful obedience even when their freedom and property was threatened. A century ago, they believe God commanded them to stop practicing it. Now they defend THAT revelation with the same dedication.
They currently believe homosexual behavior leads to ultimate unhappiness and, like all people, Mormons act according to their own beliefs. Since Mormons seek to maximize happiness in the world, they can only do whatever they can to gently discourage homosexual behavior and slow legislation that clearly encourages others to pursue that pathway to unhappiness. It is possible that, in the future, God might reveal a different policy towards same-sex marriage. But that is God's business.
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.
- RSL will play for MLS Cup tonight 3:06 a.m.
- Jazz outlast Pistons in overtime 3:06 a.m.
- Utah Utes whip SDSU 3:05 a.m.
- BYU records with win 3:05 a.m.
- RSL dancing with soccer stars 3:04 a.m.
- Cougars turn focus to dreaded rivals 3:04 a.m.
- Dixie State campus briefs 3:03 a.m.
- Weber State campus briefs 3:02 a.m.
- UVU campus briefs 3:01 a.m.
- BYU campus briefs 2:59 a.m.
- Glenn Beck to enter politics?
- Can BYU throw vs. Air Force?
- Police link alcohol to murder
- Huntsman blasts media over trip
- Cougars cruise to victory in Hawaii
- Christian leaders not backing down
- BYU records with win
- TCU still has a chance
- Orem man acquitted in tot's death
- Religion cited in deportation fight
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
192 - Palin plans tour stop in Utah173
- Glenn Beck to enter politics?129
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified122
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case103
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.100
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio98
- BYU records with win95
- Utes knock off rival Aggies93
- Huntsman pleased with Obama87
Latest comments
Beck is extremely smart, he is selling books and is very popular on TV. All...
@Mick, the Federal Govt is run by corporations through contributions and...
Lets bond together and hope for a REAL celebration SUnday night, can hardly...
I was on the playground too and some teachers came out and called us all to...
B.Y.U. has been a consistent a top 25 ranked winner under Max Hall. Hall has...
Did Timp win four in a row or 4 in 4 years?
You have a lot of growing up to do, It seems like you have not cxperienced...
The proposed ethics law puts roughly the same burden on a legislator that a...
Hall ACTUALLY broke the all timme wins record vs WYO last week. I guess...
Sounds to me like Kraig Powell may be a candidate for resignation. So long,...
Advertisements
The institution of marriage has stood for thousands of years as a continuation of what nature started, creating a relationship where a man and woman could continue to raise the children created by the two of them.
I believe that the time for legalizing marriage between people of the same sex should only occur after nature has created a way for them to reproduce.