Deseret News | Sore losers won't let go in California

Reader comments
Sore losers won't let go in California

714 comments | Read story

ksd | 9:16 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

To instereo: I'm glad that my deep-rooted moral standards are "wims", or was that supposed to be whims. That anyone would take such a serious matter as this and vote on a whim is ludicrous.

Slavery? | 9:16 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

The majority in the United States could not legalize slavery because it directly defies the fundamental rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are all guaranteed no legal impingement upon our right to live, the right to be free to think and act in our own interest and the right to pursue happiness by our own definition (the right to pursue happiness should never be confused with any guarantee that we will achieve it).
Marriage, between one man and one woman, is a legalized union of property and the establishment of certain privileges relating to the rearing of children. Legal transfers of property and associated matters can be established by many other legal means, thus, the single greatest pursuit of gay marriage activists then becomes an issue of societal recognition.
Society, which by vast majority, currently defines marriage as heterosexual and monogamous is under no requirement to recognize any other form! Society has conferred this tradition and only the majority has the right or power to recognize any other. Society does not deny gay couples any liberty. It simply reserves the right not to recognize unions which exist outside of its long established standards.

Clueless Kevin | 9:24 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"FYI. Morality doesn't come from your flowery, fraudulent scripture. It comes from empathy."

The question here isn't empathy. Its who gets to decide what to emphathize with. To suggest 64% (the percent nationally that have voted for marriage amendments) of Americans don't have empathy is ignorant.

In this case four california judges with 'empathy' for those with homosexual appetites changed law that was determined by 61% of the state that had empathy for traditional families. Unless you let the majority rule you are subject to the fickle 'empathy' of the few.

Lets hope the same judges don't also have empathy for those wanting to marry minors, empathy for spouse abusers, etc. I guess only Kevin here knows who we should have empathy for.

Comments continue below

David | 9:25 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I voted no the last vote. I won't do the same if it comes around again.

Wow Lee | 9:25 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

This is the BEST article you have ever written! Great analogy!

oh boy | 9:28 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

re: Cultivate or Cult of Hate? | 6:49 a.m.
I am homosexual; yet I believe that gay zealots are shooting the comunity in the foot over this issue. The implication that anyone who disagrees with a gay activist is guilty of "hate" (amongst a history of other lies and oversimplifications) is precisely why the gay community has little credibility. To many; the gay community appears to the be the personification of hate themselves - so please dont do me any favors by speaking for me. I am embarassed by gay bullies who only serve to make things worse.
I dont need to be married in some heterosexual tradition to be validated as a person or to feel equal in importance to the world. I feel sorry for those who do.

Cats | 9:33 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

To Kevin: Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt NOT lie with mankind as with womankind: It is abomination." Romans 1:27: "...men with men working that which is unseemly..." Deuteronomy 23:17: "There shall be no...sodomite of the sons of Israel."

I could go on and on and list a bunch of more scriptures, but you get the point. Your argument about immorality is NOT with society. Your argument is with GOD!

Kit | 9:37 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I think it's sick and wrong to compare gay rights to slavery. In slavery they were forced to be a slave for someone else. No one is forcing the gay community to do anything it seems to me they do whatever the heck they want. It isn't illegal for them to have a marriage it's just not caloled that. It is sick and wrong to compare the two!
I'm fine with them fighting for what they believe in but with the vandalism and bigotry they have demonstated towards churches and other groups. They're now to the point of being rediculous. I didn't know where I stood before the elections and was glad it wasn't my state. I now have no question where I stand. The gay extremists have ruined it for the rest of them. I now realize yes for 8 wasn't telling lies!

Enough is enough | 9:39 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Alright, enough of this politically correct nonsense. It's time to start calling a spade a spade. Homosexuality is a deviant behavior which is a crime against society and should be punishable by the same laws which place other deviants such as child molesters and rapists in prison. Why are we even giving any credence at all to the ludicrous arguments that gays are putting forward as if they were factual? It's time to stop this nonsense and start sending gays to prison for sodomy as was the case back when the majority of our nation believed in morality rather than defending crass immoral behavior that gays are attempting to redefine in order to justify their narcissistic viewpoint.

Anti-Mormon bigots are amusing | 9:40 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

It's sad to see anti-Mormon bigotry thinly disguised as pro-gay advocacy. These people are sore losers. The truth is, most people don't want gay marriage because it is wrong. Get over it. Tantrums don't make you right.

Bartholomew | 9:44 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Wow. This column could only have been written by someone comfortably in the cultural majority. It makes me think that had he been writing back then, Lee Benson might have said the same things about the civil rights march on Washington and the "I have a dream" speech: "What's wrong with African American's? They've been beaten, murdered, and subjugated for hundreds of years, and they're still whining." Are you a sore loser when you refuse to give up defending fundamental civil rights? We're not talking here about the election of a candidate for office or a bond measure for the zoo; we're talking about fundamental rights and basic human dignity. It's scarry that one the leading journalists of region doesn't understand the difference.

Jim | 9:46 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

The people of CALIFORNIA voted their preference on the issue. One side won and one side lost. The pickets should be at the homes of the people that VOTED on the issue. I really don't think that many people in UTAH voted on the issue.

mamiejane | 9:50 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Will the next step by the traditional marriage crowd be the forced union of women with men they don't want to marry? Or maybe the right of husbands to rape their wives with no consequence? Maybe we can take away married womens' right to sign contracts or have credit cards. Let's be honest; traditional marriage was horrific for women. Let us also be clear that there can be no return, ever, to traditional marriage.

Sarah | 9:53 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

The rights of a minority should never be based on a majority vote. The number of votes overall throughout the country is not what matters here. The thing that matters is individuals that are real people, citizens of this country, WITHOUT the same legal rights just because of who they choose to love and live with.

This is WRONG and this is why people who have actually figured out that it is wrong are not giving up the fight and never will.

So to the minority, I say: keep fighting for your rights! I am a straight, active LDS woman who will continue to fight with you. I honor you for your desire to strengthen your own families through the bonds of marriage.

Re: Support Civil Unions | 9:55 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"The reason California is a flash point is that rights had already been conferred, and the Yes on 8 campaign used fear, innuendo, and deception to portray gays and lesbians as less than human, and a threat to children, schools, churches, and families."

Wow. Talk about distorting the truth. To suggest that what 4 judges did in overruling the majority of the country's largest state as 'rights had already been conferred' is what I call 'innuendo and deception'.

And as for those that try to dehumunize the opposition lets look at the facts and see who is throwing out the terms 'Prop Hate', 'Homophobic', 'Fear Mongers'.

Like many of the posters here, this poster loves to malign those who were for prop 8 but feel very comfortable using the exact same tactics they use to accuse them.

RE: Robert | 9:58 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

See above for Robert's respectfull, well-written assessment (7:42 A.M., Dec. 1). For order, Robert rules!

Henry Drummond | 10:00 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Perhaps the "whiners" feel that over time they can change people's minds. When I was growing up over thirty states made it illegal for you to marry outside of your race. Those are all gone now.

Its like those laws that made it illegal for Mormons to vote. They were held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court, but Mormons kept fighting until they changed people's minds.

Knowah | 10:01 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

No matter what side you're on, the gays and lesbians have a lifestyle that is recognized as morally flawed and perverse by the vast majority of American voters...even in California. Just go to the internet and every clinical and credible article states how dangerous this lifestyle is due to perpetual promiscuity and unsafe intimate practices. Believe me, gays and lesbians are trying to force their perversion upon on us, it's their style and it will definitely get worse before it gets better. California, YOU ROCK!!!

Cats | 10:03 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

To Mamiejane: Thank you for proving to everyone that emotional illogical tyrades are what pass for rational thought in the pro-gay movement.

Just my view | 10:05 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Kevin: "You just don't understand humanity. By saying allowing people like me to marry each other "degrades" marriage totally degrades my humanity."

Your humanity is degraded by your homosexual behavior, not by anyone trying to protect the institution of marriage between a man and woman.

to mamiejane | 10:15 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

What?????? are you serious! That doesnt even make sense, nor does it relate.

Not a right | 10:17 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Marriage in NOT a right.

amazed | 10:18 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

What amazes me is that a majority of the individuals who represent the culture or "group" who is fighting to have "same sex" relationships recognized as "normal" would not even exist were it not for a heterosexual relationship. Same sex relationships are not natural. Period.

Try again, but move on | 10:21 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

To those who are in the minority on Prop 8, I suggest that you focus your energy and efforts on drafting legislation that gets domestic partnerships the rights you are seeking. Move on and quit complaining about the defeat of the proposition. Repeating the same action and expecting different results is not productive. Changing your approach and retooling your efforts might help.

One thing is for certain: The hatred shown by protesters after the elections did not help the overall image of your cause.

Re: Henry Drummond | 10:24 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"Its like those laws that made it illegal for Mormons to vote."

It has never been illegal for Mormons to vote. They simply required all citizens to avow they were against plural marriage before being allowed to vote and many Mormons wouldn't do it. But that practice was never ruled upon by the supreme court and Utah wasn't even a state at the time and didn't have its own supreme court. It also has no bearing on this discussion where we are talking about a majority decision, not laws made by legislators or judges.

Trying to link the the disenfranchisement of early Utahns to this case shows you are more interested in promoting your cause than sticking to the facts.

Sarah | 10:25 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Kevin, I just want to apologize for all the bitter comments that are directed at you. Thank you so much for standing up for yourself!

Please try to forgive them, for I really believe that they know not what they do.

It is up to God to judge each of us, not for us to judge each other.

My personal and spiritual opinion is that someday a lot of people will be shocked to find out how much God actually loves His gay sons and daughters and judges them based on what is in their hearts.

TO EVERYONE: Let's all take a moment, especially during this Christmas season, to carry the spirit of Christ in our hearts and think twice before condemning others. Let's try instead to consider and respect their points of view, even though it may be different than our own.

to Kevin | 10:27 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

The basic criterium for something to be considered 'moral' is that it do no harm (Kant). Gay marriage, and homosexuality in general, fail this simple test. Unless and until the gay community can successfully prove that their behavior is truly harmless, it can never be considered moral.

Adam D | 10:28 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Some comments focus on this being a civil rights issue and the Gay and Lesbian leadership tries to frame it in those terms. Yet one particular group of society that knows that knows the most about loss of civil rights voted 7:1 to preserve traditional marriage in both California and Florida. Apparently many African Americans do not equate the right of two men to marry one another as being the same as being forced to sit in the back of a bus, use a separate drinking fountain, use a separate toilet, go to separate schools, work as a slave, etc., as the same thing as two men marrying.

Civil unions in California give gays and lesbians every right under California State law that are given to traditional families. It was President Clinton who signed DOMA, which states that only marriage between a man and a woman is recognized for federal purposes. So the only "right" that gays don't have in California is either symbolic or federal.

In order to succeed opponents of Proposition 8 will have to frame this as a civil rights issue, but with the exception of students, Prop 8 opponents have not been successful.

California was Unique | 10:29 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

In most these other states, the people were taking preemptive action. In California, the people had already preempted the homosexual marriage issue, but the Activist judges had recently ignored the will of the people and forced homosexual marriage on the populace.

So the homosexuals were emboldened by the thought that their position should now be forced on people, and was not subject to the will of the people.

We can thank an out-of-control court system for this. If only judges would think of themselves as judges, and not as super-legislators and super-executives. And if only the legislators and executives would stop bowing to these renegade judges, and restore a balance of powers in our government.

But until then, the vocal minority will try any method to use the out-of-control courts to overrule the will of the majority in their favor. And since they know they have a sympathetic court in California, why should they simply accept the will of the people? They have reason to believe the courts will rule in their favor.

Radical Courts... | 10:30 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Is the judiciary, as is commonly thought in this country, responsible to serve as the moral arbiter of society and the purveyors of fairness? NO! The courts, as defined by the U.S. Constitution, are required to uphold and enforce the law. Laws are enacted by the people, through their representatives and by ballot. Courts, despite many blatant contradictions by activist judges, have no power to ï¿½makeï¿½ law!
The courts of California, as well as others, chose to defy the will of the people, as expressed by legitimate passage of law and confer upon a minority of society, rights and privileges not contained or defined in any way by the Constitution. Activists now demand that the courts once again defy the will of the people. This should strike fear into EVERY citizen, no matter what your beliefs!! Are we really willing to allow our courts to force upon us requirements that we, by significant majority, have voted against?

Re: Sarah | 10:33 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"The rights of a minority should never be based on a majority vote. The thing that matters is individuals that are real people, citizens of this country, WITHOUT the same legal rights just because of who they choose to love and live with."

Where do they come up with this stuff? The rights of a minority must always be subject to the majority vote because that is how our laws are made. Even the mighty constitution can and has (27 times) been changed by the majority. This is done to protect minorities. It is more likely that four judges will be wrong than the majority of Americans. Ask your statistics teacher, they'll tell you this is true. This is certainly the case in California this year.

You also need to compare your rights with those of your friends practicing homosexuality. You are allowed to marry another female and they aren't? Why would you state that they are "WITHOUT the same legal rights" as every other real citizen?

Don't be fooled by their rhetoric Sarah. Even if Homosexuality weren't a sin by bible standards minorities aren't granted special rights outside what all others have.

Is it getting hot ? | 10:38 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Thank you Sarah,
for setting us strait.
It IS up to God.
I just wonder if California is in
for the Sodom
or Gomorrah
treatment.

Richard | 10:44 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

To "support civil unions"...

To have anyone accuse the Pro 8 crowd of using innuendo, after the Anti 8 crowd produced and aired the sickeningly bigoted attack on Mormon missionaries is preposterous. Your assertion is shallow and meritless.

California law already protects homosexuals with "all the privileges and rights afforded to spouses". Read the law, and you'll understand that this debate, at least in California, was not about rights, but about forwarding a social agenda. Plain and simple.

Lindsey | 10:45 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Marriage is an institution recognized as a union between a man and woman by all major religions in the world. When the United States becomes full of atheists then we can legalize gay marriage. Of course when that happens nothing will be illegal in this country as it won't exist! Our morals are what makes this country great and morals are defined by religion. When we lose our religion in this country, we lose our heritage and our country.

Children changed how? | 10:45 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I fail to understand Benson's argument that children will be greatly affected by my possession of a marriage license. With or without the license, I'm gay. With or without the license, I love a man and care for him. With or without a license, my very existence is an affront to those who believe gay people are miserable.

So how is a marriage license gonna rock some child's world in a way that I'm not already doing that?

Re:Sarah | 10:47 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"Kevin, I just want to apologize for all the bitter comments that are directed at you. Thank you so much for standing up for yourself!"

Kevin's comments are more bitter than any other post here? This is what he has for Lee Benson:

"Your flippant drivel shows how your culture is not only morally deprived, but intellectually deprived as well."

He gets congratulated for standing up for himself and the rest of us are told to show Christmas Spirit?

I'm starting think you're not the active LDS you claim to be in a previous post. The LDS are advised against encouraging malicious attacks. If you need to claim to be something you're not to gain credibility please say you're a police officer or astronaut or something.

one mans hate | 10:50 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

"Anti momon bigots" you must have the most selective reasoning there ever was, have you bothered reading the post on this thread? they are not exactly oozing with love for the gay community.

To Oh Boy | 10:52 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I respect and admire your comments, I do believe that it there are a lot of "straights" that are in the middle of all the anger. I have seen our great influential people from Holly Wood who we worship sharing their feelings. Most of those are straight, but of course, we worship them and we follow them and if they tell us that gay marriage is right, we need to do that. They use their acting skills in all directions, some use anger, but I liked the Drew Barrymore sappy tearful comments.

It takes a lot of wisdom and maturity for a gay person to respect the definition of marriage, as between a man and a woman. My husband and I do not agree on the rights of gay couples, I believe that gay couples, siblings and such should have legal rights.

I also believe that when the voice of the people has spoken, then move on, if you don't agree, then come back in two years, but these protests will not win votes. I believe that the aggressive actions of pro-gay marriage groups will turn off many people the next time, people don't like sore losers.

Protect Marriage | 11:02 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

This is not a civil right. Same gender marriage is a self indulgent way of life. Let's get back to the fundamentals of nature.

JanSan | 11:08 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I have recently been reading up on the "tolerance" that the gays have had towards eHarmony ! What a dishonorable joke!! This was a private individual business. There were other dating web sites that the gay community have - they did not have to be bullies and DEMAND this man to bend the knee to them.and what is equal about so many gays getting it "FREE" for so many months when we have to PAY for it? Where is the equality in that? To me this is a PERFECT example of what this fight is all about- us heterosexuals having (not choosing - but being FORCED) to comply to their wishes. They are not losing rights - but WE WILL BE if this passes! I do not Hate gays and I am not a Bigot just because I refuse to willing give up my religious rights and freedom of speech.
re: Jim.. they should not be picketing ANYONE individually! We have the legal right to vote the way we choose PERIOD! Are they trying to take this right from us also?

Person #1 | 11:11 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Ok i keep hearing the No on 8 side saying this is like slavery and civil rights. Lets get one thing straight no pun intended. We are each born with the skin color you have, unless your a famious pop star of the past you can't chagne that. Gays and lesbians are not born with Gay/Lesbian tendencies. Slavery was wrong, civil right prevailed. Changing traditional marriage to fit learned tendencys of gays and lesbians is not civil rights. Civil Unions provide all the same rights. Leave it alone. If not then start protesting the discrimination of mens and womens public restrooms. Thats more discrimination than this marriage issue anyways. Yes on 8 supporters are not anti gay/lesbian. I completely support the rights of gays and lesbians but marriage is a man and a woman. There is not a rights issue here its a play on words issue. It takes a man and a woman to make a baby and that they way it should stay. Children would be forced into a Dad and Dad of Mom and Mom family and thats not how the anatomy of the thing works.

Boris Z | 11:12 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

I wish all those of you who are against same sex marriage would express your same anger, and condescension to the countries who have legalised it:
Spain, Canada, Belgium, The Netherlands, South Africa. How dare they!
I also hope you will defend traditional marriage by not getting divorces, temple and otherwise. I think the Bible is pretty clear about divorce. Living prophets have spoken on it(and they trump dead ones).
Let's remember that courts changed segregation and that was a bad thing to do. We should really promote separate but equal for all people.

kenny | 11:19 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Why is Deseret News bashing us with more of Prop 8?
The election is over,the people spoke. Stop fueling the fire.We have better things to talk about.Old news is just that.

I'm confused by Gay Rights | 11:20 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

The Gay Rights Movement is the only "Civil Right" movement in our nation's history that is trying to get special rights to a behavior. They are asking for this because of who they are attracted to and who they want to have a relationship with. All Civil Rights movement Blacks/Disabled/Latino are all based on how they appear and the prejudices that come from people who judge them for how they look. I couldn't pick a gay person out of a crowd because they aren't different from everyone else. They are attracted to people of the same sex. If we want to start giving rights to behavior based groups, then we open the door for all sorts of crazy things. Polygamy is a behavior. Bestiality is a behavior. Cannibalism is a behavior.

So for the Gay Right movement to claim constitutional rights is absurd. You don't have a constitutional right to protect your behavior. Marriage isn't a constitutional right. It is based on laws created by elected representatives. Prop 8 came about because of Liberal judges that felt that behavior is protected. That was wrong and Californians voted to uphold the law they passed a few years ago.

to: Re; Henry Drummond | 11:22 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

You are wrong. First, Mormon women who previously had the right to vote, lost that right to vote. I would liken your logic to asking the question: "should gay marriage be made legal" before deciding if the person answering the question deserved the right to vote. Second, yes the Supreme Court DID rule on the issue and the case was Reynolds V. U.S. In it, the court stated that polygamy like cannibalism were actions and actions over belief were not protected with freedom of religion. Homosexuality is an action over belief as well yet oddly homosexuality receives your praise while polygamy receives your condemnation even when all are legally consenting adults. This slippery slope is even addressed by Judge Scalia and slippery slopes are deemed valid for consideration by Judge Learned Hand. Third, please get informed on the topic BEFORE writing about it.

dave4197 | 11:23 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Lee Benson, you could've pointed out that only a small group (but loud and well connected) are whining. The majority of us are astonished at the anger and violence that has been promoted by the anti 8 people, who don't seem to understand "they lost". Of course California has many more than its share of nuts, always has, top to bottom. But look around Salt Lake, there sure are a lot of loud anti 8 nuts there, too.

LIES? here they are... | 11:23 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

will you believe an active LDS lawyer's assessment?

google Morris Thurston if proposition 8 fails

he addresses the 6 main arguements for prop 8 in detail(which were used in ads for prop 8) and here is his conclusion:

"In summary, the arguments used in ï¿½Six Consequences ... If Proposition 8 Failsï¿½ are
false, misleading, and based on faulty logic. Almost every legal case alluded to is
misrepresented. The passage or failure of Proposition 8 will not affect any of the
scenarios posed by this document; all of the so‐called ï¿½adverse consequencesï¿½ are
illusory."

YES, lies were at the heart of prop 8.

itsjustme | 11:24 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

If I wanted to marry a dog, cat or other animal, do I have a constitutional right to do so? Why can I not have multiple spouses?

It is because our society has said that it is not acceptable. Our society (read: you and me) keeps telling them that you can not define the union of two same-sex individuals as a marriage.

What is it that the homosexual communities can't understand?

Seriously said | 11:29 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Way to go! Great article! Couldn't have said it better myself. :)

Person #1 | 11:33 a.m. Dec. 1, 2008

Ok so I had a few typos in the above comment haha. But i stand by it. I say "Yes on 8" should shift effort to "Yes on Civil Unions" lets fully show our support for that. Its the right thing to do. With complete respect maybe we come up with another word to use other than Civil Union or something. I would be more than happy to campain for further reform to needed upgrades to Civil Unions. We do not want anyone from being able to manage their estate or having their partner at their bedside in a hospital. Serious couples, Gay lesbian or straight need those fudimental civil rights. I vote yes on Civil Unions which preserve the rights of serious Gay and Lesbian couples. Its all just a word issue. But again a child needs a mom and dad. If that wasnt so a gay or lesbian couple would be able to procreate. Marriage = Family and Children.

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.