Deseret News | Reader comments: 2 men cited in trespassing on LDS plaza

Reader comments
2 men cited on LDS plaza

230 comments | Read story

Page:
1
2
3
4
5
Next >

randy | 10:23 p.m. July 10, 2009

Why do some people think they need to act that way? It seems childish to me!

Emily | 10:59 p.m. July 10, 2009

I am supposing they were trying to get on the news, and in the newspapers. And trying to stir something up because they are gay. And yes acting in this manner is childish and immature.

Andrew | 12:35 a.m. July 11, 2009

Interesting that they wanted them to leave but instead of just calling the police they first pushed them to the ground and handcuffed them so they could not leave. This is just legalized gay-bashing. Shame on the church security department.

Comments continue below

Adam | 1:43 a.m. July 11, 2009

I agree, why do they think they need to act that way? Seriously - handcuffing and getting overly physical with two people because a peck on the cheek - that's childish and bully behavior for rent-a-cops. They were out of line.

Curtis | 1:59 a.m. July 11, 2009

Agreed, the way church officials acted was immature.

Both sides were wrong on this issue, but each for very different reasons.

Dave | 2:02 a.m. July 11, 2009

This is a clear-cut case of religious freedom and property rights, but it will, of course, be portrayed in the national media as a matter of anti-gay discrimination. The Constitution is being twisted beyond all recognition to justify same-sex marriage and to now discriminate against anyone who honestly believes that open homosexual behavior is "inappropriate," even if the beliefs are religious.

We are engaged in a culture war, and this is just one of the first skirmishes. According to many in the U.S. now, the Boy Scouts and Mormons are evil and homesexuality and abortion are good. Didn't Isaiah have something prescient to say about that?

Adam | 2:02 a.m. July 11, 2009

I agree the behavior was childish: getting physical, handcuffing and pushing a guy to the ground (a detail omitted in the Deseret News) is childish and bully-like behavior. It sounds like rogue rent-a-cops on a power trip - and that's scary. Really, all of this, and handcuffs because of a peck on the cheek? Yes, there was childish behavior, but it was on the part of church security.

Anonymous | 2:17 a.m. July 11, 2009

More hate. Did the security have to act that way? seems sort of aggressive and intolerant to me. Maybe all gays should line up on the sidewalks around the area during general conference and kiss away! Yes yes.

ralph | 2:18 a.m. July 11, 2009

More of the homosexual agenda. They don't want equality - they want to force acceptance of their lifestyle, "warts and all", on everyone, even on private property. Another example of the "dummying-down" of decency in our society.

Anthony | 2:19 a.m. July 11, 2009

You presume, simply because they were gay, that they were trying to "stir something up" and "get on the news"? Isn't that somewhat of a narrow minded assumption? Imagine for a moment what you would feel like and how you might react if you were approached by a stranger and asked to stop kissing or being affectionate with your spouse or significant other. I know I would get frustrated by it. While church security had the prerogative to ask them to stop on church property, try and understand the genuine reason for why they may have reacted and refused to leave, especially when confronted. I see nothing childish or immature about a man standing up for himself, regardless of whether or not i agree with the thing he is standing up for. I am continually sadden by the lack of tolerance and understanding so many here have for people they do not know, understand, or agree with.

Tim | 2:38 a.m. July 11, 2009

Childish and immature? Its always easier being ignorant and presuming things isnt it? Imagine how you would feel if someone told you to stop kissing your husband or wife. It'd piss me off for sure. I wish people would try and expand their minds a bit and think before they post on here.

candb | 2:44 a.m. July 11, 2009

i think its childish to assume that somebody would actually want to get arrested just to get on the news. there are better ways to get noticed. especially for a gay couple. stop being haters!!!! these people were singled out. showing affection for you loved one is not "acting out" randy. start to learn to accept people for who they are. not everybody is a sheep

Bot | 3:04 a.m. July 11, 2009

Just another example of outlandish behavior by homosexuals. They are just hurting their cause. Not unlike when they demonstrated outlansish behavior outside the Los Angeles Temple.

John C. | 3:38 a.m. July 11, 2009

How blatant dose this need to be. Those two new exactly how the church security would react that’s why they did it. If it wasn’t intended to get a reaction and get on the news then why didn’t they just leave when asked? Why did they become argumentative? At that point security has the right to detain them. And if they where forced to the ground then its because they gave resistance. But I’m sure the gay rights community will come up with more stunts in the future and then cry “poor me, those mean LDS people, how dare they stand up for what they believe in”

dj | 3:45 a.m. July 11, 2009

I want to know if it really was a "peck on the cheek," and I want to know what really happened to cause security to call police. Not enough truth in this story, from either side. I am sick to think how this story will be broadcast far and wide, but does not have solid facts - only one word against another.

to candb | 4:13 a.m. July 11, 2009

Actually getting arrested is a good way to get noticed for your cause; ever heard of suffragettes? The civil rights movement? Greenpeace?

Anonymous | 5:00 a.m. July 11, 2009

I have read the past comments and have thought about the event vs response. First the fact is that the plaza is private property- this means that the owners of the property have the right to determine what is acceptable on their property. The pair of homosexuals obviously knew this and decided to push the issue with their acts. They are free to act anyway they want on public property but the LDS church acted correctly. When the pair used profanity it broke a second ordinance that is a public offense and a private offense.
On the reverse if a pair of LDS members went to preach their faith or sing at a gay bar I would imagine they would be treated in a similiar way by the gay bar owner. I believe that we have to respect the rights/laws of private property regardless of the desires.
bronx1810

More than a peck | 5:07 a.m. July 11, 2009

I gurantee you it was more than just a peck on the cheek. When have you seen only a peck from a hetero or gay couple. Public displays of affection are offensive by either gay or hetero couples. However gays want to force acceptance of acts by them which are not tolerated of a hetero couple.

Visitor | 5:30 a.m. July 11, 2009

I had vacation tickets to go to Salt Lake City and the National Parks, but I just cancelled them. I will spend my dollars elsewhere. Is this really 2009?

ed | 5:36 a.m. July 11, 2009

My brother works for church security. They should have just left when asked to and not tried to justify their behavior with profanity, that is why they got pushed to the ground and handcuffed. Dont to the gay pda on church grounds just to get attention.

get real | 5:37 a.m. July 11, 2009

First, to Andrew. I didn't read anything about them being pushed to the ground.
Secondly, this is not a gay rights issue, it's a property rights issue.
The owner of a piece of property has the right to ask ANYONE to leave for ANY reason. Get a motel!

@Andrew | 5:39 a.m. July 11, 2009

Your comment is typical of special interest groups.
You read the story, embellish it to suit your needs and then pass it along.

Chris | 5:40 a.m. July 11, 2009

"Our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the Church. It is expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of conduct that apply to everyone else, whether single or married." - Gordon B. Hinckley, Oct. 1999 General Conference.

To the 12...I can see your mouth moving and I know there are words coming out, but I can't hear you. Your actions are screaming too loud.

Same rules of conduct, uh huh.

JB | 5:42 a.m. July 11, 2009

Aren't there signs at the entrances stating it's private property and that certain activities are not to be done? I could be wrong, but I think I remember that being the case. In any event, these guys knew they were in conservative Utah and knew they were at the heart of the Mormon church - at its "Mecca" so to speak. I think they knew what they were doing and I think it was their intent to create a stir.

Thin Pancake | 5:45 a.m. July 11, 2009

It's private property! The argument stops right there. If a person is asked to leave private property for any reason at all and does not comply with the request the property owner has the right to have them detained and arrested. It dosen't matter what the reason, if you are on private property and you are asked to leave you leave. The reason you are being asked to leave is completly irrelevant.

GoodGuyGary | 6:05 a.m. July 11, 2009

"Maybe all gays should line up on the sidewalks around the area during general conference and kiss away!"

I suggest you guys do this in Mecca.

Typical | 6:28 a.m. July 11, 2009

1) Engage in activity you know is offensive to the propeerty owner.
2) Refuse to stop the behavior when asked by the property owner.
3) Refuse to leave the property when asked.
4) Make the property owner out to be the bad guy when he calls the cops.
5) make the story better and spread it around.

Might not like it | 6:30 a.m. July 11, 2009

I might not like it if a property owner asked me to stop doing something on their property, but I'd still quit out of respect for their rights.
I'd go home or get a motel:)

Anonymous | 6:35 a.m. July 11, 2009

Anonymous,

"More hate. Did the security have to act that way? seems sort of aggressive and intolerant to me. Maybe all gays should line up on the sidewalks around the area during general conference and kiss away! Yes yes."

It wouldn't be funny if they didn't restrain them when they placed them under arrest and one of the security guards died as a result of a weapon being pulled by one of the men. We must not forget that these men had used profanity after they had been told to lead and their refusal was trespassing.

It's clear that the profanity and their manner of behavior could be considered assault since it would lead a reasonable person to believe that they were unreasonable and dangerous.

Just leave | 6:36 a.m. July 11, 2009

Sounds like if the couple would have just left the property when they were asked, there would have been no problem.

Dixie Dan | 6:42 a.m. July 11, 2009

If this would have happened in Hurricane, the local police would have used their Tazer gun and subdued these two dangerous people.

Big Daddy | 6:47 a.m. July 11, 2009

People get a grip. The two individuals were trying to stir the pot. They know and so does everybody else. The Church is not going to accept your perverted lifestyles, no time, no how. Get on with your lives and we shall get on with ours. The Gays and Lesbians are trying to force their lifestyles on us and they call us haters because we don't accept their behavior. If we look at history, all the great societies in history fell because of homosexuality, Greece, Roman, etc. Get ready for America to fall into the same cesspool. I for one will tell these people they are the catalyst to the fall of our country. Somebody has to speak up against this perverted way of life and thank goodness the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has the backbone and intestinal fortitude to do so. If I am a "hater monger" then so be it.

ian | 6:51 a.m. July 11, 2009

They were probably pushed down not for just refusing to leave but for then going off on the people who asked them to leave. Loud swearing like that is an offense to others. These gay actists who were obviously just trying to make a point do not have the right to detract from the temple square experience of others. It is as simple as that.

Virgie | 6:55 a.m. July 11, 2009

Please understand that the church has a right to enforce it's policies. Whether the gay men intentionally went there to cause a problem (which I doubt),then they must pay the consequences regardless. If they did not do it intentionally then they should have respected the policies and property of the church when confronted and left apologetically and everything would have been fine, but they got ignorant. Gays get angry and they cause problems. Be who you want to be, but do it out of the public eye, especially if you can't be respectful of everyone. Have respect for yourselves. Don't bring attention by inappropriate behavior. Have PRIDE as a gay person and follow the rules that we all should be living by. Even Mormons would be asked to leave if they used such poor judgment, but we try to live a higher standard and still there are those who fight against common decency. A NATURAL CONSEQUENCE will ALWAYS follow an action. YOU can CONTROL whether it's good or bad. NOTHING can stop it. It's a law of God.
His judgment WILL prevail.

Anonymous | 6:56 a.m. July 11, 2009

In order to avoid an escalation from verbal altercation to physical violence police (and private security) often have to take immediate control of the situation. I'm sure that the private security did exactly what they were trained to do within the law. Mormons find same sex public displays of affection as offensive, and they have the right under the law to ask anyone that is disruptive to leave their private property. Publicity seeking homosexual couples can protest to their hearts' content on the public right of way (the sidewalk), but this is nothing more than a lame display of disdain for Mormon private property.

Debate having sex on their table | 6:57 a.m. July 11, 2009

Re: ralph

"More of the homosexual agenda. They don't want equality - they want to force acceptance of their lifestyle, "warts and all", on everyone, even on private property. Another example of the "dummying-down" of decency in our society."

Private property means nothing to some people. Not only do we have to put up with their stupid votes when we go to vote but now private property isn't even off limits.

When asked to leave by the owner they can expect them to swear and refuse to leave and to try to debate them on the Constitution and what the law should be. Why wait until the next election when they can harass people on their property and show them that they won't be left alone unless they get their way.

The idea that everything is up for debate and vote is getting out of hand. What we allow on our private property is not up for debate or vote. It is not up for someone to refuse to leave when asked to do so. The first sign of hate is refusing to respect a person's private property when asked.

LOL! | 7:00 a.m. July 11, 2009

The usual rabid gays who hate heterosexuals are all out in force to push their agenda.

The two arrested were there to start trouble and provoke and were looking to get arrested so they could get some press.

Normal thinking peopel are not fooled by the latest silly gay hate directed toward heterosexuals.

As for the gay posters to this thread, do tou get paid to spam open forums with your hate-filled agenda?

Anonymous | 7:03 a.m. July 11, 2009

In Europe it's very common for two men two men to kiss on the Cheek... Whether they be straight or gay.

2 Tim from ER | 7:04 a.m. July 11, 2009

Yes, but the kiss was not to his wife, or to her husband. It was actions that the owner of the property did not want on its property. This issue is not about gay-rights, it is about property rights that are upheld by the constitution and by current courts. Imagine how you would feel if a visitor to your house decided he/she wanted to disrobe in front of your children and you asked him/her to leave and you were informed it was his right and you could not ask him to leave. Well i am sure you would disagree. As should all owners of property would. That is what happened here. Does anyone think that this was not planned for and procedures put in place prior to it happening? I am pretty sure this was anticipated and the legal department informed the security department what was allowed. This is supported by the comments given by the police for the article. Not every issue is about gay rights.

Anonymous | 7:04 a.m. July 11, 2009

I see people leaving the temple all the time just married and and kissing... of course these people are straigh, so Why the double standard??

Told to leave ends discussion | 7:05 a.m. July 11, 2009

Dave,

"This is a clear-cut case of religious freedom and property rights, but it will, of course, be portrayed in the national media as a matter of anti-gay discrimination."

Most people understand that this is a case of their private property, religious freedom and freedom of association being violated. When asked to leave a person's property the debate is over. It isn't time for a vote or a damn debate. A person has the right to refuse to debate you and to order you off their property.

"The Constitution is being twisted beyond all recognition to justify same-sex marriage and to now discriminate against anyone who honestly believes that open homosexual behavior is "inappropriate," even if the beliefs are religious."

What people do in their own homes, on their own damn property or on public land is their own business but what they choose to do on private property must meet with the approval of the owner who may choose for whatever reason to ask someone to leave including random reasons such as not liking their shoes or tie. The reason doesn't matter. If told to leave then you leave. End of discussion!!!!

Cole | 7:07 a.m. July 11, 2009

I've been asked on those same grounds to not kiss my wife. It's true, PDAs are not allowed on that property.

Joshthebadbear | 7:11 a.m. July 11, 2009

they knew what they were up to. Hoooorahhh for Church security. If these two morons didn't know this was an "in your face move" I'll eat . . . well lima beans or something equally disgusting. Let me at em with my pepper spray too ! .

Can't wait | 7:11 a.m. July 11, 2009

to see how the courts handle this one-- the two men will sue and in 3 to 5 years the Supreme Court will hear it.. In the mean time the point has been made by the two gay gentlemen.
I wonder if they would be upset if a Mormon family set up a picnic on their front lawn?? But then I'm guessing they are renters so they don't have a front lawn so it won't matter...
@ candb-- get real, these guys were trying to make a point and I would guess it got out of hand when they decided to resist the order to leave the grounds.

Queers | 7:12 a.m. July 11, 2009

Forcing their agenda again!!!

Why the LDS property? Its all a show to get more attention.

I would have even approached the two if they were doing the holding, kissing and groping in a general public place. There's a time and place if they want to show their passion. Obviously these were just two queers trying to force their agenda to see just how far they could go. Childish IMO!!

re: candb | 7:13 a.m. July 11, 2009

you said: i think its childish to assume that somebody would actually want to get arrested just to get on the news. there are better ways to get noticed.

Really? Did you not just see the spectacle at Mt Rushmore this week? Some in the homosexual activist camp have verbally attacked Mormons and vandalized Mormon property ever since Prop 8.

Here | 7:13 a.m. July 11, 2009

Take a look at the comments of this website on a regular basis and you'll see that the philosophy of "We shouldn't judge" is reserved for a certain few.

Everyone else is apparently fair game.

Anonymous | 7:27 a.m. July 11, 2009

They went looking for trouble and they got it. I personally find it VERY weird for men to kiss, especially in public. That's why I don't live in San Francisco.

Go push your lifestyle agenda in a more appropriate manner.

This was a very calculated act, hoping to gender sympathy for their sexual lifestyle.

Poorly done.

Disgusted Beyond Words | 7:28 a.m. July 11, 2009

I don't care if its politically incorrect, if I see two men kissing each other, it turns my stomach. I don't want to see it anywhere. I can't believe we even have to be talking about it --its so unnatural. The militant gays turn my stomach. Do your smooching at home. I feel the same way for heterosexual couples as well... Leave PDAs at home, or hotel room, please. Gay or not gay, it was just inapprorpiate for them to behave that way. It was a flaunting and in your face action. Grow up.

just wow | 7:29 a.m. July 11, 2009

They had the entire city of Salt Lake to go kiss and do whatever, and they chose to do it right where they did. So of course the church is now the bad guy. Well, here's a news flash for people, you can make your own choices, but you can't choose the consequences. Had they kissed across the street, you never would have heard a word about it. But they made the choice and now they got the consequence. As for dealing with immaturity, to the poster above who said gays should line up at General Conference time and kiss, way to show your respect for others.

Page:
1
2
3
4
5
Next >

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.