Deseret News | Utah's No. 1 for governing

Reader comments
Utah's No. 1 for governing

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Math education is tops | 2:21 p.m. March 4, 2008

Look around. The kids are taking Geometry in 8th grade! That is leaps and bounds above other states.

Someone that says math has been dumbed down since they were a kid hasn't been in a classroom lately. They are probably getting their info from Jon Stossel when he shows a school in ghetto NY and claims that is what is happening at our local schools.

another reason | 2:29 p.m. March 4, 2008

the report found that "the level of coordination between the governor's office and the Legislature goes beyond party loyalty."

perhaps they all have something else in common... which is ofen derided and cursed in this comment area....

The True Ute | 2:36 p.m. March 4, 2008

move somewhere else, yeah right. your only renting till you move to MISSOURI!!

Comments continue below

Michael-New Zealand | 2:50 p.m. March 4, 2008

We have more sheep than you do and we could surely use some of what you got!!
Our government is so poorly run the place is falling down around us after 9 years of left wing hate of anything decent! Read more if you doubt me.
Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Re: SLC'er | 2:46 p.m. March 4, 2008

Skybridges and alco-pops? Let's move to something a little more substantive. Say, for example, the immigration debate. I don't see that the legislature has aligned at all with the Church's position on this issue. Your reference to Amendment 3 is also without much substance - at least ten other states also passed a similar amendment. Is the Mormon Church also controlling things in those states? Also, if the Church is going to dump nearly $2 billion into giving downtown a much needed facelift, I don't think pushing for a skybridge equates to influencing public policy. As for Leavitt's 'scripture study', I personally don't agree with it, but you still haven't identified specific instances of how those meetings affected public policy. Please provide something substantive.

You are correct | 3:01 p.m. March 4, 2008

The immigration bill is a good indication of CHURCH involvement. What a shame! Church leaping noses need to attend to their congregations and stay out of politics!

Oppressive | 3:56 p.m. March 4, 2008

Congratulations! I wish my state were as well managed as Utah, at least fiscally. On the other hand, I'm delighted to pay higher taxes to live in a state with a culture of open-mindedness instead of all those outdated and weird Utah traditions that stifle both members and non-members of the majority religion. Ugh.

AbeFroman | 4:13 p.m. March 4, 2008

Touche SLC'er. Now I look a little foolish. Thanks.

My main sticking point, one that I probably could have stated clearly and with a little less arrogance, is that while the FF had a concept of "Seperation" it doesn't appear to be to the same severe degree that we project upon the concept today. There is ample reference to God and "Christian" ideals in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I do not think they intended Christianity to be pushed upon all US citizens but I also don't believe they would have agreed with the utter abolishment of religion from every whit of public life. Which is why I think the phrase is often used cavalierly and frequently misapplied. In the end, while I agree with the intial concept, I don't like it's misapplication by those pushing a personal agenda (I'm not implicating you, SLC'er, in that statement).

However, it still appears nowhere in official written State documents except the Supreme Court Majority Opinion.

Sal | 4:18 p.m. March 4, 2008

I didn't like the way business was done in home country and I moved to THE US.
If SLC'er feels that Utah has too many sheep he/she should move to any other 49 states that might have more wolves. How about go to Cuba? There, state and church is totally separated.

Re: SLC'er | 4:26 p.m. March 4, 2008

Please explain how the immigration bill is a "good indication of Church involvement." The Church has simply asked that lawmakers remember we are dealing with real people here. I don't see any detailed policy statements or any indication whatsoever of what the Church might be advocating, except compassionate treatment of others, which is perfectly in line with their role as a religious organization as they "attend to their congregations" and all mankind, for that matter. This argument could go in circles for quite a while. My point is this - I have never known the Mormon Church to instruct any member to vote one way or another on ANYTHING, nor would the Church take any action against a member based on their voting record. I don't know what more can be said.

SLC'er | 4:28 p.m. March 4, 2008

Re:SLC'er, how are those issues mentioned not substantive? While I might not drink those beverages, and i'm assuming you don't, it is the Church throwing its weight around and affecting other individuals' lives. And while I appreciate the Church's investment in downtown, that doesn't mean that leaders should sign off on their business plans, simply because they are the ones investing. I imagine a private business owner would be subject to much more scrutiny. Finally, to immigration - ah that topic that gets these blogger's hearts beating like 2 full bottles of Mt. Dew. Tell me how political leaders differed with the Church? The Church's only statement was asking for "compassion." We've hardly heard a peep about immigration during this session. Sounds like the legislators took the Church's advice.

cbk | 4:32 p.m. March 4, 2008

If there were Democrats in Utah, Utah would not be ranked as high.

Utah | 4:55 p.m. March 4, 2008

To many cops looking for trouble and you are it.
It is called a quota
They all have to arrest someone and lie about the arrest.
Aparently they are paid for prosecutions and percentage of the fines
Fines are out of site in Utah
You would think this is Calif. with high paying jobs.
The State is a Milker and you are the Milkee

Anonymous | 4:56 p.m. March 4, 2008

Mexico will take this land back. So get use to your darker friends. We are here to stay. If you don't like it than go back to Europe!

Re: SLC'er | 5:12 p.m. March 4, 2008

I'm sorry, I just don't see how asking alco-pops to be sold only in state liquor stores is a big issue. I think the point was to protect kids. And as for the skybridge, I actually think the Church attracts more scrutiny. If a developer were going to put $2 billion into downtown, the city and state would be bending over backwards to keep them happy. As for immigration, we don't have the time to get into the minutiae of SB81 or HB171 and it would be difficult to apply the Church's 'position' to it because the position is so general. We could go around and around with this, but I will just reiterate my point that I made earlier: I have never known the Mormon Church to instruct any member to vote one way or another on ANYTHING, nor would the Church take any action against a member based on their voting record. I don't know what more can be said.

Kita Kazoo | 6:49 p.m. March 4, 2008

A lot of people in Utah do not feel heard by their government;they feel that their values are not being represented by their state legislators. So they feel unfairly taxed.

What is even more frustrating to them is that someone would just look at the financial bottom line and deem the state to be superior to other states, when in their opinion it is not. They feel the state is actually mismanaging funds by not meeting the needs of ALL the people.

They are also upset that those lucky few who do feel their interests are being nurtured are self congratulatory by an award which does not represent the whole picture.

They might say that Utah might do well at balancing the checkbook, but dinner is burning and the baby has been left out to play naked in the street.

SLC'er | 6:48 p.m. March 4, 2008

Well we differ on opinions then. Thank goodness for the 1st amendment and for these forums where multiple viewpoints can be expressed. I agree that the Church does not tell people how to vote, nor does it punish anyone for voting contrary to the Church's position. But I find it hard to argue that the Church is by far and away the biggest policy setter in the state and that many politicians vote in line with the Church's stated (or unstated) policies. You are right, these arguments could go on forever, we have our differences of opinion, I respect yours, good debate.

no name | 6:52 p.m. March 4, 2008

Um..SLC'er, you are right that Mr. Jefferson used the phrase "a wall of separation between church and state", but not for the purpose of expelling any thought of religion from our government.
A small denomination of Baptists wrote to Mr. Jefferson fearing that if a state religion was set up by the government they would loose their rights to worship as they wanted to. In his answer to their letter, Mr. Jefferson quoted a famous Baptist minister, Roger Williams,who used the phrase "a wall of separation..." knowing that using the words of a famous minister that this little group revered would help ease their fears. In the letter you refer to, Mr. Jefferson wasn't saying that there could be no religious people in government, or no religious language, or symbols or even religious influence in government. He used the phrase to assure these people that our government would never create a state run church, which it hasn't. The headquarters of a church is here in Utah and naturally many of our government leaders belong to that church, so that may influence their decissions,but there is no state run church in this state or country.

Anonymous | 7:44 p.m. March 4, 2008

Not an American, I would love to be counted among the sheep and say sign me up for such a society which frequently comes at the top of the league when measuring all that is good.

As a political animal, its a real pity your remaining presidential campaigners did not highlight such positive political points as they opposed Mitt Romney.

In a so-called free society where discrimination is not cool, it is still cool to be anti mormon.

Could someone send me the missionaries? Please? Pretty please?

Baaaaaaaa

Page:
< Previous
1
2

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.