Quantcast
Utah

Utah Legislature: Gay rights legislation truce may be in trouble

Republicans question a proposed study on discrimination

Comments

Return To Article
  • Re; BYU alum
    Feb. 7, 2010 10:08 p.m.

    "And we wonder why folks thing (sic) Utah is a backwards state?"

    Please get serious. 35 states have voted just like Utah to ban gay marriage and to withhold or restrict certain other rights to gays and/or gay couples.

    I don't agree with some of the laws that discriminate against gays when it comes to real civil rights such as inheritance and visitation, but if you think the LDS are the only obstacles in the way of legal gay marriage, you're kidding yourself. LDS = 1% of the population. Anti-gay marriage = 50%+. What's not to understand?

  • BYU alum
    Feb. 7, 2010 2:18 p.m.

    This is a major embarrassment to our state. And we wonder why folks thing Utah is a backwards state?



    Discrimination is wrong. The LDS chruch agrees-- gays GET FIRED for being gay and it should be illegal.


    Sorry, bigots.

  • JayeG
    Feb. 7, 2010 1:10 p.m.

    Re: no putting from the rough | 2:59 p.m. Feb. 3, 2010

    The Bible also states clearly that parents have the right to kill disobedient and errant children.

    And for the benefit of those who are LDS...the Bible also states that people with physical deformities are to be banned from entering the temple.

  • Ender2155
    Feb. 7, 2010 2:10 a.m.

    I read the post my 'Employer' and simply laughed at their stupidity for not wanting to hire openly gay people. I'm openly gay at my work, and despite the fact we have a non-discrimination clause in our HR policy, they not only don't care, they embrace me. Perhaps it might have something to do with the fact I'm one of the best salespeople we have who delivers consistent results that nets my company a LOT of margin!

    How sad that 'Employer' is so blinded by their bigorty that they would miss out on an employee such as myself who is dedicated to their work and wants to see the company prosper and succeed!

    Oh wait, but since I'm gay, I'm of no use to them.

    I wonder which company will fold first in the long run?

  • mark
    Feb. 6, 2010 4:22 p.m.

    Stopping or stalling LGBT Human Rights is like trying to stop or stall evolution. Each side KNOWS equality will be a fact within a decade. For those who hate LGBTs this is your LAST GASP.
    If believe business interests and tourism interests will benefit cuz you try to have no controvercy for a year, it WON'T. Your LGBT and straight youths will continue to migrate out of state, your colleges won't attract out state youths, and LGBT and LGBT friendly businesses will find more inclusive states to build in.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 3:12 p.m.

    To Robert Watson,
    Do you also think a renter should be allowed to decline renting to Mormons or Blacks? Well, doing so has been ILLEGAL since 1968.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 3:05 p.m.

    To the 11:10 commentator,
    Since there are two openly homosexual members of the state legislature the claims that homosexuals are excluded from citizenship and should not bear the duties of citizens are totally false.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 3:02 p.m.

    To the 10:49 commentor,
    You really do not grasp the situation of rents in the off-campus housing south of BYU. That is exactly what happens. The aprtment owners rent out six slots in the place, each person buys one slot. At times the six people have never met before in their lives.
    How logical it is might be debatable, but it is exactly what happens and how it is done in Provo.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 2:56 p.m.

    To "Only in Utah" at 8:38,
    less than HALF of all states have laws that ban sexual orientation discrimination in housing and employment. I would vernture to guess a much higher percentage of Utah's population lives in localities that have such laws than does the population here in Michigan.
    This is not an "only in Utah" thing. Speaking of the 21st century, in 2003 a Texas law that made homosexual sex illegal was overturned by the Supreme Court. Wisconsin did not become the first state to include gender orientation in employment non-discrimination laws until 1982. Washington State did not pass its fair housing and employment act until 2006.

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 2:46 p.m.

    To the 8:35 commentator,
    Firing someone based on their religion is a violation of a long standing law.

  • David Fredrickson
    Feb. 6, 2010 2:36 p.m.

    Any thinking person can see right through the LDS Church's public relations game!

    The LDS Church "supported" gay rights legislation because they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by it! Churches are excluded by the legislation! So this was a way to try to amend for the bad publicity they received from the Proposition 8 fiasco while not costing them anything!

    Don't fool yourself, JPL, the LDS Church is as much in control of the Utah legislature as the puppeteer master is of his toys!

  • John Pack Lambert
    Feb. 6, 2010 2:11 p.m.

    This should put a rest to the claims the the LDS Church controls the Utah legislature. However, it won't. Those who make such claims are hard-core conspiracy theorists, and NOTHING ever disproves their theories, because they were built without proff to began with.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 5, 2010 8:39 a.m.

    ...why am I not allowed my beleif system... - 7:38 a.m.

    Hate to break it to you guy but even the LDS church supports preventing discrimination at the workplace and in evictions.
    Sounds like your beleif system is against...your beleif system.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 5, 2010 8:37 a.m.

    'Why am I a bigot, a hater, a right-wing nut, out-of-touch, homophobe in the the words of many posters, if I oppose your demands because I have deeply held beliefs that your lifestyle is unnatural and a deteriment to this nation and why am I not allowed my beleif system and entitled to vote against your demands at the ballot box without being castigated?' - 7:38 a.m.

    Question, why make special session to vote on this in every state? Because state legislator voted in favor of gay marriage? Or because state supreme courts support gay marriage?
    I doubt our 'demands' for job protection from discrimination would be against your belief system if this discrimination targeted you, correct?
    Or are you saying because of your belief's it is 'ok' to discriminate against others?
    That would be foolish as if I believed in something you were against (i.e. religions were supported by the devil, etc), where would that leave us?

    You can BELIEVE in anything, your ACTIONS are held accountable.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 5, 2010 8:29 a.m.

    'And so to your comments, are gays visible, in many cases yes...' - 6:36 p.m.

    Actually, in all cases 'no.' Regardless of how 'smart' a person thinks they are, homosexuality is not a visible thing. You know the movie 'Burno'? Yeah, he's straight.

    'Again, there's nothing you can do about it unless Employer is stupid and most successful business people are not stupid.'

    Unless your business is about faith, it serves no purpose in your business. You can have any buisness you like, faith-based, etc. That does not give you license to discriminate. Based on many thing, including a person's orientation.

    If you spend all day telling a homosexual how they are imorral and that god does not love them, you will not do any job effectively and you will be sued for, at least, harrasement.

    Bottom line, if you care about what a person does in bed instead of the job you gave them, your not very smart to begin with.

  • re ---Question | 7:38 a.m
    Feb. 4, 2010 12:29 p.m.

    ["if I oppose your demands because I have deeply held beliefs that your lifestyle is unnatural and a deteriment to this nation and why am I not allowed my beleif system and entitled to vote against your demands at the ballot box without being castigated?"]

    when everyone can vote on your lifestyle, then you can vote on theirs. fair enough?

  • I didn't realize
    Feb. 4, 2010 8:45 a.m.

    I didn't realize that bigotry was such a problem until I stepped out of my comfort zone and started to get to know people. It turns out that some of the kindest and most generous people I know happen to be gay. Yet, they are told daily on board like this that they are immoral, selfish, and responsible for the moral decline of America. I am shocked at the cruel way people talk about some of my friends. It's unacceptable. I know of many who have wound up being kicked out of homes as teens because they were gay. Those unfortunate teens do what they can to survive after becoming homeless. We need to do more to help lift these children. Let's stop judging and start loving.

  • Question
    Feb. 4, 2010 7:38 a.m.

    Can anyone in the gay community answer this question for me?

    My question is: Why am I a bigot, a hater, a right-wing nut, out-of-touch, homophobe in the the words of many posters, if I oppose your demands because I have deeply held beliefs that your lifestyle is unnatural and a deteriment to this nation and why am I not allowed my beleif system and entitled to vote against your demands at the ballot box without being castigated?

  • To: Christy
    Feb. 4, 2010 7:32 a.m.

    Gays have became so strident and demanding of rights, such as marriage, which when put to the vote of the people in this country will never pass. You have every right to love whomever you please and I agree that you should be treated fairly in housing and employment as long as you are a good employee and renter and do not scream discrimination when an employer or landlord wants rid of you because you do not perform in the workplace or fail to pay your rent.

    I do not oppose domestic partnerships. I do oppose adoption unless the child is old enough to consent to the adoption by a gays and I strongly oppose marriage for gays.



  • George King
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:24 p.m.

    Everyone on this issue needs to take a break. There are more important issues. Getting Utahns beach to work. My impression with the community is that they just want to have a job and a place to live. The church will be the bulwark of promoting the traditional marriage. Utah has clauses to protect traditional marriage. Utah is not in jeopardy of losing its moral compass. When I come home to Utah on vacations, I am amazed how strong the traditional family is. I am thankful to be in a church that sees the importance of the family and at the same time recognize the decency of people.

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:10 p.m.

    @@ Christy 8:50 p.m.

    Bitter? No. Amused? Kinda.

    'Employer' said, "You make a choice and employers will make their decision to hire you based on those choices. I am sure their are many employers who will welcome people of "different" lifstyles, I am not one and frankly there is nothing you can do about it."

    So,are we talking about the petulant employer of the local Baskin Robins franchise? Or are we talking about the HR guy at Costco? 'Employer' insinuated that he would not welcome people of different 'lifestyles', so I assumed he is a small biz owner, as there are very specific laws against discrimination at the big companies.

    Regardless, it doesn't offend me at all that 'employer' knows his rights. I would hope and assume that any business owner, big or small, would know how to protect against false allegations. I just have to say that 'fat people', 'felons' and 'illegals' do not = Gays.

    The proposed law remains : You can't fire someone simply because you find out they're gay.

    A quiet bigot is still a bigot. And gay rights activists aren't planning on getting any less vocal.

  • @ Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:50 p.m.

    You sound very bitter in your response to Employer. Who knows how big his business is or the nature of the business. Does it offend you that Employer knows his rights and knows how to protect his business against allegations of discrimination? Maybe he won't hire fat people, or felons or illegals or a host of others who expect "rights" which could damage his business. You cannot win a lawsuit unless there is incontrovertible proof that discrimination occurred and that's very hard to get unless the Employer is very vocal that he fired someone because they were gay. He is probably one of the people you consider a "quiet bigot" those that don't openly oppose the gay cause or publicly or privately comment on it at all. I think there are many more of them than there are of those who openly support or oppose the gay cause. The more vocal and demanding gays are, the more they turn off those who might support them.

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:17 p.m.

    @Employer | 3:46 p.m. Feb. 3, 2010

    "You make a choice and employers will make their decision to hire you based on those choices. I am sure their are many employers who will welcome people of "different" lifstyles, I am not one and frankly there is nothing you can do about it."

    You're right. I wish you'd give us your name so people could be forewarned!

    The crux of the issue is - you go on ahead and hire whomever you want. That's fine. That's your right as an owner of a small business. The proposed law states you can't FIRE some wonderful employee simply because you find out they're gay.

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 6:56 p.m.

    @The Root for concern | 10:21 a.m. Feb. 3, 2010

    "the trouble most people have with issues like this isn't the gay thing, it's how the gay thing is used to hide the fact that sometimes bad tenants come in all forms, but when someone's gay, they can say, "You're discriminating!"

    Anyone can say anything. Anyone, regardless of sexual orientation, can be a worthless employee or renter. As a boss or a landlord, it is imperative you cover yourself by documenting every problematic issue. And then - everything should turn out ok for you if you're ever taken to court.

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 6:44 p.m.

    "The fact that many gays do not see their behavior as immoral does mean that their bosses and landlord should be forced to agree. If gays want jobs or apartments, they should live according to the moral behavior their bosses and landlords expect of them –just like everyone else."

    So... then... according to your logic... if some heterosexual engages in adultery, or theft, or abuse, all immoral behaviors, THAT immorality should be overlooked by their 'boss' and 'landlord' simply because the adulterer/thief/abuser is not GAY - which is the Alpha and Omega of immorality in your eyes.

    News Flash: We don't live in a society where bosses and landlords are the arbiters of morality. You do your job and you get there on time. You pay your rent and take care of the place. That's it.

    How about this - I think the way YOU view life is lacking in morality - according to ME - so I guess I'd be within my rights to kick you to the curb. All fair, because as your boss/landlord, I call all the shots, regardless that you do your job just fine and pay your rent on time.

  • To: Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 6:36 p.m.

    Re your comments to Employer, you're right, discrimination based on sexual orientation would have to be proven and Employer is probably much too smart to hire someone who does not meet his business needs but if he/she did hire a gay, they would also probably too smart to fire a person for just being gay. So it would be impossible to prove. Particularly if Employer keeps his feelings to him/herself which most smart people tend to do.

    So Employer is right there's nothing you can do about it.

    And so to your comments, are gays visible, in many cases yes, they are and that's the kind Employer seems not to want.

    In case you are in any doubt, as a fellow Employer I couldn't agree more with Employer and I won't be hiring anyone who does not fit into my business either and I'm much too smart to ever be successfully sued for discrimination. Again, there's nothing you can do about it unless Employer is stupid and most successful business people are not stupid.

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 6:01 p.m.

    "I’ll tell you what Christ would do. He would tell people to be grateful for their multitudes of blessings, talents, abilities, and privileges and not to be concerned about the few privileges that do not apply to them."

    That is hilarious. In otherwords, he'd say, shut up and be thankful for what you've got.

    Does it make you feel good to speak so sanctimoniously - in the name of Christ - to people YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW?

  • Christy
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:32 p.m.

    "Still, Sandstrom said he and others are fairly certain that the city and county ordinances violate the state's "at-will" employee law. And, as a legal and policy issue, he said no local ordinances should violate state law, no matter what the cause."

    Oh yes, Heaven FORBID we actually progress in society and change some laws. I'm sure 50 years ago some southerners fought real hard to keep things just the same as well.

  • TO -- Digbads | 2:54 p.m
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:03 p.m.

    ["We should recriminalize homosexual behavior. It's acceptance and promotion has lead to millions of deaths in the United States, and disease and misery, not to mention the disruption to the core family"]

    nice try, but gays do not cause deaths, they are beaten to death. and more hetros have disease than gays.

    are you sure you didn't mean for your posting name to be "Dingbat" not digbads?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 4:59 p.m.

    re --- Never good enough | 1:13 p.m

    ["The bottom line is homosexuals have all the exact same rights as everyone else when it comes to marriage, housing, employment etc. The problem is they choose to waive these rights when they choose homosexuality as their sexual preference."]

    none of them has waived any rights. not in the least. what you are admitting is that you think people should have the RIGHT to discriminate against gays because YOU don't approve of their lifestyle...

    well guess what. I don't approve of the mormon lifestyle. I find it worse than homosexuality. It breeds little copy-cat clones and destroys individuality. so I think you should waive your rights when you choose mormonism.

    and I'm not even gay - just an old white guy that really hates posers and bigots.

    and you sir are both.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 4:02 p.m.

    'I am sure their are many employers who will welcome people of "different" lifstyles, I am not one and frankly there is nothing you can do about it.' - 3:46 p.m.

    Employer, frankly, there is. If this law passes (and with the LDS church support, it will) and your discrimination can be proven, there would be consequence. Regardless if it is a straight person or gay person.

    You compare being gay to body peircings and bad hygine. Tell me, is being gay visible?

    And I don't mean your 'hunches' or any ideas, I mean, can you factually see if someone is gay?

    No.

    As such, you might be firing a 'butch' lesbian who is not, in fact, a lesbian. And if that is found, you would have no defense for your discrimination as it was based on assumption and not facts.

    SF, some haters need to drop the word Christian.

    Too beautiful a word.

  • SF
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:54 p.m.

    Homosexuals needs to drop nickname Gay. Too beautiful word

  • Employer
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:46 p.m.

    As an employer, I would never fire someone for being gay, I would find some other reason and there are many to choose from! I certainly don't want an openly effeminate, gay man or a "butch" lesbian working in my business any more than I would want a person with multiple visible piercings or poor hygiene. You make a choice and employers will make their decision to hire you based on those choices. I am sure their are many employers who will welcome people of "different" lifstyles, I am not one and frankly there is nothing you can do about it.

  • putter
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:41 p.m.

    Putting from the rough is clearly not ok.... go to another country where it is ok if you still want to live in sin

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:26 p.m.

    The bible says it clearly that this is not right

    Many say the bible is a book of fiction.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:08 p.m.

    Digbads | 2:54 p.m. Feb. 3, 2010
    We should recriminalize homosexual behavior. It's acceptance and promotion has lead to millions of deaths in the United States, and disease and misery, not to mention the disruption to the core family.

    It would take a constitutional amendment at this point since it was the Supreme Court that decided that what people do in their own bedroom is no one elses business.

    Get it organized. See how many Utahns even want to go so far as to take away other Americans freedom in such a manor. Take your petition to church and see how many members want to force others to live by their beliefs. (Forcing others to live righteously, where have I heard that before.)

    I think you will be disappointed.

  • @digbads
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:07 p.m.

    keep digging yourself further into that hole, comments like yours really need no response the bigotry speaks for itself.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 3:05 p.m.

    'We should recriminalize homosexual behavior. It's acceptance and promotion has lead to millions of deaths in the United States, and disease and misery, not to mention the disruption to the core family.' - 2:54 p.m.

    Thanks for the laugh!

    I'm sure we can both agree that if any one thing was responsible for 'millions of deaths, disease and misery' it wouldn't be homosexuals. Otherwise we could argue of the semantics of dependancy on electricity.

    Millions.

    Seriously.

    There could be tears.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    'If you are sick of the prejudice, just tell people you are straight and you'll be amazed how fast they leave you alone.' - 2:45 p.m.

    John, I realize you are being funny. (or really, really hope so) I have mentioned this before, to find out why prejudice is harmful, simply tell people you are gay for two weeks.

    I guarantee you'll support equal rights after.

  • no putting from the rough
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    The bible says it clearly that this is not right

  • Digbads
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:54 p.m.

    We should recriminalize homosexual behavior. It's acceptance and promotion has lead to millions of deaths in the United States, and disease and misery, not to mention the disruption to the core family.

  • Robert Watson
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:49 p.m.

    The property owner who wants to rent his apartments to whom he chooses to rent - has a valid point. Should a renter decline to rent to homosexuals - in a free America that would be his choice - but perhaps his shame. His main concern should be how well his property is treated, respect toward and for other tenents and prompt payment of rent.

  • @Joyce | 1:27
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:48 p.m.

    "I think they are hell-bent on being validated in their behavior, let alone all the ramifications and spread of disease."

    Well, Joyce - according to the CDC, heterosexuals in the 18-35 age range have the highest rate of STDs in the U.S. Your post attempts to associate the spread of disease soley with same-sex activity, but ALL unprotected sexual activity has the potential to spread disease.

  • John
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:45 p.m.

    As a fellow gay man, this is just another issue on the 'pile' of others. I personally have decided that if I am to live in Utah without discrimination, I have to simply just say, "I'm straight." So far it's working quite well. I had no problem getting a job or a house and nobody has asked question one to me. If you are sick of the prejudice, just tell people you are straight and you'll be amazed how fast they leave you alone.

  • Pro Equality/ Anti-H8
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:44 p.m.

    This is a no brainer, OBVIOUSLY gays and lesbians should get equal housing and employment rights! lol, the younger generations are gonna be so embarrassed when they look back and see we were even discussing this!
    Someone needs to tell Utah that 1970 is over and they can safely join the rest of society now in 2010.

  • @never good enough
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:41 p.m.

    its amazing how you can fit every single false claim into one post. I guess practice makes perfect. As to the actual claims I think anyone that has been around these boards or this issue long enough already know the truth and will either ignore you or ignore the truth and nothing anyone says will really change that.

  • @Discrimination | 11:25
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:31 p.m.

    Your argument is baseless as you obviously have not read or understand the City and County ordinances that were passed.

    All employers have the right to hire or fire whomever they please. The ordinances only state that you cannot fire someone soley based on their orientation. It does not state that you cannot fire someone that is gay - you just can't fire them just based only on that. The same way that the ordinances state that you cannot fire someone based soley on the fact that they are Mormon, or Catholic, or Baptist, etc.

    Pretty clear, don't you think?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:30 p.m.

    Utah was 'in trouble' when they thought job protections from discrimination was optional.

  • Priorities
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:07 p.m.

    So if the pro-family conservatives back off from passing any anti-gay laws this year, maybe they have time to criminalize and punish heterosexual divorce?

  • Joyce
    Feb. 3, 2010 1:27 p.m.

    I do not appreciate or approve of "Closed doors" and will not vote for anyone who engages in that behavior. The people's servants' soon forgetThat they are to represent the people.

    I think gays are wrong in their choices. I think they are hell-bent on being validated in their behavior, let alone all the ramifications and spread of disease. They were "not born different", they chose to be different.







  • Never good enough
    Feb. 3, 2010 1:13 p.m.


    The bottom line is homosexuals have all the exact same rights as everyone else when it comes to marriage, housing, employment etc. The problem is they choose to waive these rights when they choose homosexuality as their sexual preference. And, yes, it is a choice. To believe otherwise is to deny biology, physiology, nature and evolution. In fact, to accept homosexuality as natural behavior is to deny life itself. And changing laws that have been around for thousands of years to accomodate people who don't want to obey exisitng laws (which are EXACTLY the same for everybody) is an horribly bad precedent.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:59 p.m.

    "My point was that you claim it’s worse for gays without comparing it to anything. It’s worse for gays, you say. Well, worse than what?"

    Are you seriously asking this question???

    It's worse for gays because they DON'T HAVE LAWS PROTECTING THEM Mormons on the other hand do...

  • pragmatist
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:54 p.m.

    I worked with military personnel for many years and I completely understand why the "don't ask don't tell policy'. I'm not sure why there would be any discrimination if people would keep there mouths shut about many of their personal preferences, including religion and politics.




  • @Brandon | 11:18 a.m
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:53 p.m.

    Brandon, you're missing the point. Please read the name section and refer to the time stamp. Read that section (which the person states that people need to live under their boss or landlord's moral code) and then read mine. You will see what I'm getting at.

  • Mc
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:45 p.m.

    When my daughter was in high school she had a lesbian classmate who would stand and stare at other girls when they were changing. She was outspoken about her sexual orientation, so they knew why she was staring and it was very uncomfortable.

    If I were a landlord in the hypothetical situation presented by Anonymous above, I would want to be able talk to the other 5 roommates to see if they were comfortable living with someone who may be interested in them sexually. If they objected I would want to have the option of saying no to the lesbian renter rather than having the other 5 move out. Expecting the 5 straight girls to be okay with a lesbian moving in would be the same as renting the 6th space to a male without their okay.

    I have always thought that gays should be able to openly serve in the military as long as straight soldiers have the option of not rooming with a gay person. No one should be forced to share their living space with a person of the opposite sex or same sex orientation who may develop an unwanted sexual interest in them.

  • @Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:36 p.m.

    I do discriminate and so do you. Otherwise you wouldn’t care with whom who you strike up a relationship.

    Funny that you attempt to denigrate my comment and then cannot disprove it.

    1)Being Mormon means believing something. Being gay means believing something. Beliefs is beliefs. People fired or discriminated against for being Mormons. My point was that you claim it’s worse for gays without comparing it to anything. It’s worse for gays, you say. Well, worse than what?

    2)No one said discrimination does not exist against gays. What is relevant is whether the discrimination is any worse than what exists against other groups.

    3)If American laws protect people from their landowner’s morality, then there is no need for additional laws, Right? If laws say you can’t evict people unless they break the law, then why are we seeking another law? If such laws do not exist, then landowners currently have the right that you want taken from them.

    4)Most businesses have a rules against behavior that they believe will negatively affect their business.

  • re -- Anonymous | 9:26 a.m
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:08 p.m.

    ["I can't believe that someone is actually equating homosexual rights to freedom of religion. There is no comparison. Our nation had its origins because of freedom of religion."]

    they are both a choice. how is there ANY difference?

    and our nation may have some origins in freedom of religion, but gays fought along side heteros against the english. a gay man probably steered Washington's boat as he crossed the Potomac.

    didn't you ever wonder about those funky wigs? do you have ANY idea how many of our nation's founders were gay? and they were treated with respect back then. now you treat them with distain. yet they helped create this country that you act like you care about so much...

    you have no clue.

  • @@@2:00
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:07 p.m.

    “Just like the black people or women. Why did they have to fight for equal rights? Just be happy for their blessings, talents, abilities, and privileges and do not be concerned about the few privileges that do not apply to them.

    See how horrible that really sounds?”

    It does not sound horrible at all. Blacks and women, in the past, fought for rights that DID apply to them. I would have fought along side them. When gays fight for rights that apply to them, I fight with them too.

    When they fight for rights that do not apply to them, I fight against them. The right to marry does not apply to gay people. The right to force people to ignore your behavior does not apply to anybody.

  • re -- Anonymous | 8:26 a.m
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:58 a.m.

    ["So... If I own a property that rents to, say 6 girls, and there is a vacancy and a lesbian wants to move in and makes it known that she is lesbian. Do the other girls have to live with her even if they don't feel comfortable because I can't discriminate?"]

    what if it was a black woman and the other girls didn't like black people? then would you feel comfortable discriminating?

    how is that different?

  • boy
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:50 a.m.

    this sounds like more of this "big government" interferance I keep hearing about, passing laws to tell cities and counties that they can't have their own anti-discrimination ordinances? Tell the government to stay out of our business and quit sticking their noses in our bedrooms and wedding chappels, how's that? And Utah complains about states rights? They wont even let local governments make their own decisions without trying to tie their hands. Tell the lawmakers to get to work on the real issues and to quick messing around with the silly stuff. I WANT MY STATE BACK from the Government!

  • Ender2155
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:29 a.m.

    Your boss (unless you work for a church or some similar entity) or landlord cannot make you live up to a 'moral' behaviour; that's a ridiculous idea! If my boss is a vegetarian, can they force me to be one too? If my landlord is atheist, can they keep me from having a Christian symbol or sticker on my car? No, of course not! Unless what you are doing is illegal or detrimental to either your job or place of residence, they can't dictate what goes on in your personal life!

  • Discrimination
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:25 a.m.

    I recently decided to seek a new job after retiring from the Federal Govt. I am highly educated, hold graduate degrees, and have years of experience in my profession. I have been interviewed by 5 employers who looked at my resume. However I am keenly aware that I have not been hired by at least two employers because of my age. They other three offered me the positions because of my age and experience.

    So I have been discriminated against, even though my age was never mentioned? Am I angry or upset, ready to file lawsuits or demand further legal protections, I am NOT. Employers should have the right to hire the best candidate for their business and landlords should be allowed to select the renters they want in their property. Their profit margins may depend on those choices. Some many want to hire and rent to gays, others may not.

    Gays, get over yourselves, life is often not fair, learn to live with it. Why impose your demands for recognition on the those of us who do not agree with your unnatural lifestyle. We have rights too.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:25 a.m.

    So, talking about your orientation is not 'descrete and respectful?'
    Then what do you call sending out invitations to your wedding?

  • Brandon
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:18 a.m.

    "What if I thought practicing your religion was immoral?"
    If you fired someone because of this, then you would be in legal trouble, as freedom of religion is part of the constitution this country is based around. Personally, I think that discrimination based on religion, race, color, gender, or sexual orientation is extremely wrong morally, because then you are forcing your moral beliefs on someone else. The way it's being discussed on here, the mere idea of being gay or lesbian is 'wrong'. Personally, at a job, if someone is gay or straight doesn't matter so long as they aren't forcing themselves on you. Just like if someone is Mormon, Christian, Baptist, Muslim, etc. They have their religion and are not breaking the law by following it, and so long as someone of the LGBT community isn't hurting someone, why is it even an issue?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 11:10 a.m.

    Well if it is true that gays and lesbians do not have equal rights in Utah, which I doubt they do then I see no reason for them to have to pay state or local taxes if they have no rights. Somewhere I heard no taxation without representation.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:49 a.m.

    "You are wrong. Every gay person in Utah has the exact same rights as me. What you mean to say is "There are no SPECIAL rights for Gays in Utah." In my opinion, that's the way most of the citizens of this state like it."

    1) You're wrong. This isn't about "special rights", everyone has a sexual orientation and so EVERYONE is covered by this.
    2) The majority of the people in this state DON'T support your opinion. All of the polling data shows Utahns support these protections.

  • Steve the actuary
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:49 a.m.

    I don't get the utah legislator. They are complaining about the federal government interfering with states rights. Then they want to overturn laws that a city passes. They are doing the exact same thing to cities that they are complaining about the feds doing to them. Hypocrits.

  • @ 8:26
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:49 a.m.

    So, all these hypothetical 5 women are roommates, correct? As their landlord, why are you picking their new roommate? If they are not roommates, what business is it of theirs who is living in a separate unit?

    And this did not happen to your brother because this just barely became the law and the roommate situation is a little different from the general renting situation.

    Also, if your only rental unit is the basement apartment in your house, you are probably safe from this law.

    Come on, people! At least do a little research on what you are objecting to!

  • @Pagan | 9:31 a.m
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:23 a.m.

    What if I thought practicing your religion was immoral? Now you need to live by what I consider is moral.

    BTW, you're fired and you have 3 days to move your furniture out of my property! How does that sound to you?

    Your logic is very flawed.

  • The Root for concern
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:21 a.m.



    the trouble most people have with issues like this isn't the gay thing, it's how the gay thing is used to hide the fact that sometimes bad tenants come in all forms, but when someone's gay, they can say, "You're discriminating!"

    Then the lawsuits start and who really wants to be subjected to that?

    For most people, who are discrete and respectful, this should be a nonissue, regardless of orientation, because sex doesn't factor into the equation.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:10 a.m.

    It's really very simple. If you can serve, why can't someone else?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:03 a.m.

    Being aware of the discrimination you face does not give it justification.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 10:01 a.m.

    'You announce 300 cases of documented discrimination in Salt Lake City, but make no effort to put that into any kind of context. How does it compare to discrimination against Mormons...' - 9:31 a.m.

    There you go again. Trying to change the subject. But no, let's pretend you have a point. Ok, 1) Being mormon is a religion. Factually, it is a choice, right? And yet religion is covered under discrimination in the United States. A person cannot legally fire you for simply being mormon.
    2) This issue is not about mormon rights. Or any other rights. Why should there be a comparison? The established fact by not only the SLC discrimination report is that discrimination does exist towards members of the LGBT community, correct?
    So, not IF it exists but how severe.
    3) Your morality is irrelevant. In my life and in American laws. Only if a person breaks the laws do you get to evict them. Not because of what tv they watch on tuesday.
    4) I doubt your morality is made clear on any lease or work agreement. (i.e. you must be 'X' religion to work here)

    Your only 'fact' is that you discriminate.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:47 a.m.

    Sodom and Gomorrah...here we come!!!

    Did you really just quote a 2000 year old book in comparison to my very now right to have a job?
    Many people consider the bible to be a work of fiction.
    Have you read the good works of harry potter?
    If you can't think of a reason by yourself, don't use other peoples words to justify your blind hate.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:33 a.m.

    There is no implication of inferiority. We are all unique.

    Unique does not mean 'less'. And as such, a gay person if they are not 'less than' someone else should have 'equal too' the same rights and protections you covet.
    Do not try to use the word 'unique' in place of 'less' to try and make your weak point that we are all created equal.
    We are.
    Utah legislature simply needs more 'time' to realize this.
    It's 2010. Time enough has passed.

  • @Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:31 a.m.

    There you go again, with your one-sided display of “facts”. You announce 300 cases of documented discrimination in Salt Lake City, but make no effort to put that into any kind of context. How does it compare to discrimination against Mormons, or women, or fat people? How serious were these cases of discrimination? Pagan doesn’t care. Frankly, I don’t see the masses of desolate and homeless gay people wandering the streets.

    Regardless of your skewed view of reality, gays have all the rights that everyone else has. A person can legally fire you or evict anyone, if they are aware of behavior they consider to be immoral. The fact that many gays do not see their behavior as immoral does mean that their bosses and landlord should be forced to agree. If gays want jobs or apartments, they should live according to the moral behavior their bosses and landlords expect of them — just like everyone else.

  • @@2:00
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:31 a.m.

    " I’ll tell you what Christ would do. He would tell people to be grateful for their multitudes of blessings, talents, abilities, and privileges and not to be concerned about the few privileges that do not apply to them."

    Just like the black people or women. Why did they have to fight for equal rights? Just be happy for their blessings, talents, ablilities, and privileges and do not be concerned about the few privileges that do not apply to them.

    See how horrible that really sounds?

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:28 a.m.

    'You are wrong. Every gay person in Utah has the exact same rights as me.' - 9:16 a.m.

    Ok!

    For this to be comparable, please give, date, time, and place that you were fired for being straight.

    I know I have my example!

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:26 a.m.

    I can't believe that someone is actually equating homosexual rights to freedom of religion. There is no comparison. Our nation had its origins because of freedom of religion.

    Sodom and Gomorrah...here we come!!!

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:19 a.m.

    'This is a huge non-issue, a waste of time.' - 8:55 a.m.

    Spoken like a true heterosexual. You realize you have an orientation, correct?

  • To: Oxi Moron
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:16 a.m.

    You wrote: "There are no rights for Gays in Utah.."

    You are wrong. Every gay person in Utah has the exact same rights as me. What you mean to say is "There are no SPECIAL rights for Gays in Utah." In my opinion, that's the way most of the citizens of this state like it.

    I don't think that makes us bigots. I realize that opinion puts me at odds with most of the pro-special-gay-rights bloggers who flood comment boards like this one with comments like "get with the times", "what would Jesus do", and "giving special rights to our group won't give you less rights".

  • @2:00
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:13 a.m.

    “I can't understand, if you're "born different", you don't get the same privileges as others? So they are less than us? What would the Savior do?”

    What is so hard to understand? Would Christ give a driver’s license to someone born blind? Would he give child-care rights to someone who can’t resist the urge to abuse children? Would Christ demand that amusement parks be forced to redesign their rides so that 800 pound people can ride them too? Would He force museums to include the artwork of people who have no artistic talent? Would he force publishers to publish books from people who were born without writing skills?

    There is no implication of inferiority. We are all unique. Some are born with qualities that others do not have. The good son was not inferior to the prodigal son just because no banquet was offered for him. I’ll tell you what Christ would do. He would tell people to be grateful for their multitudes of blessings, talents, abilities, and privileges and not to be concerned about the few privileges that do not apply to them.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:13 a.m.

    The LDS church actually sides with the gay community on this. Work discrimination and rental discrimination deserve no part in Utah.
    Something our legislature will find out all too painfully with the next roster change.

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:06 a.m.

    'It might be a small issue in Salt Lake, it is a complete non-issue everywhere else.' - 8:55 a.m.

    Don't most other places have these laws in place already? Or does an issue only matter when it affects you?

    If that's the case, then this should pass, shouldn't it?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 9:00 a.m.

    I love the statement, "it's my property so I should be able to do whatever I want on it." Uber-conservatives consistently tout property rights but seem to always forget the responsibilities that are tied with those rights.

    I find it odd that religion is protected though it is obviously a "choice". Even those that argue that being gay is a "choice", we have protected people's "choices" for generations.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:57 a.m.

    Richard Socarides, a Clinton adviser said "Look, we are not second-class citizens and our rights are not second-term problems,". DSNews 01/28/10

  • Coretta Scott King
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:56 a.m.

    "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice," she said. "But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.'" "I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people," Coretta Scott King. - Reuters, March 31, 1998.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:55 a.m.

    This is a huge non-issue, a waste of time. It might be a small issue in Salt Lake, it is a complete non-issue everywhere else. Quit wasting time, get back to work on issues that matter.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:53 a.m.

    Utah, you are a bigot.

  • Hmmm
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:48 a.m.

    You've got to wonder about people who are always so preoccupied with homosexuality as if it's their own personal bogeyman.

  • property owner
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:44 a.m.

    @Anonymous 8:26am:

    I own several properties and never heard something as ridiculous as that. I rent and will continue to rent to openly gay people as well as straight people.

    Most people that I talk to move out because of:
    1. Too small
    2. Too expensive
    4. Buying a house of their own

    Never have I heard that people are moving out because of an openly gay person.

    Quit coming up with your paranoid and hypothetical situations that rarely happen in real life. Its closed minded people like you that give it the perception that its okay to discriminate in the first place.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:39 a.m.

    Where does that leave me as a property owner? I can't discriminate but the other 5 renters will give notice. - 8:26 a.m.

    I doubt all of your hypothetical '5 girls' would care unless the lesbian made unwanted advances too them and didn't stop. And le'ts be real, that happens sometimes regardless of a person's orientation. I can count on hands and feet the times a man has tried to make advances on me because 'I'm a woman.'
    Bottom line, orientation is not an issue unless people make it one. If your renters wanted to leave because someone is gay or lesbian, odds are they were going to give you notice on some other childish reason also.
    You new tennent's not LDS? Left-handed? Has red hair? People will always find new and creative ways to find differences instead of what unifies them. Just like you.
    As a landlord, you should only care if they can pay you...or not.

  • only in Utah
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:38 a.m.

    unbelievable.

    I thought we left the 1960s behind us. Apparently not so in Utah. Catch up to the 21st century, Utah, you can do it.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:37 a.m.

    @ Utah Repent | 7:49 a.m. Feb. 3, 2010
    Oh Pleeeze...
    get off your sanctimony by which you cry foul and hypocracy, when in fact it is you who are lacking in understanding of the underlying debateable facts and issues.
    You, Sir or Madam, should repent and crawl out from behind your impious bleeding heart.

    -------

    The LDS church is on Utah Repent's side, btw. Do you want to fight them too?

    I know who they will back up. Do you?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:35 a.m.

    So, if I fire a mormon would our legislature ask for more time for study?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:34 a.m.

    The girls who live there do not 'need' to live there, correct? They pay you to live there. If your hypothetical lesbian can pay the rent to live there what is the difference?
    As a landlord your primary concern is who CAN pay you the rent and who CANNOT. Or do you give 'discounts' to single women who rent from you?
    Shameful.
    Regardless, just because you own a property does not mean it is sovereign territory that secedes from America. You were able to buy the land because of the state you live in. You were able to buy from the state because of the country you live in. As such you need to adhere to both their laws.
    If you cannot do that, try moving to communist china, and see how much more 'freedom' you have in places where freedom truly is, dictated too you.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:30 a.m.

    Truce? Wouldn't that mean both parties relent to some compromise?
    But our Utah legislature seems to think we should 'study it more' with no end date in sight. Essentially they say 'I don't want to allow it, so I'm going to keep putting it off indefinitely, until it's someone else's problem.'
    This will simply anger not only the gay community but also members (and leaders?) of the LDS church who see work discrimination as something that needs to CHANGE, not something that needs to be enforced.

    Party of 'NO!' meet everyone else.

    Your 'truce' was over when you decided to stall basic civil protections.

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:26 a.m.

    So... If I own a property that rents to, say 6 girls, and there is a vacancy and a lesbian wants to move in and makes it known that she is lesbian. Do the other girls have to live with her even if they don't feel comfortable because I can't discriminate? Where does that leave me as a property owner? I can't discriminate but the other 5 renters will give notice. Then my property is not attractive to others unless they are also lesbian? This happened to my brother by the way. I think we should be allowed to rent to whom we want. We have the freedom of association. And if it is OUR OWN property we should be able to do what we want with it. Stop telling me what to do with my own property!

  • Pagan
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:14 a.m.

    Time for more study?

    The Salt Lake City's discrimination report, not even 7 months old, (came out in July '09) had over 300 cases of documented discrimination in Salt Lake City alone. Do you really think it is 'better' to be a gay/lesbian person outside of SLC in Utah? St. George? Provo?

    I doubt it.

    "As far as I'm concerned, this has nothing to do with gay rights.' - Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem

    I would agree. Because being gay offers zero protections in Utah. Essentailly being gay gives you no rights. No right to discrimination protection at work, none in rental agreements. A person can legally fire you or evict you because of who you date. Not what you do.

    '....recently passed by Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County with the support of the LDS Church.'

    So, the LDS church and the gay community are in agreement that work and housing discrimination due to orientation is wrong.

    And yet our Utah legislature thinks we should do nothing and 'study it more.'

    I have heard enough. I am tired of the constant bait and switch our legislature feeds us.

    Next election, my vote is my voice.

  • LT
    Feb. 3, 2010 8:11 a.m.

    I am deeply offended every time neo-homosexual issues come up, all the verbal batterings against LDS and Utahns flare up again. Do progressive educated individuals not know that there are opposition voices from all persuasions and ideology.

    @6:11 a.m. Feb. 3, 2010,

    Show us the way

  • afriad of reality?
    Feb. 3, 2010 7:55 a.m.

    is it really any shock that the conservatives are nervous about studying the issue since the facts never fall in their favor on the issue of gay rights? if they believe they are right then why fear the study let it move forward.

  • @ Utah Repent
    Feb. 3, 2010 7:49 a.m.

    Oh Pleeeze...
    get off your sanctimony by which you cry foul and hypocracy, when in fact it is you who are lacking in understanding of the underlying debateable facts and issues.
    You, Sir or Madam, should repent and crawl out from behind your impious bleeding heart.

  • Kevin
    Feb. 3, 2010 7:47 a.m.

    "Senate Majority Whip Wayne Niederhauser, R-Sandy, has been working on a resolution reaffirming the traditional family, as has Sen. Stuart Adams, R-Layton."

    ** Oh joy, more fluff. What is with you fluff-heads?


  • Utah Repent
    Feb. 3, 2010 6:11 a.m.

    Once again bigotry and Utah’s spineless politicians decide to postpone making a decision.
    Once again, politicians have decided that “there are more pressing issues” than the protection and equality of all citizens.
    When is Utah going to answer the call of being the light of the nation? Utah, your sin is that you failed to look for justice and fairness for all. You have failed in “denying yourself “and follow the Lord. Just like in antiquity you have allowed the provincial fears and bigotry of an ignorant people to take over your destiny. You are going to be judged by the love you show to the needy and undesirable among you.
    Just like the Pharisees you wrap yourselves in a cloak of faked morality forgetting what is important to the eyes of the Lord. You should repent and rise above your mediocrity.

  • know the law
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:51 a.m.

    Utah Labor Commission website:

    "Utah courts have three general exceptions to the at-will rule: (1) when the termination violates clear and substantial Utah public policy; (2) when an implied or express contractual term requires dismissal only for cause; or (3) a statute or regulation restricts the employer's right to terminate."

    "Utah Code Annotated, Title 34A Chapter 5. The Act prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, and disability. Utah's law also prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, or pregnancy-related conditions."

    And now, in Salt Lake City public policy includes sexual orientation.

    How is this a violation of at-will?

  • Jerry S.
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:31 a.m.

    Big mistake. The legislators know what the majority of Utahns want and posponing the issue will not make us happy come election time. State senators and representatives, do your job or go home.

  • Is bigotry a Utah value?
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:02 a.m.

    All evidence points to YES in my opinion.

  • RichE
    Feb. 3, 2010 5:00 a.m.

    Since the arrangements for the "truce" were done in secret, there is no way for the public, of which all our legislators are supposed to represent, to understand how or why our legislative leaders thought that "doing nothing" (Party of "No"?) was the right thing to do.
    In the absence of any meaningful information, the vast majority of Utahns undoubtedly feel the same way, that is, that it is an election year and none of our 'politicos' want to have their thoughts, feelings and activities visible in the light of day.
    In my opinion, Utah should press ahead with attempting to provide 'common ground' rights to all citizens of Utah, no matter where in the state they might reside.

  • Susan
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:04 a.m.

    You mean they don't have housing and anti-discrimination rights? When we all live in peace?

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 3, 2010 2:00 a.m.

    I can't understand, if you're "born different", you don't get the same privileges as others? So they are less than us? What would the Savior do?

  • Bully on the Hill
    Feb. 3, 2010 1:06 a.m.

    Rep. Sandstrom, don't let Rep. C Johnson bully you into dropping your legislation.

  • Equality Utah
    Feb. 3, 2010 1:04 a.m.

    "We're sticking to the agreement," said Equality Utah executive director Brandie Balken."

    So now Equality Utah is now a member of the Legislature?

  • Bruce
    Feb. 3, 2010 12:45 a.m.

    Good. Most people here in Utah are glad.