Comments about ‘LDS, Catholics must defend religious freedom, cardinal says at BYU’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 24 2010 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
re -- Jmo | 2:43 p.m

["Does the name Carrie Prejean ring a bell. She got ridiculed because she stated her religious beliefs in a public venue"]

well that's the other side of the coin of free speech. no one took away her rights to free speech. but if you think you can say offensive things and have no repercussions, you are obviously wrong.

look at tv and radio personalities that say something wrong, or Mel Gibson's tirade. they all suffered consequences.

you people's problem is you want to insult and remove rights from a large group of people (250 million worldwide) and then want to have no backlash. well sorry - it doesn't work that way.

how is it you don't get that? and how is that an "attack" on your religious freedoms?


The alliance of LDS with Catholics seems to IGNORE, you folks detested one another for almost ALL of LDS History. The really putrid stuff you'd write about one another, is well documented. Trying to look all BFFs, I think is a laugh riot.
When you two religions carve up all other American's Rights, in the end Catholics will turn on YOU. You seriously are no match for 1/3rd of American Catholics or the Vatican.


TO ---- re; He is Confused | 2:02 p.m. | 2:45 p.m.

["Actually the use of tax codes to control speech is a perfect example of religous intolerance. The current prohibition of political speech was slipped into law by LBJ as part of an effort to silence non-profits who dared oppose him. Of course if MLK uses the pulpit for politcal speech - that will be overlooked and he will be honored with a holiday"]

MLK did not preach eligion - he spoke of civil rights for everyone (including gays). and the tax codes were changed to simply reflect that if you take public money you have to serve the entire public. don't use tax money from gays and then not serve gays.

i don't think there is ANY reason at all for churches to have a tax-exempt status.

but you are right - taxes can be used to stifle "unwanted" activities. they (and you) are doing it to me all the time (I smoke). but it's ok for you to do it to me, because you don't approve of me - but it's not ok to do it to you?

why are you special?


Your argument is STUPID.
NO gay or lesbian could sue a religion to marry them...NONE.
So stop this nonsense scare tactic, no one believes it BUT YOU.
Just as a Jehovah Witness or buddhist can't sue the LDS or Catholics to marry them, or vice versa, no religion is being forced anywhere in America to marry ANYONE they disagree with.

re --- Beth | 2:54 p.m

["anyone demanding revoking tax-exempt status for that sole reason is indeed trying to strip away some rights. You don't have to like what I say, but I have a right to say it free of government sanctions"]

agreed. but I for one see NO reason for churches to have a tax-exempt status. it has nothing to do with your "position" on things - I just don't see why you should have it. Country clubs and those types of organizations don't have it - why should you? (I see no difference between a religion and any other "club".)

nearly 70 million catholic in US

And for nearly 40 years abortion has been legal in the USA which goes to show many religious people are pro choice. Religions have a right to have opinion on abortion, but when it comes to putting a woman in jail for it, I don't know any religion that has said she should go to jail. So in my view abortion is wrong, but how do we punish for something that is a personal medical procedure. Having said that I do believe there are many subtle attacks on biblical virtues at university level as well as in world of science which makes corporations money so in many ways science is god of this world. On other hand, I oppose religious extremists who want to outlaw birth control and divorce if they can.

re --- JJ | 3:27 p.m

["It is unfair for those without religion to dismiss religious individuals from their jobs (yes, this has happened) simply because of their political beliefs. The fact that their political beliefs are influenced by religion should not be an excuse for others to attack religion."]

and yet you all have no problem firing or evicting gays, who don't even express anything. they just want to live their lives.

seems hypocritical, no?


I felt the spirit when he was talking. I think I am going to investigate the Catholic religion.


Funny how the religious types are always looking for boogeymen - to rally the faithful and fill the tithing coffers. There is no assault against religion in the US. Laughable.

re -- GW | 4:02 p.m

["There is a few who have no moral obligation to behave to any standard of behavior,and regard sacred things as stupid or " getting in the way of their civil rights" want to take away our religious freedom in order for them to justify their secular progressive belief system"]

what? non-religious people have no standards of behavior?

wow. therein lies the problem Religious people think they corner the market on "morality" and so all the heretics and apostates have to be forced to conform or God will come down and smite us all...

(and don't act like that is not how you think. that is exactly how many of you look at this issue.)

re -- Anonymous | 3:58 p.m

["Maybe, instead of unbelievers attacking those that believe. They should use that energy and help create jobs for the economy, rather than attacking what someone believes or how they want to worship."]

yeah. and imagine how much good you all could have done witht he millions you spent trying to keep a minority from getting married...

do you even think about what you are saying? both sides spent money and energy. one side was trying to preserve the rights of a minority and one side was trying to take rights away from a minority...

gee - I wonder which one is right?


"Some companies won't do business with anyone from Utah on the off chance that A Mormon might work there."

Well, a lot of companies won't do business with Utah companies on the off-chance that they employ Utahns who were educated by the inferior school system in Utah.

Concerned Christian

I am happy to see the Catholic and LDS Church's lining up behind the original intent of the United States Constitution. We are under attack from the socialists, commies and secularists and we must recognize it and defeat them.


If religious leaders sense that religion is under attack, what reason would there be to deny it? Are supposed to believe they make it up?

I am not free to sing Christian music in publicly funded places. I am not free to pray out loud in publicly funded places. I am not free to teach my religious beliefs in publicly funded places. I am not free to decorate publicly funded places with religious artwork or religious inspiring words. I am not free to watch all the channels on my own TV set or to surf the internet without the most basic of my Christian values being assaulted. I am not free to financially support laws that coincide with my beliefs without worrying about repercussions. I am not free to run for office without my religion becoming an issue. I am not free to create laws in the pursuit of my own happiness without being accused of intolerance. I am not free to attend large religious assemblies without my beliefs being assaulted by protesters.


don't you just love the twisted logic of this author? "when they tell us we can't stop gays from marrying, they infringe on our religious freedom right to control the lives of others". "I know they're not trying to force me or anyone I know into a gay marriage or gay lifestyle. but still, what kind of a good Christian am I if I don't try to legislate my values onto others?".

to -- RE: Freedom | 4:06 p.m.

["You would take away my freedom and use my tax dollars to pay for abortions against my will, thus taking away my freedom."]

how is using your tax dollars (and mine) to pay for abortions "taking away your freedoms"?

you all don't even understand the word "freedoms".

and THAT is why you are so against gay marriage. because you have a strange view of "freedoms". you think if you don't like it or don't approve of it, and it is allowed, you are losing "freedoms".

at this point, i'm at a loss for words. your definition of "freedoms" is too obscure for me to even relate to.

Mind your own business

If I want missionaries to visit my domicile, then I will request the visit.
Otherwise I'll view the intrusion as pure, unadulterated proselytism and extremely rude behavior to boot.
Learn some manners.

@L L Edmiston | 4:31 p.m.

I don't know what you're talking about concerning E-Harmony, so I will not comment on it.

As to the Boy Scouts and the Catholic adoption agencies -- nobody tried to make either change their policies or beliefs; the only issue was whether they could receive public money and still discriminate. If they wanted to, they could continue to discriminate all they wanted ... they just had to do so on their own dime. And that's the way it SHOULD be.


re: Henry Drummond | 2:46 p.m. Feb. 23, 2010

"When anyone wishes to step into politics and try to legislate their view of the world people are going to have their say."

And thus Org Religions perceive the blowback as being attacked which allows them to play oppressee which they have made an artform 5 or so yrs.


re: jeff | 4:26 p.m. Feb. 23, 2010

Exactly. Life, liberty, & the pursuit of happiness.
So long as you don't impede the rights of another.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments