@ Pagen | 1:45 p.m. June 21, 2011 (or 'Pagan' or whoever you are) - You claim it is impossible to love the sinner and condemn the sin.My, my....how blind you are.So, I'll say this again: the practice
of homosexuality in any and all forms is wrong. It is evil, immoral, degrading,
damming (progress is stopped) and destructive. All who engage in this lifestyle
will do so to their own eventual sorrow. Your way is not the way of the Savior
of the world; not before, not now and not in the future. And yet what we do can
be separated from who we are, and love received regardless of what we do. How
can you claim to be a Christian and yet not grasp this concept, a concept so
simple that literally even a child can understand it.What your group
refuses to grasp is that just because you believe something is true does not in
and of itself make it true.Again, fight against it at your own
peril.You come on here repeatedly touting the rightness and morality
of your lifestyle and yet continually hide behind a cowardly veil of
anonimity.I will not.
I'm LDS and I love my gay friends and neighbors.
I consider myself to be politically and fiscally conservative. However, I'm not
a fan of Huntsman or Romney,because both have faults. I see nothing wrong with
courting any political grass roots base,of any affiliation by any candidate. I'm extremely biased against any person or group that espouses violence
towards innocents and excuses that violence (in any form) by using gender,
religion, ethnicity or any other miserable excuse.I'm active LDS, not
ashamed of it, and not a Utah native (not ashamed of that either). I find the
culture here in Utah to be completely foreign to me, and find the
"enthusiasm" with which Romney and Huntsman are embraced to be
astounding, while there is such rancor towards Harry Reid. I don't see much of a
difference between Romney, Huntsman or Reid politically. All are unapologetic
opportunists, willing to prostitute themselves on the altar of power, while
throwing pathetic political crumbs to the masses of sheeple foolish enough to
believe anything that comes out of their mouths. yet, all are active LDS.(by
their own admission) I'm liking Ron Paul more and more each day,although I don't
think he's got the charisma enough to win.
@ coleman51 | 10:48 p.m Thanks for clarifying that. I didn't mean to suggest
the Church condones homosexuality. I take it for granted that most people
understand the Church does not approve of any promiscuity whatsoever outside of
marriage (between a man and a woman). But I disagree with you that supporting
the concept of civil unions from a legal point of view is contrary to the Church
position. Again If anyone can show me where I'm wrong (and Huntsman is wrong)
I'd like to be corrected.
A voice of Reason, you've got it backward. Marriage is a civil contract allowed
to be officiated by religious leaders. Without the State recognition, there is
no marriage. Religious or non-religious alike can have marriage, with or without
the involvement of a church.
In case there is any confusion about how the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints feels about civil unions or homosexual relations in general,
any member who engages in homosexual relations falls under serious
transgressions and is subject to formal Church discipline. If he/she has made
temple covenants which have been violated by homosexual relations, they are
facing the possibility of excommunication. I cannot see how Jon Huntsman's
position on civil unions in any way is consistent with the Church he belongs to.
A gay Republican really is an oxymoron. The party does not want you. They are
embarrassed by you, and they are afraid of you. I invite any person who
considers himself or herself to be a gay or lesbian Republican to consider
joining the Libertarian Party.
@dumprake"Mormons will not get Huntsman, or anyone else
elected, they are an insignificant, fringe group who get publicity far beyond
their significance."See how that works?
@jnewbyfrankly who cares if they can or cannot "control" their
desire. There is no legitimate reason they should have to even if they
can/could. its frankly no one else's business.
Romney supports a constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between
one man and one woman. Huntsman supports civil unions. Which position does
anyone with a clear mind believe the LDS church supports and the vast majority
of Republican primary voters?
Question for UtahnsAre these statements true about John Huntsman? The states budget deficit increased dramatically during his tenure: In
fiscal year 2003, two years before Huntsman took over as governor, the state of
Utah had a $173 million budget deficit, In fiscal year 2009, Utah was forced to
rely on rainy day funds and federal stimulus dollars to close a $1 billion
budget gap.He supports a flat tax, and instituted one in Utah: The
Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that, while the poorest 20
percent of Utahns paid a 9 percent of their income in taxes, while the richest
one percent paid just just 4.9 percent of theirs.He supports
slashing corporate taxes, and tried to eliminate them completely in Utah: The
policy would have cost the state at least $200 million in revenue.He
would end Medicare as we know it: Huntsman didnt hesitate to endorse the House
GOPs budget plan.He supports a radical Balanced Budget Amendment.
The BBA would prevent the government from running deficits when deficits are
necessary, such as during deep recessions.
While I don't claim to be an expert in the mind of a gay person, I do believe
that many can control their desire to be gay if the elect to do so. That would
explain why we have many ex-gays and ex-gay support groups as well who have
found happiness without the gay lifestyle.Much like a straight
person may be tempted to cheat with an attraction towards a member of the
opposite sex, they can either choose to succumb to the temptation or turn and
walk away. To say otherwise is saying we have no control over over carnal
desires and I'm not sure I can buy into that.
Good for Jon. All Americans deserve to be treated with dignity, and deserve to
be as much a part of the electoral process as they wish. Marginilization of any
class of people is not the American way.
"They are enamored with the very idea that there is a politically prominent
Mormon who disagrees with his Church on the subject."How does
Huntsman disagree with his Church? From what I've heard he favors civil unions
but not re-defining marriage. Happens to be my position and if that departs
from the Church's statements I'd like to know.From what I've heard
so far I find Huntsman a sensible candidate.
Huntsman is not going to get the nomination of the Republican Party precisely
because he "supports homosexuals". (As mentioned by Rifleman
above.)He is, however, going to continue to receive favorable media
coverage - out-sized to his ultimate chances for nomination - precisely because
the press, as a whole "supports homosexuals" as well.They
are enamored with the very idea that there is a politically prominent Mormon who
disagrees with his Church on the subject.Their fascination with
Huntsman will, of course, wane once the nomination is decided.I
still think Huntsman is really running for VP .... on Obama's ticket.
I am LDS. State-recognition of any kind of marriage is a non-obligatory luxury
and not an essential right to living freely. State-recognition does nothing to
affect an individuals personal freedom. The LDS Church has given fair, friendly,
kind and loving, logical support for its decisions and had a violent, hateful,
and purely intolerant response in return.Those who really want
truth, listen. Those who want to party their life away, doing whatever they
want... they don't listen. I understand that it is easy to go that direction...
but there is no fruit, reward, or happiness in it's end.
hey has anybody seen Ross Perot latley ? cuz hes funny to ! I liked all his
stories about the chicken man and the potato chip man. anybody running for
political office will seek support from any group that they think will help them
get elected. absolutly nothing new here
Rifleman | 3:54 p.m. June 21, 2011 Salt Lake City, Utah Re:
Pagan/PagenHuntsman isn't going to get the nomination and so there's
no need worrying about whether or not he supports homosexuals. Its a moot issue.
================= You have a shallow understanding of
politics.Huntsman will carry the heavily populated Moderates and
Independants.The Reagan BIG tent Republican.Even if he doesn't
win the Presidental nomination, only a fool would not consider him [and all his
BIG Tent support, not to mention Inter-National diplomatic experience with the
World's largest economy] as hands-down the best V.P. addition to the GOP
ticket.Win-Win.Hunstman is one sly fox.
Just a suggestion to you, Jon. If you want significant support from the LGBT
community, you might want to run as a Democrat. That's how the vast majority of
them will vote.
So much for Huntsman trying to appeal to conservatives. I guess he is going
after Obama's base.I still say Huntsman has a better chance of
getting the Democrat nomination.He is a RINO at best, and a liberal
disguising himself as a Repblican at worst.
Romney and Hunstman, like McCain, are liberals in conservative clothing. They
appeal primarily to the liberal voter. If the Republican party nominates either
of these two men, Obama will win. These two should really be running as
Democrats. As such, they have a chance of beating Obama in the primaries. What
they, and their supporters, fail to realize is that the liberal segment of
America will vote for Obama unless he is defeated in the primaries. If
Republicans are to win the Whitehouse, they must nominate a true Republican --
one whose values, history, and behavior solidly mirror the traditional
Republican party platform and values. Neither Romney nor Huntsman fit that
dumprake | 10:09 a.m. June 21, 2011 Washington, UT Gays will not get
Huntsman, or anyone else elected, they are an insignificant, fringe group who
get publicity far beyond their significance. ================= What a bigotted statement there dumprake.If it is true, it would
apply thus:[MORMONS, Blacks, Hispanics, the elderly, the Jews, ect.]
will not get Huntsman, or anyone else elected, they are an insignificant, fringe
group who get publicity far beyond their significance. So how that
We are all sinners. To say that we are all perfect is stupid. I love my child no
matter what. THAT is the very definition of unconditional love.
As you exercise your American franchise to vote, voice out and choose our
leaders you help perpetuate the American dream. You are free to vote for and
support any candidate of your choice. In addition, you may show your
displeasure and non-support for any candidate that you disagree with. The many
problems we all face is evaluating how much we agree with or disagree with a
particular candidate given the limited amount of data and information made
available to us to make a decision with. Collect positional information on
policies, past practices, positions on issues, and try to avoid decisions on
commercials and bumper sticker statements like Hope and Change. Study and yes
even pray about your vote.
@dumprake So gays make up roughly the same percentage of the population as
people that are LDS that also get a lot of publicity and are (also unfairly)
considered nothing but a fringe group by many people. So I have to ask do you
apply the same logic to LDS people or just those small groups you do to agree
with? The point is even if a group (LDS or LGBT or...) only make up a small part
of society they have the right to have their voice heard.
Re: Pagan/PagenHuntsman isn't going to get the nomination and so
there's no need worrying about whether or not he supports homosexuals. Its a
@Pagen, can you not love your child but hate some of his/her sins? Thats not
being hypocritical - its being honest and having an unconditional love.
Sorrow of the damned, (progress-stopped), is that they do not sorrow for their
sins, only that they cannot sin and still have God's approval...GLBT cause is
just wrong...they play on the sympathy of people for their plight, in a pure act
of sophestry to get support. If Huntsman gives in to that sympathetic
sophestry, he shows a weakness our President should not have. We love the
people, but abhor the sin. We do not give in to the ways of sin, nor seek to
accomodate those ways.
'So you find fault with the HRC, Equality Utah, Get equal, GLAA, etc?' - Counter
Intelligence | 12:07 p.m. Are they acknowledging homosexuality and
trying to paint it in a positive light? Trying to get the LGBT equal rights, or
none at all? I know where my support lies. It belongs
with those who are not ashamed of what they are. And do not try to
keep 'religion' out of something that has had over 1000 legal goverment
protections they covet... since around the 1960's. That
is an evident, double standard. Your not even TRYING to rebute my
points about what Obama has accomplished. Only that those groups are trying to
promote equality, like PFLAG are 'bad' because they say 'gay.' I
doubt you are truly gay CI, though of course I have no way to prove it one way
or another. Perhaps you are simply pretending to be a LGBT person to
try and villify them? Lies to try and villify opposition have been
used before... An example: *'3 sent to prison in beating
of DJ Bell, another sentenced to jail' - By Emiley Morgan - Published by DSNews
Huntsman won't even be top two canidate, he will lose to Romney and Paul
"Gays will not get Huntsman, or anyone else elected, they are an
insignificant, fringe group who get publicity far beyond their
significance."Such a politically illiterate statement. Follow.
I am strait, dont discriminate, and patriotic. I believe in equal rights not
special rights. Ron Paul is getting my vote no matter what. If a gay man wants
to marry his boyfriend I have no problem with it. Just leave my religious
beliefs alone and I leave you alone. Keep government out of it. Democrats and
Republicans have wasted too many of our tax dollars over this issue. I choose
Libertarian and I choose freedom.
'Whereas heterosexuals produce children, then spend most of their time, money
and energy raising their children, homosexuals have no children on which to
spend their resources.' - sjgf | 10:29 a.m. What a horrible and
general comparison. Should I say that Mormons 'only make babies?'
Both would be incorrect. You have not been paying attention. According to the Child Welfare Information Gateway, between 8 and 10
million children are being raised by gay parents. *'Lesbian Utah
legislator carrying baby for gay couple' - SLtribune - 01/08/10'...Rep. Christine Johnson, D-Salt Lake, at her home on Friday, is 16 weeks
pregnant. Johnson is acting as a surrogate for a gay Salt Lake County couple,
her close friends, after they expressed frustration with the difficulty of
adopting a child in Utah.' *'Single mothers less accepted than gay
parents, report says' - By Marjorie Cortez - DSNews - 03/17/11
"In most ways, the accumulated research shows, children of same-sex parents
are not markedly different from those of heterosexual parents." - AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS (AAP) - 'Coparent or Second-Parent
Adoption by Same-Sex Parents' - POLICY STATEMENT - PEDIATRICS Vol. 109 No. 2
February 2002, pp. 339-340 - Pulished: 02/01/10
I fail to see how this Demo in Republican clothing is good for anyone. I am
tired of the two faced John McCain type politicians. We need someone to save
the economy, reduce the deficit, restore our Constitutional rights stolen by the
Courts, and enforce the issue of unalienable rights coming from God and not the
government. Even my liberal friends in Taos, NM are talking about the rights
coming from our creator and not selectively given by the government...No to
'Gays will not get Huntsman, or anyone else elected...' - dumprake | 10:09
a.m. Tell that to Obama 2008.
@dumprake:While gays may be insignificant in their numbers, they
have a lot of time and money.Whereas heterosexuals produce children,
then spend most of their time, money and energy raising their children,
homosexuals have no children on which to spend their resources. They are able to
spend the time and money on their cause that heterosexuals spend on raising
families. As a result, they have a very loud voice in the public arena that
heterosexuals cannot afford.
After weeks of pro-Romney novellas in the Deseret News, the headline "Jon
Huntsman Jr. seeks support from Gays" is posted minutes after Huntsman
formally announces his Presidential Campaign?Wow. Subtle.
I am homosexual. I use the term gay because it represents who I am and I
find fault with others who try to associate it with political baggage. Huntsman is a good canidate. But I cannot see his actions supporting the LGBT
community. Whereas the incumbant, Obama has:
*..ordered the Pentagon study, which supported repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't
Tell', (Dec '10) *allowed sexual orientation to be covered under Hate
Crime legislation, *Signed the extention of the Ryan White Treatment bill
for HIV for gay AND straight Americans in 2009, *Allowed the State
Department of offer same-sex benefits for employees (2009) As I
said, Huntsman is a good canidate, but when a side-by-side comparison is done
Obama has simply done more for the LGBT vote than any other president to date.
Let alone Huntsman. Huntsman should run for Hatch's
seat, and run again in 2016. Heck, even EYE would vote for him then.
Until such time, Obama has run the office of the President better than any of
the GOP contenders. *'Poll: Less than half of GOP primary voters
satisfied with 2012 field' - By Mark Murray - NBC News - 06/15/11
Gays will not get Huntsman, or anyone else elected, they are an insignificant,
fringe group who get publicity far beyond their significance.