Comments about ‘Liquor suit seeks to muzzle LDS Church’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Nov. 1 2011 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
disrupt the status
Salt Lake City, Utah

If it bothers you so much, why don't they move to nevada?

Magna, UT

There is a reason we have liquor laws - liquor makes people dangerous. My neighbors little girl was shot and killed right in front of my house by a youth who was drunk and playing with a rifle. Never mind drunk driving! We need more strict laws to protect all of us people from these people, not less!

Salt Lake City, UT

Of course, let the liquor lobby use their influence, but muzzle MADD, parent-teacher groups and the LDS church. What could be more fair then that?

Sacramento, CA

Mayhem Mike, this is primarily and LDS newspaper, but not dedicated to any particular readership. I've been reading it for a few years now, am LDS, most certainly not conservative--or rarely so--as you could infer from my posts. If you're offended because I'm reading it anyway, perhaps your offense level is set too low--just a suggestion here, but maybe it needs to be raised a bit. I hope the readers of this paper will continue to be the varied and interesting group who show up on these boards--including you--because that's why I read the articles and the comments.

Salt Lake City, UT

"My neighbors little girl was shot and killed right in front of my house by a youth who was drunk and playing with a rifle."

That heartbreaking example raises an interesting dynamic because it involves two things...
1. alcohol - liberals/libertarians want more freedom to be able to access it while conservatives believe it should be regulated
2. firearms - liberals want those to be more regulated, conservatives/libertarians want those to be readily available

So which is it, was the child a victim of lax rules on alcohol? Lax rules on firearms? Lax rules on both? Or should you blame the person in which case you shouldn't blame alcohol or guns?

I have a feeling a lot of people have inconsistent stances as to whether they consider people innocent victims of alcohol or innocent victims of firearms.

casual observer
Salt Lake City, UT

Every community has the right and responsibility to regulate alcohol consumption. Community stake holders in commerce, public health, education and faith-based organizations need to input before laws are passed. We ban those under 21 years of age from buying alcohol because various societies (Community standards are different in various locales, e.g. Nevada has only two counties that outlaw prostitution.) have mandated it. Because the LDS legislators have specific views does not invalidate their perspective in formulating regulations. Liquor lobbyists should not have unbalanced influence in legislative matters.

Lehi, UT

In Nevada, if the casino industry doesn't approve of certain legislation, will it not have an uphill battle? Won't the legislators consult with that industry before trying to craft a bill? This happens all the time throughout the US. Major players in each state are consulted. If you want to pass a bill, you need to get buy in from those players. In Utah, the LDS Church is a major player. If a legislator wants to ignore that, then they risk losing the vote of LDS people.

Sacramento, CA

"The Church" I assume, refers here to the people who lead it, not the LDS Church as a body. That would be people in a lot of places besides Utah, with government decisions more immediately important to their own lives, don't you think? I would immagine that, however, since the leaders live in Utah and are her citizens, they have a right as voters to say something and the ability to make themselves heard, not to mention the verbal talent of making themselves understood and the intelligence of knowledge of the facts to support their position. This is known as being able to make a logical argument for one's opinion. It's something my junior history teacher in high school taught us: it's not what side you take that counts, but whether you have the facts to back up your opinion. If other groups disagree, let them say so just as succinctly and in as logical a manner, so that we have groups with facts, not emotions, speaking their truths. I have family in Utah, and, having lived there and enjoyed my time there, wish to see this done in an adult manner.

Lehi, UT

Just read liquor laws by State, and Utah wasnt listed among the best (most stringent). So if Mormons cant speak on this because they are religious, hopefully they allow MADD or some other organization to help slow those seeking gain (for life?).

Those arguing that "we cant legislate morality, cant tell us what to smoke, who to marry (number, age, gender), how to drive, not to steal, lie, or murder (ten commandments violate our right of separation) often also argue that "we CAN tell you who to marry and what property the religious may buy, and that you may scream hatred at Mormons and disrupt weddings but Mormons cant speak freely on issues, or even read from pioneer journals on the Mormon trail (because the journals dont contain the approved regime version of history); and no Christmas trees (even Egypt allows Christmas in parks etc) or crosses for public servants (Arlington cemetery next?) and religious people should pipe down or we'll tax you more (take provisions you give to the poor and donate to foreign banks, CEO bonuses, and our big controlling government (so they can afford to promote homosexuality by marriage)... : ) : ) funny but unfair logic ; )

Bountiful, UT

ToBeReadOutLoud: You say the Church should be able to say what they want as soon as they start paying taxes. Well, we Mormons do pay taxes on the same tax rate schedule everyone else does. So, I guess we Mormons have a right to say what we want. Right?

Just remember this: The Church has no voice of its own. Its voice comes from the unified belief sustained by all its taxed members.

Park City, Ut

Yea alcohol is bad, very bad. Drunk people killing other people! Just like people with guns killing other people! Take those away right? Yea... if you want to point at a drug that does 10 times more harm than alcohol, about 100 times more harm than marijuana, then look no further than Utah's most popular narcotic of choice, one that knows no religious or cultural boundaries, it's called prescription drugs! You want to ban a substance that does more harm than alcohol, ban them! But that would be crazy, why punish the people who use pain meds as prescribed, right?!? Can we assume that some do use the drugs as they should? Can we make the same assumption about all narcotics? Some cliche's come to mind, babies and bathwater, and sledge hammers.

The Deuce
Livermore, CA

Interesting set of comments here. Some cry "free agency" but forget that agency requires responsibility to work correctly. Yes, people should have the opportunity to exercise their agency. When they use that agency incorrectly and that results in harm to others, then you have taken that agency too far. You do not have to be a member of the LDS faith to recognize the issues with over consumption of alcohol. I am not a member of this faith but feel that alcohol sales should be regulated. The more drunks you can keep off the road the better. This is not a hard topic to understand. Please don't confuse agency with freedom. The more agency you have the more responsible you should be.

Beaverton, OR

There is a difference between individual tax-paying Mormons having their say at the ballot box, and the 'Church' politicking for a certain side of an issue, in actual Sacrament meetings, as was the case with Prop 8.

Sure, they can make a statement about an issue. But that's where it needs to end. No legislating, no funding legislation. If they want to be an active political player, they need their tax exempt status stripped.

Beaverton, OR

DSB | 10:16 p.m. Nov. 1, 2011
Cedar Hills, UT

...although Beaverton was indeed a nice suburb of Portland, the liberal laws forcing everyone to live among the lowest legal standards of humanity certainly created a very unfavorable climate in many areas for family-oriented people.


Really? 'The lowest legal standards of humanity'? Daily drink specials at some restaurant constitutes 'the lowest legal standards of humanity'? The many LDS Church members who live here in Beaverton would probably disagree with you. I certainly do.

You also wrote, "...if an unrestrained proliferation of strip clubs, pornography stores, and available liquor is your vision of ideal community standards, you should vote to make sure they remain legal and plentiful in your community."

Again, Beaverton, my community, is not teeming with 'an unrestrained proliferation of strip clubs, pornography stores, and available liquor(?)', and no, that would not be my vision of an ideal community.

Utah doesn't have a monopoly on 'wholesome' communities. And I'd question anyone who broadly painted their community as entirely 'wholesome', anyway.

Doesn't Utah have the highest rate of online porn subscriptions?

Aren't antidepressants prescribed in Utah more often than in any other state?

Saratoga, UT

"little separation of church and state"

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,..."

One word for this idiotic lawsuit....REALLY?


I think it pretty obvious most people on this board are for the current laws and want the LDS church to lobby in their favor. Do you people even know what would happen if we allowed bars to set their own prices or allow more bars? What if we allowed the private companies to run liquor stores? Do you really think we would be worse off. I know alcohol is an inconvenience for most of you and most of you would rather see it gone. If you call yourself a true Conservative that believes in limited government you're a complete hypocrite if you believe in government run liquor stores. Most of you aren't true conservatives and you love to regulate social issues.

On another note is you believe the word of wisdom never said you can't drink beer you are ignorant.

The revelation suggests that barley-based mild drinks (such as beer) may be permissible. As recently as 1901, Apostles Brigham Young, Jr. and John Henry Smith argued that the revelation did not prohibit beer. However, LDS Church leaders now teach that consumption of any form of alcohol, including beer, violates the Word of Wisdom

Lehi, UT

@als Atheist,

You are the one that is showing his ignorance and lack of logic. I was using the insane ideas to showcase the fact that you do not have to participate in an activity to have a vested interest in allowing or prohibiting that activity. I don't ski but that shouldn't exclude me from the political process if a bill were introduced that would affect the ski resorts. Free speech is guaranteed to all!

Shelley, ID

There has been alcoholism in my family. It is a tough addiction to overcome. Alcoholism splits up families, those drinking have no logic and do illogical things. There are BEHAVIORAL laws regarding alcohol - why not educate more about alcohol as well as determining, for the good of families and the community, what amount of alcohol consumption is allowable? By the records and experiences of those affected, there should BE no alcohol. really, what earthly good is it? It wasn't good for my family. But I digress - this isn't about allowing alcohol - this is a lawsuit to silence a Church voice who speaks on behalf of families like mine - the less alcohol (or none) the better for all. Thank you, LDS church, for being a voice of reason.

Albuquerque, NM

In my experience Utah already has some of the worst drivers I have ever encountered anywhere and there have been some horrendous accidents along the Wasatch front. Imagine how much worse it would be with more alcohol consumption! Why would anyone oppose the LDS church concerns?

Draper, UT

The Church in Utah will NEVER butt out of the law making process in Utah, be they laws about liqour or be they about the height of the trees lining state street. The Church is so entrenched that they only need to whisper and the entire Legislature will feel the gust. What is more importamnt is to remove the Church's tax free status. Then they can openly meddle all they want, they do it anyway.

to comment

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