Comments about ‘Prop. 8 declared unconstitutional by 9th Circuit Court; stay prevents same-sex marriages from resuming’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 7 2012 11:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Salt Lake City, UT

2-1 decision... we could've guessed it'd go that way months ago.

Church member
North Salt Lake, UT

This is awesome news. Allowing them to marry will not hurt anyone. I believe in free agency. People should be able to choose to live their lives the way they want (as long as they don't harm anyone).

Brother Chuck Schroeder
A Tropical Paradise USA, FL

I still say "Family First", and ban all gay marriage.

Congress could of repealed California's Proposition 8 ?. Why didn't they then?. What were the GOP waiting for?.

Now the Federal appeals court declares California's Proposition 8 unconstitutional. A federal appeals court Tuesday struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage, clearing the way for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on gay marriage as early as next year. Prop 8 Overturned, February 7, 2012 The 2-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that limited marriage to one man and one woman, violated the U.S. Constitution. Opponents of same-sex marriage have promised to appeal to the US Supreme Court.

If prop 19 in California is passed, can the federal government repeal the law? Sorry Ron Paul, California's Proposition 19 which would legalize the personal growth, use, and distribution of marijuana appears to have gone up in smoke.


Before you all start posting nonsense about the "will of the majority" and the voice of the people, please get an education about this country and its judicial, legislative, and executive laws.

The United States of America is NOT governed by majority rule; if it were, schools would never have been desegregated in the south thanks to Brown v. Board of Education as the MAJORITY of residents in those school districts supported segregation.

Our Constitution requires the rights of the minority be balanced with the will of the majority. So while the voice of the majority can play a role, it cannot be the only consideration when determining others' rights.

Whether legally marrying the sole adult individual you love is a right or not is more reasonable a debate; but the "voice of the majority" argument is nonsense in this context.

Salt Lake City, Utah

And is it any wonder that people don't respect the judiciary?

Salt Lake City, UT


First gay marriage is allowed in California. 18,000 same-gender couples get married.

Then, Prop 8 passes with voter majoirty. 52% for, 47% against. A majority of...


Then, former federal judge walker rules Prop 8 unconstitutional.

His ruling, is supported:

**'Judge's Prop. 8 ruling upheld' - By Lisa Leff - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/14/11

'...ruling that struck down California's same-sex marriage ban...' - article

Also, Walkers orientation is noted as not an impact in his 136 page oringinal ruling against Prop 8. Supported by, Judge Ware.

**'Judge Ware Denies Motion To Vacate Decision Overturning Prop 8' - By Barry Deutsch - Family Scholars - 06/14/11

This, and even the 'Defense of Marriage Act' is failing in courts:

**'Gay marriage wins rulings in pair of federal challenges' - By Denise Lavoie - AP - Published by DSNews - 07/08/10

Popular support, favors gay marriage:

**'Gallup Poll: Majority of Americans support gay marriage' - By Elizabeth Stuart - DSNews - 05/20/2011

Washington state passes gay marriage through it's Senate and needs to vote in the House...

6 other states allow gay marriage. With MA still having one of the lowest divorce rates...

and, this.

I choose, the right side of history.

Sylmar, CA

wow. way to freak out all the religious people. this should be fun to watch...

USS Enterprise, UT

Where does the US constitution say anything about marriage?

I know that the constitution says that if it isn't specifically mentioned in the US constitution, that the rights are left to the states and people. The state decided that Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Please tell us what part of the constitution was violated.

Salt Lake City, UT

Though not gay myself, I have had a number of gay friends. Uniformly they are good people. To deprive them of the institution of marriage is to condemn them to half a life. Remember, equal protection under the law. Of course, this is going to end up before the supreme court. I predict gay marriage will be an extablished fact within 5 years, like it or not (I do understand why various religions cannot accept this - it's going to be tough on them).

Hayden, ID

The 9th circuit court is the most overturned, liberal excuse for a court in the world.Newt Gingrich has promised to disband this mockery of justice and I urge all Americans to vote for Newt to reign in the usurped power of this rediculous "court".

Park City, Ut

OH NO the world is going to end! Right? I mean this was important right? We didn't want Gays to mary because... because...?

Salt Lake City, UT

'The state decided that Marriage is between a man and a woman.
Please tell us what part of the constitution was violated.' - RedShirt | 11:47 a.m. Feb. 7, 2012

1st, many states scrambled to factually CHANGE thier state constution when gay marriage was 1st allowed in MA in 2004.

My example?

The state of Utah. Amendment 3. Passed in 2004 it factually CHANGED the vergabe of people allowed in marriage TOO 'one man and one woman' FROM...

'two people.'

So, the very people who claim to want to DEFEND to constitution....changed it.

2nd, the constitution is constantaly refferenced as a 'living document'. i.e. it can change to reflect our views of an American citizen.

I support this as:

The consitution did NOT mention 'slaves' as equal people. Or make the claim that they were worthy of legal protections and rights of the average American citizen.

i.e. Our black American citizens of today.

Today, it is my hope, we know better.

Tooele, UT

Whenever a legal opinion is based on granting or denying "dignity" -- a word that doesn't even appear in the Constitution or Bill of Rights -- you know it will be quickly overturned, probably in the en banc review that will occur in the Ninth Circus, but for sure at the Supreme Court.

Mom of 2
Eagle Mountain, UT

This is great news. Nobody is forcing churches to recognize gay marriage, but legally it should be available. How is it going to hurt MY marriage if Bob and Joe down the block want to get married? I ask that all the time and nobody can ever answer.

Brother Chuck Schroeder
A Tropical Paradise USA, FL

Has the 9th Circuit Court read this?. Ban all same sex marriage in America. "The Family." A Proclamation to the World. The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God's commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

Magna, UT

This 2-3 split was a sure bet months ago when the panel members were decided. But Judge Smiths dissent is fascinating and not surprisingly reads like the Proclamation on the Family. It's obvious he realized how weak the original arguments by the Prop 8 supporters were, so he has gone waaaaay outside the case to try to give it some legitimacy before it goes en banc or up to the Supreme Court.
His LDS roots, his valentines to Scalia, and his add ons to the case will probably get more scrutiny than the panels actual decision.

Portland, Oregon

This isn't surprising. While Latter-Day Saints might view this as an assault upon marriage, we must remember that freedom of choice must allow every one to make his or her own choices and we cannot force our beliefs regarding such decisions on any other person or group by legislation or ballot. So long as marriage outside the Church is simply a legal contract, it must be available to all who are legally qualified and able to enter into such a contract. People inherently recognize truth, but often due to prejudices or spiritual darkness will attempt to create something similar to a true ordinance as a mockery and affront to God. We must not contend with evil, but through living the Gospel, demonstrate that living according to God's will bears fruit that is eternal and everlasting. And by their fruit ye shall know those who follow Christ and those who do not.


Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal and eternal identity and purpose...Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God. I believe these words with all of my heart. I mean no ill will to my fellowmen, but marriage is not our law to change. It is God's law, and if we make a mockery of it, we are choosing to receive the consequences of such mockery.

The Missing Link
A Tropical Paradise USA, FL

Don't worry, after elected, Mitt Romney will ban same sex marriage in America.

"Obviously, Governor Mormon is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

New Yorker
Pleasant Grove, UT

Then, by the same reasoning, polygamists and any other -ists have a right to do whatever they want interpersonally.

Government is abdicating any specific role in regulating the inter-personal affairs of citizens. This would probably a good thing, except now in the name of liberalism, they will want to force everyone else and every religion to think like they do.

Already in our school curricula the government is teaching our very young children that all "life styles" are equal and that everyone must accept this. The government has raised their view to a "religious" dogma that everyone must march to.

As we move along this road, our freedom of association will soon stop when we leave our private property. Our own children will be listening to hear if we believe in the party line. Things here will not be much different than it has been under past totalitarian regimes. For us it will be the totalitarianism of atheism.

It doesn't have to be this ugly way. Every vote for every level of government matters in this election, and the president nominates supreme court members.

to comment

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