Reader comments
LDS Church expresses disappointment in California gay marriage decision
404 comments | Read story
utahn | 11:13 p.m. May 15, 2008
For those of you opposed, I would like to say that I work with many young,gay
LDS people who end up in a straight unhappy marriage. They hate themselves, and
only yearn for their families love and support.I hope I live to see the day when
people with such strong moral values spend more time worrying about starving
children, and violence towards women than about their neighbors sexual
preference. Seems to me the ones most concerned, are the ones crusing State
Street anyway looking for a same-sex partner and then going home to their so
called normal marriages. Can't we just let people live their lives?
Auburn, CA | 11:19 p.m. May 15, 2008
The LDS church runs the politics in the state of Utah and I find it appalling
that the LDS church is sticking its fingers into California politics.
You're forgetting | 11:22 p.m. May 15, 2008
Just because a same sex couple gets married in Massachusetts or California they
have to keep in mind that their marriage will not be seen as such. It will
however be seen as 2 people cohabitating.
In portland, Maine there is a partnership registary. This will allow couples both straight and gay in a commited relationship get their names on a list so that if something should happen the partner has some legal rights. NH has civil unions(not marriage). Vermont has same sex civil unions it does not recognize gay marriages. Salt Lake also has a registary like Portland, Maine for people straight and gay in committed relationships.
So if a homosexual couple decides to move to another state they do need to do some research to make sure that their marriage will be acknowledged.
In portland, Maine there is a partnership registary. This will allow couples both straight and gay in a commited relationship get their names on a list so that if something should happen the partner has some legal rights. NH has civil unions(not marriage). Vermont has same sex civil unions it does not recognize gay marriages. Salt Lake also has a registary like Portland, Maine for people straight and gay in committed relationships.
So if a homosexual couple decides to move to another state they do need to do some research to make sure that their marriage will be acknowledged.
Comments continue below
NoMO | 11:34 p.m. May 15, 2008
Adam and Steve?!? I don't remember a Steve in the Bible or the BoM. Adam
and Nephi would have made a cuter couple. THANK YOU CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT.
jackhp | 12:01 a.m. May 16, 2008
"Our world is worse than Sodom and Gomorrah."
Really? Then why in "heck" hasn't your dutiful "God" done anything about it? By your reasoning we should have been experiencing some serious firestorms long before now.
Really? Then why in "heck" hasn't your dutiful "God" done anything about it? By your reasoning we should have been experiencing some serious firestorms long before now.
to hmmmmmmm | 12:08 a.m. May 16, 2008
What about freedom of speech? People of the LDS church are people entitled to
make statements regarding laws passed in our country. Many other groups make
comments without being chastised.
M&M | 12:12 a.m. May 16, 2008
The LDS Church expressed disappointment in the Supreme Court ruling....
Translated that means: "The LDS Church was disappointed they wasted so much
Tithing money fighting an immoral battle trying to impose their 19th century
moral values on others by manipulating the legislative process in
California."
Any questions?
Any questions?
LYNN* | 12:20 a.m. May 16, 2008
Kris please keep the goats and dogs out of this. they have no problem accepting
being straight. you will never never see two billy goats making out. or to male
pitt bulls.
A God Given Right | 12:27 a.m. May 16, 2008
How many of the bloggers here honored their Mothers this past Sunday? How many
owe so much of what they have become in life to what they have been taught by
their Mothers?
Along with free speech, the right to an education or to simply drink from a public water fountain, every child in America has the God given right to be raised by a Mother and a Father. While these rights are not always fulfilled, they should always be among our loftiest ideals.
Along with free speech, the right to an education or to simply drink from a public water fountain, every child in America has the God given right to be raised by a Mother and a Father. While these rights are not always fulfilled, they should always be among our loftiest ideals.
kurtlein | 12:33 a.m. May 16, 2008
As is typical of liberals and democrats we the "people" can't be
trusted to vote and make up our own minds so they have to over-rule us and tell
us how to think. The Church has every right and obligation to continue this
fight against perversion and wickedness.
Joyce | 12:39 a.m. May 16, 2008
It does matter...to God!
Leviticus 18:22-28shows that sexual morality will directly affect a nation's survival (see also Jeremiah32:21-24).
LDS believe that this is another blessed land but a cursed land when we rebel against God (see also in the BoM: Jacob 2:27-29 and 2Nephi1:7,10-12 and Alma 10:19-23 -which mentions political involvment).
LDS Leaders said in a proclamation to the world that the disintegration of the family will bring the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
So they call upon citizens everywhere to promote those measures that maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society, to save our nation!
Do you want to get rid of our economic national crisis? Then repent and give true love, not license to indulge in sin.
Leviticus 18:22-28shows that sexual morality will directly affect a nation's survival (see also Jeremiah32:21-24).
LDS believe that this is another blessed land but a cursed land when we rebel against God (see also in the BoM: Jacob 2:27-29 and 2Nephi1:7,10-12 and Alma 10:19-23 -which mentions political involvment).
LDS Leaders said in a proclamation to the world that the disintegration of the family will bring the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
So they call upon citizens everywhere to promote those measures that maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society, to save our nation!
Do you want to get rid of our economic national crisis? Then repent and give true love, not license to indulge in sin.
Freedom | 12:39 a.m. May 16, 2008
Homosexuality isn't approved by God. It will always be a sin regardless of
what politicians, supreme court justices, or others try to justify. You can use
civil rights arguments all day long to convince men otherwise, but you will
never convince God that it is ok. Man's wisdom is foolishness to God.
CAgayinactiveMormon | 12:52 a.m. May 16, 2008
Those who complain that the court is overriding the will of the majority should
re-read the Constitution. The courts were set up, among other reasons, for just
this purpose: to protect the minority from the over-zealous rule of the
majority. It's an important part of our checks-and-balances system of
government. What the court has said is that the majority cannot take away the
right of the gay minority to be married. The majority may not like it, but it
proves that our government is working the way it was designed to work.
Alex de Tocqueville, a contemporary of Joseph Smith, said in his great book about democracy in America, "The majority...is not all-powerful. Above it, in the moral universe, stand humanity, justice and reason..."
He also said, interestingly, that one of the consequences of democratic government is that there would be "more vice and less crime." Personally, I don't believe being gay is a vice, but if you do, fine -- that's your right, but in a democracy you can't force your views on a minority -- if the courts rule that your view is not constitutional, as they have now done in California.
Alex de Tocqueville, a contemporary of Joseph Smith, said in his great book about democracy in America, "The majority...is not all-powerful. Above it, in the moral universe, stand humanity, justice and reason..."
He also said, interestingly, that one of the consequences of democratic government is that there would be "more vice and less crime." Personally, I don't believe being gay is a vice, but if you do, fine -- that's your right, but in a democracy you can't force your views on a minority -- if the courts rule that your view is not constitutional, as they have now done in California.
Information | 12:58 a.m. May 16, 2008
President Gordon B. Hinckley has said: �Nevertheless, and I
emphasize this, I wish to say that our opposition to attempts to legalize
same-sex marriage should never be interpreted as justification for hatred,
intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either
individually or as a group. As I said from this pulpit one year ago, our hearts
reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We love and
honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the Church. It is
expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of conduct that
apply to everyone else, whether single or married"
(�Why We Do Some of the Things We Do,�
Ensign, Nov. 1999, 54).
Supreme Court was WRONG to go against the vote of the people.
Homosexuality is a moral issue, that is why churches need to speak up. There are some in the political world that have dragged into their arena.
Church speaks out to help, not to hurt.
Homosexuality is not comparable to the civil rights movement. As a black person who fought for this, I am offended to have it compared to our fight. Totally different!! Research it!
Supreme Court was WRONG to go against the vote of the people.
Homosexuality is a moral issue, that is why churches need to speak up. There are some in the political world that have dragged into their arena.
Church speaks out to help, not to hurt.
Homosexuality is not comparable to the civil rights movement. As a black person who fought for this, I am offended to have it compared to our fight. Totally different!! Research it!
400,000 | 1:11 a.m. May 16, 2008
Last year, around 400,000 homosexuals gathered in California to parade around in
the nude and perform sex acts on each other--in public. Media didn't want
to cover it so as to not stir things up.
I agree with both churches' stand on this issue and am very tolerant of homosexuals. However, the lifestyle they have chosen should not be held up as acceptable by our government.
Humans can not change what God has set up. He's probably saddened that some have missed the point...at least for now.
Protecting the definition of marriage is not intolerant to anyone. It is the only way to protect our society and future. And that is a good thing.
Is it good or bad? If it leads to life, it is good. If all it does is lead to death, then it isn't. Simple and beautiful. Now go pervert it
I agree with both churches' stand on this issue and am very tolerant of homosexuals. However, the lifestyle they have chosen should not be held up as acceptable by our government.
Humans can not change what God has set up. He's probably saddened that some have missed the point...at least for now.
Protecting the definition of marriage is not intolerant to anyone. It is the only way to protect our society and future. And that is a good thing.
Is it good or bad? If it leads to life, it is good. If all it does is lead to death, then it isn't. Simple and beautiful. Now go pervert it
Paperboy | 1:20 a.m. May 16, 2008
Uh, am I supposed to be surprised by this?
Misled | 1:23 a.m. May 16, 2008
Sad day in California. Can you imagine two gay men adopting a little baby?
Obviously they couldn't naturally have one on their own.
AJ | 4:50 a.m. May 16, 2008
State marriages are worthless, they may give us tax breaks and certain rights on
this Earth, but they have no meaning in heaven.
What is important is that we are joined in God's sight and that we live up to God's standards and laws. The marriages of homosexuals are only recognized by the governments here that choose to recognize them and not in heaven, thus the marriages are dead.
As Latter-day Saints, pray for and love these people as the brother and sister that they are. Preach the truth in meekness and love and hope they will see the error of their ways. Let us give them the right to live the life the way they choose; a right that we claim for ourselves.
To paraphrase Joseph Smith: Teach them the truth and then let them govern themselves.
What is important is that we are joined in God's sight and that we live up to God's standards and laws. The marriages of homosexuals are only recognized by the governments here that choose to recognize them and not in heaven, thus the marriages are dead.
As Latter-day Saints, pray for and love these people as the brother and sister that they are. Preach the truth in meekness and love and hope they will see the error of their ways. Let us give them the right to live the life the way they choose; a right that we claim for ourselves.
To paraphrase Joseph Smith: Teach them the truth and then let them govern themselves.
Stenar | 5:18 a.m. May 16, 2008
"For many years now, I have been an outspoken supporter of civil and human
rights for gay and lesbian people. Gays and lesbians stood up for civil rights
in Montgomery, Selma, in Albany, Ga. and St. Augustine, Fla., and many other
campaigns of the Civil Rights Movement. Many of these courageous men and women
were fighting for my freedom at a time when they could find few voices for their
own, and I salute their contributions." --Coretta Scott King, wife of
Martin Luther King
I appreciate | 5:23 a.m. May 16, 2008
I appreciate the church backing up what they preach. No one can name one good
thing that has come out of people living a life of homosexuality.
And to think you are born gay is ridiculous. It is a choice just like everything else. You choose who and what you are.
And to think you are born gay is ridiculous. It is a choice just like everything else. You choose who and what you are.
RL | 5:30 a.m. May 16, 2008
JUST A REMINDER:
All who defendes that homosexuality is a normal issue, I only remember that they only are alive because they born off a natural process that is called procriation, that all off us are alive because in same point a man and a woman join together to create live. Procriation is only possible with a man-woman relationship.
Making homosexuality or the same sex marriage legal is against the natural order of the things.
Note that I�m not agaisnt the people that have homosexual beaviour, no, they are human beings and I believe that I have to respect everyone, independent of they race, social condition or sex tendance.
The point here is about a social behaviour that not correspond with the logical order off the things.
All who defendes that homosexuality is a normal issue, I only remember that they only are alive because they born off a natural process that is called procriation, that all off us are alive because in same point a man and a woman join together to create live. Procriation is only possible with a man-woman relationship.
Making homosexuality or the same sex marriage legal is against the natural order of the things.
Note that I�m not agaisnt the people that have homosexual beaviour, no, they are human beings and I believe that I have to respect everyone, independent of they race, social condition or sex tendance.
The point here is about a social behaviour that not correspond with the logical order off the things.
Jason | 5:34 a.m. May 16, 2008
All you "Judges need to be impeached" people need to wake up and shut
up! The supreme courts of this land including our nation's highest one were
put there to override even laws passed by the "majority" whenever
those laws are unconstitutional and infringe on the rights "of all!"
They were put there to protect the "minority" from the tyranny of the
"majority!" All you so called "religious" people need to
understand this one thing, YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PUSH YOUR VIEWS ON OTHERS!
PURE AND SIMPLE! That is why the judges had every right to do what they did.
It's about time a state supreme court does what it's supposed to do.
Knock down a law that is totally the "majority" trying to control the
"minority." That is exactly what this nation was founded on!
MiamiKid | 6:04 a.m. May 16, 2008
If two people regardless of gender can marry each other, why can't three?
Glado | 6:36 a.m. May 16, 2008
Statistically 11% of the population is Gay. Look around your congregations and
always remember the Bishop, the Deacon passing the sacrement, the pretty girl on
the piano, all might be gay.
Hiding behind the banner of richeousness doesn't change a thing.
If I were to were to think out loud passing an opinion on my that respond with such fervor I must say I'm wondering what you are hiding from your local authorities.
Hiding behind the banner of richeousness doesn't change a thing.
If I were to were to think out loud passing an opinion on my that respond with such fervor I must say I'm wondering what you are hiding from your local authorities.
SS | 6:44 a.m. May 16, 2008
CA Supreme Court interfered with the rights of the people, again. But, CA had
already given gay couples all the substantive rights of married couples through
the domestic partners act, except for the use of the word "marriage".
To I Appreciate | 6:56 a.m. May 16, 2008
What do you think caused your heterosexuality - is it genetic, environmental, or
a choice? When and how did you decide you were heterosexual? Is it possible your
heterosexuality is just a phase?
Bart | 6:59 a.m. May 16, 2008
I think it is hightime for all state legislators in every state to follow the
actions of the Republican-dominated high court in California. The constitution
guarantees all people equal access to and benefits from the laws of the land.
From tax codes to a myriad of other issues, gays are not afforded the same
access and benefits--period. From a constitutional viewpoint, the California
decision was a correct one. It's funny how if you agree with a position,
you recognize the constitutionality of it--but if you disagree, then what that
document says be damned. You can't have it both ways.
Paul in MD | 7:01 a.m. May 16, 2008
To bgubler - I don't know where you've been for the last 20 years, but
"politically correct" and "conservative" are generally
considered to be complete opposites. Those two terms go together about as well
as fine crystal and sandpaper.
Go activist judges! | 7:02 a.m. May 16, 2008
Strike down all laws that promote Heterosexual White Male Privilege. Legislate
from the bench and give all people the same rights as you want for yourself!
Stop this tyranny that has been allowed since the beginning of this nation. All
people are equal and the same, treat them as such!
The church needs to stop promoting privilege at an expense to those outside their views.
The church needs to stop promoting privilege at an expense to those outside their views.
IL mom | 7:03 a.m. May 16, 2008
I was really upset to read the news about CA yesterday. It's a sad day for
marriage. I believe it should ONLY be between a man and a woman.
Rulon | 7:11 a.m. May 16, 2008
I am not sure that the church's opinion carries much public opinion when it
comes to commenting on "unusual" marriage practices
Jeff | 7:23 a.m. May 16, 2008
I think the worst part of all this is that people are comparing this to things
the Church has never even taught. One person says that the Church used to teach
that blacks are �inferior�; another
says they couldn�t hold the Priesthood. Neither of these is
true. Yes, certain people with dark skin couldn�t hold the
Priesthood, but neither could certain people with light skin, medium skin, or
any other color skin; it never had anything to do with skin color. The Church
ordained its first black priest in 1836�back when most
Protestants were debating whether blacks even had a
soul�and has ordained many blacks since then. It just so
happens that the family that was promised to receive the Priesthood at some
future date happened to include a lot of black people, so the urban legend got
started (even among members of the Church).
Regarding taking away the Church�s tax-exempt status because it takes positions on political issues, I expect you�d have to revoke the tax-exempt status of virtually every non- and not-for-profit organization on the planet. Can you think of a single one that doesn�t take a position on right and wrong?
Puh-leeze�.
Regarding taking away the Church�s tax-exempt status because it takes positions on political issues, I expect you�d have to revoke the tax-exempt status of virtually every non- and not-for-profit organization on the planet. Can you think of a single one that doesn�t take a position on right and wrong?
Puh-leeze�.
Howard | 7:30 a.m. May 16, 2008
I'm glad the Church is staying out of politics.
Degenerate Society | 7:34 a.m. May 16, 2008
It is a degenerate society when people accept gay relationships the same way as
a heterosexual relationship. What if someone wants to have a marriage
relationship with their animals? Is it still unjust to refuse someone from doing
this?
Paul in MD | 7:37 a.m. May 16, 2008
It is the right of any church to tell its members what the church's stand
is on any issue of morality. Marriage is held by most churches to be a God
given institution, tied to moral values by scripture.
The LDS church often comments on its doctrinal position on legal and social issues, WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE HOW TO VOTE. These comments, delivered as letters to every congregation in the area affected, always include a paragraph explaining that the church will not tell its members how to vote, but that each eligible voter should study the issue and candidates, determine the best choice for themselves, and actually vote.
Every election cycle, a letter goes out to the congregations in the US reiterating the position that the church will not give specific direction on how members should vote, except that they should be active in the electoral process and exercise their responsibility to vote.
If the government were to tell a church that it can't comment on a moral issue, wouldn't that violate the separation of church and state in the way our founding fathers initially envisioned that protection???
The LDS church often comments on its doctrinal position on legal and social issues, WITHOUT TELLING ANYONE HOW TO VOTE. These comments, delivered as letters to every congregation in the area affected, always include a paragraph explaining that the church will not tell its members how to vote, but that each eligible voter should study the issue and candidates, determine the best choice for themselves, and actually vote.
Every election cycle, a letter goes out to the congregations in the US reiterating the position that the church will not give specific direction on how members should vote, except that they should be active in the electoral process and exercise their responsibility to vote.
If the government were to tell a church that it can't comment on a moral issue, wouldn't that violate the separation of church and state in the way our founding fathers initially envisioned that protection???
Actually | 7:45 a.m. May 16, 2008
God did create Adam and Steve. God created every perosn on this earth - some of
which came here gay. I don't worship a God who creates someone a certain
way and then punishes them for his creation. For a long time people wrongly
thought God desired to punish people based on the way he created their skin
color - even to the extent that they should be owned by other humans based on
that skin color. Fortunately we no longer believe God desires humans to be
punished because of the color of skin he sent them to earth with. Now it is time
to recognize that he equally does not want his children punished because of the
sexual traits he sent them to earth with. It's almost as if mankind needs
someone or something to be prejudiced against.
DM | 7:46 a.m. May 16, 2008
My fellow Miami native is correct.
But this is the consequence of giving the government the power to define and regulate marriage. Honestly though, we'd all be better off rejecting any role for government in defining a personal relationship.
But this is the consequence of giving the government the power to define and regulate marriage. Honestly though, we'd all be better off rejecting any role for government in defining a personal relationship.
Paul in MD | 7:48 a.m. May 16, 2008
To Archaea Cougarguard - It is quite easy for non-believers to give credit to
society where none exists. The changes to church policy you cite were NOT due
to societal pressure, but to revelation. You may not believe that there is
divine revelation today, but we do.
To equate the issue of blacks receiving the priesthood with the church's stand on homosexual behavior is to admit not having the faintest clue what the reasons are behind those positions. Gay marriage will never be condoned by the LDS church, regardless what society decides to accept or reject. The only people I've ever heard say that will change are those who don't believe in the church in the first place, and don't understand the idea of Christ being at the head of the church. We don't change doctrine to fit our own ideas - we receive it from Christ through a living prophet. I don't think Christ is going to give much credence to decisions made by the California State Supreme Court.
To equate the issue of blacks receiving the priesthood with the church's stand on homosexual behavior is to admit not having the faintest clue what the reasons are behind those positions. Gay marriage will never be condoned by the LDS church, regardless what society decides to accept or reject. The only people I've ever heard say that will change are those who don't believe in the church in the first place, and don't understand the idea of Christ being at the head of the church. We don't change doctrine to fit our own ideas - we receive it from Christ through a living prophet. I don't think Christ is going to give much credence to decisions made by the California State Supreme Court.
Chip Browne | 7:53 a.m. May 16, 2008
Marriage is a phenomenon of nature, and a person's right to marry is a
direct result of his/her difference in gender with the other human being. By
marrying, we form the complete nature of the human species. The two genders form
the complete image and likeness of God.
�And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;"
Essentially, the power to mate is the power to marry. The power to marry comes from the difference in gender. The right to marry does not come from a decision to love someone of the same gender. The state, therefore, does not have the power to empower two gay people to marry because two gay people do not have the power to mate, and when you do not have the power to mate, you do not have the power to marry.
Even God Himself cannot join two gay people in marriage.
�And that he created man, male and female, after his own image and in his own likeness, created he them;"
Essentially, the power to mate is the power to marry. The power to marry comes from the difference in gender. The right to marry does not come from a decision to love someone of the same gender. The state, therefore, does not have the power to empower two gay people to marry because two gay people do not have the power to mate, and when you do not have the power to mate, you do not have the power to marry.
Even God Himself cannot join two gay people in marriage.
VA Mormon | 7:54 a.m. May 16, 2008
I am amazed by reading these comments by both members of the LDS church and not
of the LDS faith, but especially members. When the prophet sends a letter to be
read over the pulpit, it isn�t just there opinion;
it�s the mind and will of the Lord. If the Lord says that
marriage between two people of the same gender is harmful to our society I
believe it. Many people laughed at and mocked Noah too, but we all know how
that turned out. Yes, God loves all of His children the same but He can be
disappointed in the decisions they have made with their agency, and even though
He loved those children they were still destroyed for their wickedness. People
say that member of the LDS faith are closed minded, but what they
don�t realize is that they are just as closed minded for
bashing a people just based on their beliefs. Our world is headed for a lot of
problems if people continue on this lower path, NOW is the time to stand up for
morals.
Prophetic | 7:55 a.m. May 16, 2008
I prophecy that there will be an Official Declaration 3 beginning with the
words: To Whom it May Concern...it will coincide with a threat by the government
with a loss of tax exempt status.
I also prophecy that there will be a legal challenge to polygamy.
I also prophecy that there will be a legal challenge to polygamy.
What does it harm? | 7:55 a.m. May 16, 2008
Considering that people are born gay and "treatment" has not been
successful, what is the harm in allowing two gay people to formalize their love
for each other? Nothing changes. Gay people would still love one another and
would still adopt children and raise families with or without the right to
marry. So why not allow them the same formality extended to heterosexuals?
People who were not otherwise gay are not going to suddenly run out and become
gay. We are fearful of something God created. God does not make mistakes and he
does not desire that his creations continue to be discriminated against in his
name. For heaven's sake, only half of heterosexual marriages are successful
anyway. Who's to say homosexual marriages won't actually start to give
marriage a better reputation?
Just a question | 8:15 a.m. May 16, 2008
I am not knocking people who choose a gay lifestyle. But if a man was supposed
to be with another man or a woman with another woman- how come they weren't
bulit that way?
They can not have children either. They can adopt I realize that.
Men and women were made to be a couple They were met to be toether. No piece of paper or law will ever change that. It is what it is and will be forever!
They can not have children either. They can adopt I realize that.
Men and women were made to be a couple They were met to be toether. No piece of paper or law will ever change that. It is what it is and will be forever!
The world has changed | 8:14 a.m. May 16, 2008
While I don't think it's right that a few judges can overrule the
voice of the people, nothing surprises me anymore. I just love it when people
say that the majority can't push their views on the minority. It's
always the minority that wins these days after they have pushed their views on
the majority! What a joke. I'm all for the legalization of gay marriage
even though I support the church's right to block it and not recognize it.
Free speech anyone? Perhaps then we can get on with more important issues like
the economy and hunger. But with legalization of gay marriage, let's hope
that the same responsibilities will be enforced if and when there are divorces,
e.g. child support, alimony, visitation rights, splitting of assets, yada, yada,
yada. With equal rights comes equal responsibilities and consequences.
Can't wait to see what the courts will rule in the future on that.
Dutchman | 8:17 a.m. May 16, 2008
What a farce for anyone to suggest that the LDS Church should lose its tax
exempt status for reading a statement over the pulpit opposing gay marriage.
Those that follow the news know that any given Sunday a politician, Al Sharpton,
Jesse Jackson, George Clooney, Bill Clinton, or Jimmy Carter, etc., can go to
the pulpit of almost any church in America and say all kinds of things that have
nothing to do with religion and the tax exempt status of that church is never
threatened. In fact, in the last 50 years the IRS has only challenged the tax
exempt status of two religions. None of them were the LDS Church because the
LDS Church never comes close to stepping over the line.
To: I appreciate | 8:22 a.m. May 16, 2008
Did you wake up one day and say to yourself, "I will chose to be
heterosexual despite by urges toward homosexuality?"
Rien | 8:35 a.m. May 16, 2008
There's a lot of people here that betray a really deficient understanding
of our constitutional system.
First of all, judges sure can overrule the voice of the people as express through the legislative power or the referendum/initiative/proposition power. The other side is right when they say that elite, know-more-than-you judges were and are a check on what the founders thought was an majority that could go a little out-of-control.
That said, that side is completely wrong when they say that the majority may not impose their view on other people in the minority--it's called a constitutional amendment.
Both are very powerful check, and thankfully both have inherent checks built in: judges have no power over the purse or the sword to enforce their rulings--they have to depend on the other branches and the general respect of the people for that (and too many out-there decisions erodes that respect quickly). And the amendment process's internal check is that it takes a super-majority and a VERY LONG TIME--time to debate and make sure that's really what the majority wants.
That's how our democracy works folks--judges can make poor decisions; you can have someone else's whims imposed on you. Accept it. Or not.
First of all, judges sure can overrule the voice of the people as express through the legislative power or the referendum/initiative/proposition power. The other side is right when they say that elite, know-more-than-you judges were and are a check on what the founders thought was an majority that could go a little out-of-control.
That said, that side is completely wrong when they say that the majority may not impose their view on other people in the minority--it's called a constitutional amendment.
Both are very powerful check, and thankfully both have inherent checks built in: judges have no power over the purse or the sword to enforce their rulings--they have to depend on the other branches and the general respect of the people for that (and too many out-there decisions erodes that respect quickly). And the amendment process's internal check is that it takes a super-majority and a VERY LONG TIME--time to debate and make sure that's really what the majority wants.
That's how our democracy works folks--judges can make poor decisions; you can have someone else's whims imposed on you. Accept it. Or not.
jdog | 8:39 a.m. May 16, 2008
Proud to be a member of a church that has a backbone to stand up against
babylon. To stand up against sin. To stand up and be counted.
Homosexuality has always been and always will be an abomination before the Lord.
Homosexuality has always been and always will be an abomination before the Lord.
JOHNJ | 8:42 a.m. May 16, 2008
I know it's the last days. When sin is more important than JESUS CHRIST
would'nt you think that day is soon? Look at all the destruction going on.
It's just going to get worse. We have just seen a gllmse of what's to
come.
I'mnot1RU | 8:41 a.m. May 16, 2008
You could not be more wrong, the courts are to rule according the law and not to
take into account majority or minority, otherwise they become legislative. Our
laws were derived from social norms, social norms are critical to the survival
of society, change the norms and the society no longer exists. If what you are
saying is true and the CA supreme court ruled in favor what does it mean when a
higher court overrules them? Well it means that one court ruled on the basis of
law and the other on the basis of legistating something.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Related content
- NFL: Week 12 recap 12:50 a.m.
- '12 Days' bill would top $87K 12:35 a.m.
- Study finds autism therapy works 12:35 a.m.
- Boy shot following traffic stop 12:35 a.m.
- Sports on the air 12:24 a.m.
- Herbert builds his team of rivals 12:21 a.m.
- Corroon a step closer to governor 12:21 a.m.
- Monday on TV 12:18 a.m.
- Editorial: East, West and religion 12:17 a.m.
- A deficit commission? 12:17 a.m.
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
- BYU is champion of the state
- Cougars beat Utes in overtime
- Credit Coug defense for win
- Field goals, penalties doomed Utes
- Marriage definitions vary widely
- Cougar defense rose to occasion
- Banged up Jazz get best of Blazers
- Jones' joy for life remembered
- Fantasy is reality for BYU professor
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
869 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime473
- Max Hall issues apology145
- BYU is champion of the state137
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies117
- Cave to be sealed with body inside116
- Rivalry Week is highly profane90
- Hall's legacy measured today79
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal68
- Utes fall to Seattle U. at home65
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
I find it interesting that many of the same people who say that we can't...
None of these teams is going to be easy. They all have fine football...
Max, no apology was necessary, but the apology was polically correct. If...
Very good piece of writing, Amy. You summarized what many of us have been...
How is a top 25 finish make Utah a top twenty team? I think what the poster...
90% of the BYU & Utah fans have class, and Hall knows it. If you don't...
This might be my favorite article I've ever read from the Deseret News. Kudos.
Thank you for not giving up and don't give up now brother and sister...
Dr. Lois Lee's work with children who are victims of child sexual...
Look at the preview for Pixar's "Up". The whole move is summarized in...
Advertisements