Comments about ‘10 states — including Utah — ask California court to delay gay marriage’

Why is it any Utahn's business what a Californian does in their personal life?

Oh no!
Here we go again!

IN one word: Yes.

The CA Supreme Court has found that the law is unconstitutional. What is the point of requesting that they allow unconstitutional discrimination for just a little while? Should Saints be released from their covenants for just a little while?

If a state decides that it is ok to allow people to marry their sheep then other states MUST accept the marriage and grant them the rights associated with it. That is why MANY states (not just Utah like you imply) have a bonifide interest in what other states do concerning marriage laws.

This is in the article:

"they have an interest in the case because they would have to determine if their states would recognize the marriage of gay residents who wed in California."

To Uh huh
The reason it is their business is because people move. If one of the couples moves to Utah it is all of the sudden Utah's business because they have to decide whether or not to recognize it. Personally, I hope they don't recognize it if it passes.

Who's husband and who's wife or vice versa?

Duh, because what happens in california does not stay in california. 10% of US congress is from california. Also, if someone from california moves to utah they are now a Utahn. What are the legal ramifications they will expect to their marriage? I don't care about the marriage issue either way, but I think it will save us all a bit of money if we know the answer before all the lawsuits start to fly.

According to a report from the city's comptroller, New York City would stand to gain $142 million in the first three years of legalized gay marriage.

$142 million! Boy, they really know how to pull an old conservative Republican's heart-strings!

Why would you not recognize a marriage performed in another state? Let's getting the wedding bells ringing! What a great time to be a Californian.

Uh huh, please read the article before posting. It specifically says these 10 states are trying to get clarification on whether or not they have to recognize gay marriages performed in California.

States do not exist in a vacuum - what one does affects all the others in more ways than you realize.

Utah needs to mind Utahs business and stay out of California business. Boycott Utah!!

Uh huh, didn't you read the article; it states, "The attorneys general say in court documents filed Thursday that they have an interest in the case because they would have to determine if their states would recognize the marriage of gay residents who wed in California."

Besides, I agree that the courts should stay the decision so that the people of California can vote--again--on whether gay marriage should be allowed. If left to the voice of the people, I believe there will be a ban on gay marriage.

The full faith and credit clause in the Constitution obligated UT and every other state to recognize any legal status granted by any other state. But I do not see UT petitioning that they get veto power on what corporations or traffic laws CA passes.

They can live with what marriage arrangements CA permits just like they are *already* living with VT's civil unions and MA's gay marriages.

UT may be used to taking direction from the LDS but the rest of us aren't and don't have any reason to.

UT doesn't get to decide if it will recognize other state's licenses. The US Constitution already has established that what licenses are grated in one state ARE recognized by others.

This was already decided in 1776 but the Founding Fathers.

What does it matter who marries who? Some lesbians or gay guys down the street who are happy can't be married because mainstream society is controlled by bigots? This is seriously childish of our leaders to engage in such schenanigans over who can marry and who can't. Our country should just legalize gay marriage and put their energies toward something that needs attention, for instance, Operation Freedom, foreign oil dependency, education, etc. But would that be too much to ask?

It's a domino effect nation-wide, if one state passes it, then others may eventually. Also if one state out of 50 recogninzes it, what do you do if you aren't in California. It should not be recognized. Sorry.

VT and MA are already granting licenses recognizing gay marriages or civil partnerships. CA will be next month. NY has already said it will recognize these legal identities as well as the ones granted in Canada.

Some states -- probably like UT -- will resist it. They will have their refusals challenged in the Supreme Court and it will find that the full faith and credit provision guarantees Americans the right to have their legal status recognized by all 50 states.

This is the Constitution we all owe our freedoms to and that Joseph Smith said was inspired by HF.

Okay, let's make a deal.

Utah gets to ban gay marriage in California but California can supersede Utah's bizarre liquor laws on behalf of their wine industry. Turnabout is fair play- if you're going to interfere with the lives of those in other states you better get prepared to get your lives interfered with by them.... I'd love to see the opinions of those in California used to overturn Utah sovereignty on lots of issues... it would be fun to watch the same Utahns who want to force a ban on gay marriage in California scream about "states rights" and sovereignty then.