Deseret News | Gay couples in Utah urged not to sue

Reader comments
Gay couples in Utah urged not to sue

428 comments | Read story

Anonymous | 5:43 p.m. June 18, 2008

I am so tired of hearing the argument that marriage is about love and commitment. Sorry, but that does not make a marriage. There are many forms of relationships that are about love and commitment and they don't constitute a marriage. Marriage by definition is a union of a man and woman. Why- because a healthly society protects the building block of that society and gives that building block special rights and priveleges above all other relationships. Homosexuality is not that building block. This is a black and white issue. It has nothing to do with discrimination- all already have the same right to get married so there is no descrimination here. It's sad our society has come to this level of depravity.

John Dough | 5:43 p.m. June 18, 2008

Let's start a prediction for the sad future shall we: Gay marriage starts to be accepted by states little by little. The states that don't accept it will be sued into submission. As this takes place, those that do not support gay marriages and wish not to take part in them (i.e caterers, photographers, owners of meeting halls) will all be sued as well to accept homosexual behavior, even though they believe it to be a sin. "Just shut your mouths you bigots." is what the pro gay marriage community will say, and they will because they lack the will to fight for what they believe is right. When it is generally accepted the definition will change again after the poligimous people sue for marriage rights under the law. The same process will be repeated in all states. Then the door will be open for pedophiles, necrophiliacs, and beastiality. For those who are for gay marriage won't want anyone excluded. All of these groups will want the same rights and they will get them due to scummy lawyers and perverts that legislate from the bench. Suing people into acceptance isn't what this country should be about, should it?

re: P in Mexifornia | 5:43 p.m. June 18, 2008

This guy must live in a border town or something.
But he's right. Don't go to California. It's evil.
Sea World, Disneyland, Hollywood, San Francisco, mountains, plains, deserts, ocean, valley's, produce, wine-country, weather ...
Evil! Pure evil! Stay away!

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 5:50 p.m. June 18, 2008

"Was the question of banning gay scout leaders because they didn't want gays scout leaders, or didn't want child preditors? Should a gay person not be able to be in a position as a leader just because they're gay? There are alot of heterosexuals who are preditors.

I think anyone in a position of authority in such an organization should succumb to a background check. If there is nothing to hide, there should be no problem. Only problem comes when a sexual preditor sees any organization as a field to be harvested -- I don't think it has anything to do with being gay, because preditors come in all sorts of disguises."

Have you ever googled "LDS + sexual abuse"?

To "To Poor McKenzie" | 5:53 p.m. June 18, 2008

So when straight people want to get married it's because they're in love, but when gays want to get married it's about "money from government agencies, Social Security and welfare."

Please. We're not so different from you. Why all these hurtful and ridiculous insinuations? Argue against gay marriage if you want, but please don't insinuate that we have bad motives, or motives that are any different from yours.

If This Happens In Utah... | 5:58 p.m. June 18, 2008

the Mormon culture will not run out of town, but I predict it will quickly spread to OVERT persecution from gays to the Latter-day Saints.

The Book of Mormon was meant for OUR day....

Keep the faith!

to Jiminy | 5:57 p.m. June 18, 2008

"This issue will be THE issue in our nation's history. Do you realize what is at stake with how our courts rule (and how we vote) over the next few years as gay marriage is pushed through the states?

Among other things, BYU could lose it's tax exempt status if it discriminates too much on admissions (meaning, refusing to allow a gay couple to attend).

LDS college students (especially those at BYU) could lose their federal Pell Grants and federally backed student loans and professors could lose their grant money.

The LDS Church could lose its tax exempt status for not recognizing a gay couple's constitutional marriage. Because what if they convert to the LDS Church after they get married? Are they supposed to divorce before they get baptized or just never make it to the temple?

Tax deductions for charitable contributions could be nixed.

Regardless, the federal government has wide powers on tax enforcement laws including power to arrest for non-compliance to federal laws.

This is the big time, people."

YUP! Evolve or die. Get used to it.

To Betty, 1:04 AM, Jun 18 | 5:58 p.m. June 18, 2008

Times DO change, morality does NOT.

l | 6:03 p.m. June 18, 2008

These comments have anything to do with the actual article I've read through about 100 comments, but no one is addressing the issue here.

Rather than discussing whether or not it is right or wrong to be gay, this article is about the legal issues surrounding gay marriage. What happens when gay marriage is legalized in one state? How does that affect other states? What about gays that marry in California and want to get divorced back in Utah?

What if someone sues in Utah to have their California marriage honored and then the courts here rule against them? That would actually slow down the gay momentum they are trying to drum up, with legal precedent, so that is why the recommendation is for Utah gays not to sue here.

Could a Utah court even possibly recognize a gay marriage here with the constitutional amendment that was passed here, or would it have to go to the US Supreme Court to overpower the Utah Constitution?

Article-IV-Section-1 of the US Constitution says that states have to honor laws and judicial proceedings from other states, so the acts of other states do affect us here, but how much?

Anonymous | 6:06 p.m. June 18, 2008

What a shame if you're actually forced by law to stop persecuting gays! How will you cope if you don't have someone to look down on?

Here's a hint for you: in 100 years people will look back on Scientology and LDS as strange aberrations and ask how intelligent people could be sucked into such weird beliefs.

California | 6:10 p.m. June 18, 2008

There are a lot of people who like gays but are angry about what they are trying to do here in California.

They are forcing this issue on our society and believe me people are bugged about it!

Hey Anonymous | 6:14 p.m. June 18, 2008

I was going to close this out but noticed your comment on mine. Am I reading you right, you need to be LDS to be a sexual preditor? Have you googled anything but LDS? Seems anytime there is anything on LDS you're all over it to run it into the ground. Try googling Catholic + sexual abuse, or Male + sexual abuse, or female + sexual abuse, or juveniles + sexual abuse, or any combination of scenarios. I'm sure you'll find plenty and find that all sexual abusers ARE NOT LDS. All the post was saying was gay isn't the issue with the Boy Scouts thus all gays are not sexual preditors. Besides, not all Boy Scout groups are affiliated with LDS. Didn't know that, huh? GOOGLE IT!

I think reading through these posts, people are just afraid of what they don't understand. I really don't understand the gay lifestyle, but I don't really feel threatened by it either, so I'm not going to stress about it.

I wondered how this all came around anyway. Wasn't the original news story about gay marriage becoming legal in California and not to get in a tizzy and start frivilous law suits?

re:anonymous | 6:13 p.m. June 18, 2008

"30 years ago everyone - even the medical, psychiatric, psychological associations - agreed that homosexuality was a sickness, a mental illness, a deviance."

And forty years ago, people were saying the same thing about blacks. You can't stop the inevitable: Gay marriage will eventually become accepted by the federal government.

And whereas Mormon culture will never LEAVE Utah, its influence, slowly and surely will not only diminish, but become far more progressive. The youth of this day, LDS or not, see a need for change.

Anonymous | 6:16 p.m. June 18, 2008

I don't think people should speak about the issues with the gays. I will say we wait for direction from the prophet and then we can discuss this topic.

To Eye Dee Ten Tee | 6:16 p.m. June 18, 2008

I can absolutely GUARANTEE you that the LDS church will NEVER, repeat "NEVER" allow homosexual marriages to occur in our Temples or even in our chapels.

Just won't happen.

The Church will gladly lose it's tax exempt status and every other "perk" (or whatever you want to call it) extended to us but it can not, WILL NOT, EVER yield to the lower morals of those who think homosexual "unions" or "marriages" are morally acceptable.

I do think very strongly that the LDS church will eventually get drug into court for this very reason, and the Church will no doubt pull out all the stops and do everything in their legal power to fight it. But they will win because the Church is essentially a private organization. It does not accept government funding at any level; federal, state or city, and therefore, can not be dictated to by any form of government what we "must" allow.

Will we lose our tax exempt status? Maybe. But if so, so be it. Will the Church maybe then ask for more than 10% of our income? Maybe.

May God bless the LDS people and any other church who will stand up to evil.

To California | 6:17 p.m. June 18, 2008

I understand, really I do. But I think that's because they really feel that the issue they're forcing only stands to affect them and just don't see what opponents see as catastrophic consequences to anyone else.

Thank you | 6:17 p.m. June 18, 2008

I'm a gay former RM living in Boston. I want to sincerely thank most of the people posting on here, because the tone of the debate has improved.

I live in Massachusetts, the issue is pretty much settled here. Same-sex marriage became legal and the sky did not fall. People got used to it; New England folks don't normally discuss their marriages or religion.

"Civil Unions" with equal rights in civil law is fine with me as a compromise.

So thanks, sincerely.

Cali reader | 6:17 p.m. June 18, 2008

"for all you chicken littles out there,the world is not ending, the sky is not falling, there is no second coming. I know you need to beleive this to make your religion true but I hate to be the one to break it to you, you are only getting out of this world one way and that is the way we are all get out,through death."

Maybe not tomorrow or even in my lifetime, but I hate to break it to YOU. There will be a Second Coming. There will also be and has already been consequences for the choices we are making. I am not just talking about homosexual sex. We are a country that could enjoy so much more prosperity and happiness, but we have left what truly matters. Same-sex marriage is only one more step, although a big one) down the slope. Whether or not you choose to believe, there is a God, who while he loves each of His of children, will not condone actions contrary to His laws. You don't have to believe me, but it is so.

Re: If this happens in Utah | 6:19 p.m. June 18, 2008

You are right on the mark! It isn't a matter of IF the church will get pressure to accept "gay marriage", it has already started! Wait until Obama loads up the Supreme Court with liberal judges and the church is told we are discriminating against people because we don't allow gay marriages in our Temples. You think what happened to the FLDS in Texas won't happen to us? Can you see Federal Marshalls with search warrents storming our Temples to enforce court orders from activist judges? The definition of freedom of religion will be decided by a liberal judge very soon.

Law suits from Gays? | 6:24 p.m. June 18, 2008

The big suits are a comin". Just watch our tax dollars at use defending state constitutions and lawsuit payouts for "cruel and unusual punishment" to gays for having to wait to get married after a judge overrules the consent of the people. The Utah Senator knows exactly what he is starting. Do you here the sound of money flowing out of our pockets to the gay rights groups and greedy lawyers. Now that is a big clang.

Think about this | 6:28 p.m. June 18, 2008

A gay friend and I were talking years ago and I couldn't understand the whole concept. I finally asked him why he would even consider that lifestyle and (to clean it up for posting) what everyone thinks about when people are talking gay relationships.

His comment to me really made me have to stop and think. He simply said, "Is that all your relationship is to you, just physical and nothing else. It's the same with us as it is with you. We have feelings and emotions just like everyone else. Physical relations have very little to do with our lifestyle".

Anonymous | 6:38 p.m. June 18, 2008

Some of you really are a bunch of hysterics. Could it be your projecting the meanness of spirit you've always reserved for gay Americans? Just because you operate that way doesn't mean gay people will. But there are many of us gay and straight who really hold the Constitution in high regard and want equal rights for ALL Americans.

Warren L. Hennig | 6:41 p.m. June 18, 2008

Once again an article with the word "gay" in the headline generates HUNDREDS more posts on this website than any other article. What is it about this community that obsesses so on this issue?

This community continues to show that it thinks this issue is more serious or a bigger threat than any other. With all that is happening in the world, I seriously wonder why it is that this community seems to lack any perspective. You simple don't see this in other parts of the country.

I merely scanned them, but many of these posts reveal some serious misunderstandings and overstated fears bordering on paranoia. I mean this not as an insult but as a serious observation: I really wonder whether there is some relationship between this and the fact that prozac and related drugs are prescribed in Utah so much more than anywhere else. And yet alas, it does not seem to be working.

bystander | 6:46 p.m. June 18, 2008

Homogamy will be legalized in Utah. After a short time the predominant LDS church will accept it. The church's stance has always been to be subject to the law of the land. FYI there has already been homosexuals inside the temples (D. Michael Quinn). There are already homosexual "couples" of the LDS faith. The church is too politically correct to take a stand against homosexuality. I don't care if gays get married. "Marriage" is a legal term anymore and hardly anyone uses it with a religous, let alone moral connotation.

To bunch of Hysterics | 6:51 p.m. June 18, 2008

Ben to a gay pride parade lately? Hold up the constituion and want equal right for all people? Gay pride actiivist were in one of our Veteran Days parades here last year. Families with children who did not know they were there were shocked at the behavior of mocking soldiers, the flag and showing perverted behaviors. I was there, as family after family left in disgust. The mayors office was overwhelmed with complaints. I am sick of gays telling me they are like me. I do not show perverted sex acts in front of family on a public street. Gay pride spokesman said that they had the permit and freedom of speech to do what they did. I don't live in Utah or anywhere near it. There are very few LDS here. Making gay marriage legal in California is just another avenue to use by gays to push their perverted attitudes on the rest of us no matter what. You need to get real.

Re: Rich at 9:37 AM | 6:51 p.m. June 18, 2008

So you think the Jesus in the Bible is really all that different than the "Mormon Jesus"?....the Biblical Jesus is "accepting" of everyone while that bad, ol' Jesus in LDS doctrine is "mean". Is that right?

What about the Christ in the Bible who drove out the money-changers from the temple WITH A WHIP? What about the Biblical Christ who constantly chastised and condemned the Saducees and Pharisees? What about the Biblical Christ who stubbornly stood His ground and refused to answer the false accusations of those who condemned him to die upon the cross?

Does the homosexuals' Bible include THOSE depictions of the Savior or did you edit those out?

Jesus Christ, as God's only begotten Son, has standards and He will not change them, no matter who cries for it to be different.

Make no mistake in this; Christ IS accepting of "EVERYONE", but NOT accepting of everyone's "ACTIONS". Why the vast majority of the homosexual population won't see that is mind boggling....

Wow | 6:50 p.m. June 18, 2008

Wow gay posters, why all the hate? Why is it that gay people can be so sarcastic and hateful in proving their point?

Camels: Coincidence? | 6:52 p.m. June 18, 2008

In 1969, Spencer W. Kimball wrote about sin entering our lives by using the image of the camel, coaxing its owner to let him sleep in the tent during a particularly windy evening in the desert. Once the camel's nose was sympathetically allowed inside, trying to prevent him from taking over the entire tent became impossible. "Miracle of Forgiveness" (1969) pp 215-216

Less than two decades later, the following was printed in Guide Magazine in an article entitled "The Overhauling of Straight America", (October-November 1987) by Marshall Kirk and Erastus Pill: "In the early stages of our campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be exposed to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent - and only later his unsightly derriere."

Rights? | 6:54 p.m. June 18, 2008

Responsibility. Rights flow from responsibility.

In general gays do not care about society, only wanting to push their perverse agenda and market it.

About 15 years ago the Chicago hotel I stayed in was hosting a conference about using the legal system to push their agenda on society. I read through a binder that someone left behind. This effort is well organized and funded.

We have not seen anything yet...

A free society requires moral, selfless behavior or it will fail. A great polarization is occuring. Stay grounded and follow your concience. Teach and live correct principles to your family.

I have a cousin and one friend who are gay. I don't agree at all with their lifestyle. After understanding their paticular situations, I know they have made the choices to "become" gay. If society wasn't accepting of this practice neither of them would have done it. I will keep supporting them as a friend. I'll do anything righteous for them. These two do admit when we have personal conversations that they are more focused on gratification than on being responsible. Hopefully my Psychology background is helpul at times to them. We will see.

porky | 6:58 p.m. June 18, 2008

it used to be i didn't like getting old, but lately it's looking better and better since it just means i won't be around to watch our formerly great society crumble around its lost morals.

Re: BYDC at 10:13, 8 June | 7:01 p.m. June 18, 2008

BYDC, you're missing the point. Agreed that heterosexual cohabitation (ie, "living together") also weakens the instutution of marriage. However, heterosexual cohabitation only offers ONE alternative to a heterosexual marriage. A homosexual union (or marriage) offers ANOTHER possible choice. Now my kids would have two choices besides a traditional man/woman marriage.

THAT is how any other living arrangement besides a male/female marriage weakens the institution of marriage.

I'm confident you are smart enough to see this....

Anonymous | 7:04 p.m. June 18, 2008

So where is the example of Christ attacking homosexuals if the issue is so serious? Meanwhile, whose church has a booth inside the temple where money is exchanged for weird costumes?

Anonymous | 7:05 p.m. June 18, 2008

The mormon jesus is sure an odd cat. I would think we need to re-address what hatred really is as I see alot of that being spread here and it the mormons whom are spreading it but thinking they are being helpful. Whats that all about?

I don't care | 7:09 p.m. June 18, 2008

Why is it that gay activists insist on having everyone else accept and even embrace their perversions? Most of us don't really care what you do in your private life. We just object to you shoving it down our throats everyday! Go be gay if you want, we don't really care what you do! We just don't want to embrace what to us are perversions.

Re: Anonymous | 7:16 p.m. June 18, 2008

Can you see that the "most lost" is the person who doesn't even know he's lost?....

Reality | 7:19 p.m. June 18, 2008

A wise person sees that sexual immorality brings enormous problems into one's life. I've read well over 150 of these posts and have yet to see a single, blatantly inflammatory, homo-bashing comment here. Sure, there are stern comments addressing the act of homosexuality, but no posts tearing down homosexuals as human beings.

What exactly are you looking at, "Anonymous"?

We can't say who's "religious" | 7:27 p.m. June 18, 2008

Religion holds many forms and gay people can be "religious" too. They might want the blessing of their spiritual advisor (and yes, there are some churches willing to perform gay marriages) or they may want "civil unions" (just like other people). The "golden rule" applies here too "do unto others as you would have done to you". If you don't want other people judging your relationships then stop judging theirs!

Its over | 7:44 p.m. June 18, 2008

Is there conservative left who still truly believes that there is any chance at all that their point of view will prevail? The fight over homosexual marriage and the acceptance of homosexuality is over. Homosexuality IS in the mainstream. Its accepted. Look at TV, Look at magazines, ;ook at the people walking the street. They are not pushing it in the mainstream rather they are observing that it is. I mean the opposition to this question are the SAME folks fighting against integration in the 50's. The outcome to this is inevitable. Obsolete points of view die. In 50 years, no conservative will dare speak against gay marriage. It will be part of our society and it should be. We will be a tolerant society.

LDS In Oregon | 7:48 p.m. June 18, 2008

1) The people complaining about "unelected" judges need to realize that they didn't just magically appear; they were appointed by elected officials (and as someone mentioned in California's case, by Republicans.) I'm also guessing that the same people didn't mind when the Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount in 2000 and essentially appointed George W. Bush as President.

2) The people obsessing about dogs/sheep/adulterers/polygamy just sound silly. Marriage as a union between two consenting adults and nothing more. What's so hard about that to understand?

3) The people ranting about the Church losing its' tax-exempt status sound ever sillier. People, the Church is a PRIVATE organization that doesn't receive one penny in tax funds, and the courts have repeatedly ruled that private organizations have the right to discriminate against anyone they want (And that goes for the Boy Scouts as well.) Don't worry, gays aren't going to force their way into the temple.

4) My wife and I were married in the temple and we're the proud parents of a two year-old. Civil unions were legalized here in February and you know what? We're still just as married as we were before. Funny how that works...

MY SLC | 8:05 p.m. June 18, 2008

My partner and I live in downtown SLC. We (and the bank) own a house pay taxes etc. We are both professionals, work hard, keep the yard nice and are good neighbors and vote. I am also a RM and son of a bishop.

I live in Scott McCoy's district and will continue to vote for him. He is a decent, honest man and represents his district.

The hate of the gays on this site is amazing. Do you realize how many of us are your brothers, sisters etc? We work with you everyday. All we are asking is for equal rights.

wow | 8:17 p.m. June 18, 2008

Disagree with gay marriage and you bash gays. Clever little way of trashing the other side. Clever, clever, clever and extremely vile.

SLC'er | 8:24 p.m. June 18, 2008

Wowwwwwww, too many comments to read them all. One quick comment to John C. at 1:10. Rome declined when it became a Christian nation. When it was without morals Rome was at its pinnacle. First looser liquor laws, now allowing other fine, homosexual citizens to marry . . . Lord help us, this state is becoming normal! Oh wait . . . then there's the racism issue.

Judy | 8:40 p.m. June 18, 2008

Churches make all sorts of rules about who can marry within the church. The state can't compel a church to perform rites for someone who doesn't qualify. Churches discriminate all the time--Catholic priests won't perform a ceremony for two non-Catholics or where one partner was previously married in the church (even though they are legally divorced). Churches can require that marriage partners be of opposite sexes if that is their doctrine. However, religious doctrine is one thing, but as long as the STATE provides a service to residents, it can't discrimination. Marriage can be religious but it doesn't have to be and as long as it doesn't have to be, the secular options should be open to all.
I bet that most of you who find gay marriage threatening don't know any gay couples. My kids all grew up with the kids of gay and lesbian couples and I got to know the parents well--and they are first and foremost people in loving relationships. Get to know committed gay couples and you won't find it so threatening.

Get ready | 8:39 p.m. June 18, 2008

The thing is the day is coming when it's in the church's interest to proclaim gays members holding the priesthood (at least the male ones; recognizing women as full members will be later). When that day comes you will all be in a conference and called on to sustain the Authorities.

How are you going to deal with the judgmentalism in your hearts then?

And if you think it won't ever happen ask your grandparents who learned that Heavenly Father had found some spirits to be unvaliant in the pre-existence and given them the Mark of Cain so we could all recognize their unworthiness if they thought Blacks would be priesthood holders and how much latitude they had to hold on to old ideas then.

To SLCer | 8:59 p.m. June 18, 2008

Dude, check your history book as it must have been ruined in a snow storm in Salt Lake. That is the worst review of the Roman Empire I have ever read. Talk about completing rewriting history for a political motive. Pathetic. Ouch! it really hurts to know someone is so totally not read anything.

BYDC | 9:08 p.m. June 18, 2008

Re: "missing the point"

I think we've discovered the rub. I don't believe that homosexuality is a choice (and overwhelmingly legitimate evidence doesn't support the choice position either). So I don't think children in general are susceptible to be enticed by same-sex marriage. But if they discover in adolescence that they are gay, I would truly hope that they would be able to see committed gay couples as role models. It would save them from so much of the grief that countless gay people who came before them have experienced.

Ralph | 9:11 p.m. June 18, 2008

Here's the irony, right now gays and heteros get equal treatment under the law in Utah. Neither can enter into same sex marriages.

This notion of Gay/Lesbian marriage is mistakenly thought of as the end of the moral highway for our sexual views. The problem is it's not the end of the highway but one more stop on the ever-degrading road.

Look at how our views have changed since the 60's regarding sex and sexual relationships. What's next once when we get past this sticking point? Once upon a time the notion of gay/lesbian relations was revolting to the majority of us. Now most people tolerate it.

It's just like the adage of the frog in a pot of water on the stove. If you threw him in while boiling he'd jump right out again, but if you put him in while the water's cool and then slowly crank up the heat he gets used to each increase until too late.

What's next? If laws are changed for Gays/Lesbians, are pedophiles next? Anyone watch "To Catch a Predator" on Dateline? That huge number of pedophiles caught each week's a small percentage of the overall total still "in the closet"

To "I don't care" | 9:11 p.m. June 18, 2008

Nobody's trying to shove anything in your face. Let us have the same rights and benefits that you have, and we will gladly disappear into our own private lives. In fact, contrary to the "sky is falling" crowd, you won't even notice us because we'll be the same as everyone else.

To "reality" | 9:20 p.m. June 18, 2008

No offensive comments, huh? Comparing my relationship with my partner to "marrying a dog"? Did you miss that one? How about the suggestions that gays are a danger to children as pedophiles, or if not that as bad role models? What about the suggestions that gays only want to marry as a way of getting money from the government in the form of benefits, or, in the alternative, in order to destroy churches?

You may not have found any of these posts offensive, but I would say that's either because they weren't directed at you, or because you have a really high threshold for what is inflammatory.

(In fairness, there have probably been even more posts which mock religion or are offensive to Mormons in particular. I make no excuse for them. Offensive is offensive and I wish people would refrain from such comments so that we could have a more civil dialog.)

Rich | 9:52 p.m. June 18, 2008

Same sex marriage is simply wrong. Same sex advocates are a faction or group who support a particular view that is not held by the majority of the country yet they wish to impose their views and interests on everyone else.

Thomas Jefferson cautioned us against factions. They seek to overthrow the will of the people and promote their agendas.

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.