Deseret News | Gay couples in Utah urged not to sue

Reader comments
Gay couples in Utah urged not to sue

428 comments | Read story

STOP the insanity! | 9:55 p.m. June 18, 2008

Sexual orientation is not the same as race, and I am SICK of people equating the two. Anyone who says that sexual orientation is the same as race is LYING!

To: Rich | 9:58 p.m. June 18, 2008

You said:

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

Live in Utah do you, well this phrase should ring a bell. The LDS have been doing it for years and now you are using this same concept to attack another. Nice but you've hit it on the head and now you can self reflect.

Gal50 | 10:03 p.m. June 18, 2008

Homosexual marriage is a civil rights issue. African-Americans got their civil rights some forty years ago. Because this is a point in time where blacks have civil rights and gays don't, people still feel discrimination against gays is acceptable although they don't accept discrimination against blacks when in fact the people who are against gay marriage are just like those who were against civil rights for blacks. It is a horrible thing to deny people the rights they are due.

After a civil rights movement, discriminatory people start to understand why it is wrong. A greater percentage of people understand why it is wrong to discriminate against blacks today than forty years ago and forty years later, people will have the same understanding when it comes to gays.

People can access their hatred to form beliefs about blacks, gays and others, however, they are not allowed to write laws based on hatred. They must use sound judgment. Because scientific evidence supports a genetic component to homosexuality, there can be no discriminatory laws. A civil union is probably an example of separate but equal is inherently unequal. Heterosexuals who are uncomfortable with demonstrations of gay love will have to adjust.

Comments continue below

Dale Newton | 10:03 p.m. June 18, 2008

To John C - not a bad comment - but, please learn how to spell - it's so bad I thought you were/are trying to be funny...

Tracy | 10:04 p.m. June 18, 2008

That pedophilia is more common in gays is unproven. Many many young girls are molested, almost always by men living a heterosexual lifestyle. In fact more girls than boys are molested in the US. Despite the focus on boys in the clergy scandals, many girls were also molested by priests. Some studies show that pedophilia is primarily about power and that as the disease progresses, the perpetrator may molest both boys and girls. Some experts theorize that gays who stay in the closet may seek out adolescent partners largely due to the shame of admitting their attraction to another same sex adult. If this is true, the best protection against adults preying on teen boys would be celebrating mature monogamous gay relationships. However, we certainly celebrate mature monogamous hetero relationships and many many girls, including teens, suffer at the hands of married men, including their own fathers and step-fathers. Let's drop the prejudice that pedophilia is a "gay" thing--it just isn't so and it certainly is no reason to oppose gay marriage.

The NIT | 10:11 p.m. June 18, 2008

What a sad, sad commentary on the cultural shift in the USA today - this should be a non-story. Who cares that some individuals with the same sexual preference choose to unite? And "marriage" is the wrong word to use and it's not a right, but a legal definition. If two heterosexuals chose to unite it wouldn't be news and I would hope that someone marrying a sheep wouldn't be an article in the Deseret news. However, it probably would be - and would be just as silly and just as sad.

Ed | 10:13 p.m. June 18, 2008

Got news for All Homosexuals...you have equal rights in all 50 states. You can get married the same as anyone else. Pick a member of the opposite sex and set the date. You can't re-define Marriage...it's always been between a man and a woman. What will be next... I want to Marry my XXX (you fill it in)...brother, sister, mother...why not allow plural marriage...if you have two or more 'consenting' adults...what's the problem, right?

Too bad | 10:13 p.m. June 18, 2008

Women and racial minorities should be offended. Now those groups are being thrown together with homosexual deviants. Sort of cheapens what women and minorities have had to do to get to where they are.

Homosexuality is aberrant and abnormal. Being a woman isn't. Homosexuals are not being "denied" any civil rights. They go to the same schools etc. This is not a case of separate but equal.

Homosexuals should be ashamed for how they have hijacked Civil Rights that stood for equality for women and racial minorities.

Todd | 10:22 p.m. June 18, 2008

Please don't sue Utah. (wink wink) Please please don't sue. (I am so noble aren't I) No really please do not sue. (Maybe if I suggest it then...people will get the idea to sue)

Cambria | 10:27 p.m. June 18, 2008

I am a teacher at an elementary school. I see first hand how this gay issue effects kids. They other day two little girls came to me almost in tears saying that people were calling them gay because they hung out too much together.. What the? They asked me what gay was and told them to ask their parents but I assured them that they were not gay!

Isn't that sad. Now children can't even have close friendships without being called gay.

Maybe the children should sue.. The are the ones who lose in this mess.,

Anonymous | 10:28 p.m. June 18, 2008

Actually, a lawsuit here would not go well for the homosexuals.

to too bad | 10:39 p.m. June 18, 2008

You're a hater. I'm a straight woman who's been in the same marriage for 47 years. You can throw me in with racial minorities and gays if you want to. I don't mind in the least standing with people who want to exercise their right to pursue their happiness just like everyone else. I am proud to stand with the Constitution for equal protection for all.

And to anyone who wants to equate homosexuality and pedophilia check out the number of lawsuits against LDS bishops and scout leaders for abusing young people. It will blow your minds. And that's just the tip of the iceberg because unless the victims and their families are willing to bring a lawsuit (and they're counseled NOT to) it gets swept under a rug and the deviant bishop goes on calling unsuspecting young people into private interviews.

To: Cambria | 10:45 p.m. June 18, 2008

Maybe you should teach the kids not to bully? Maybe you could explain that the word gay is not that bad, because 1 out of 10 of your students will turn out gay, inevitable. My kid brother is gay and was bullied almost to death in school. It was heartbreaking and he became inactive and moved far away.

So, Cambria, the children lose because they have teachers like you, and not because someone in San Diego who you've never met might be getting married.

awesomeron | 10:51 p.m. June 18, 2008

Wow this issue gets more comments the issues on the S Word. I wonder why. Considering what the Mods must have rejected they have been busy people. The issue of Gay Marriage in California, will be taken care of the Day after Election Day. They can call it Civil Union all they want and I believe that they should have protection under the law for Property, Health, Child Custody etc. However Marriage is between a Man and a Women. no matter how fulfilling or unfulfilling that may be. Some times the Marriage is a cover up for one or both partners.

Folks | 10:52 p.m. June 18, 2008

The day comes and goes and the sun rises and sets and people can say as they will. Time advances. Homosexuality is a sin and that can be argued and justified and perveted for years and years to come. Its practice brings condemnation. It is self-destructive behavior. One generation of homosexuality is all that can exist. Comparisons can be made to nature, but mankind and womankind are not the same as any other creatures out there. Some use the word God quickly. Let it never be said, however, that I didn't love you enough to warn you of consequences of your peversions in morality if you have immoral behaviors of any degree. Homosexuality is one immoral behavior that exists in several. Let it never be said that I didn't love you enough to tell you that we can all improve and become better people. We can repent and thank goodness for it. The advocates of homosexual marriages who disagree no matter the pursuasion are like, "blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel." Matt. 23:24 What I say I say in love and warning. Good night.

Just a thought | 10:53 p.m. June 18, 2008

Isn't it funny how the same people who are touting taking care of the environment and keeping things natural are the ones who are for homosexuality (a very unnatural act) Interesting....

Joan | 11:08 p.m. June 18, 2008

Hang on a minute. Shouldn't homosexuals have the same right to marry, divorce, get a divorce attorney and be miserable the rest of their lives like the rest of us? I wish I was an attorney. I know the world is coming to an end, just like it was touted in the ancient Greek times (remember the ancient Greek... the ones who practiced homosexuality with boys). One thing we know for sure is that when the world does actually come to an end, there will be a divorce attorney somewhere writing a nasty letter to somebody's ex. The older I get, the more nothing changes.

l | 11:58 p.m. June 18, 2008

to Todd | 10:22 p.m.

Actually, one of the worst things for the gay marriage movement would be for someone in Utah to sue, since they would not be successful here and that would slow their progress nationwide.

Dysfunction Junction | 12:12 a.m. June 19, 2008

How about the state stop sanctioning marriages and let religious institutions deal with the "phrase" marriage. The Gov't should be giving civil unions to all americans, regardless of creed, religious affliations, orientation, etc. If marriage is such a sacred word, take it away from the government.

Oh but you are! | 12:22 a.m. June 19, 2008

Law suits (what this article is about) forcing the rest of us to embrace your perversions is not shoving your life style in our face?

Same sex marriages | 1:03 a.m. June 19, 2008

Do same sex "marriages" still have a mother in law?

Californian | 1:34 a.m. June 19, 2008

I am SICK of hearing people compare the gay agenda and racial issues. Same-sex ï¿½marriageï¿½ restrictions are NOT equivalent to anti-miscegenation laws. This is a favorite argument of ï¿½gaysï¿½ who want to garner sympathy by playing victim. Itï¿½s totally spurious. Anti-miscegenation laws forbade people of different races from marrying. A natural relationship between a man and a woman, which is what God and nature intended, was prohibited by law. To talk about racial issues in the same breath as same-sex ï¿½marriageï¿½ is disrespectful to people who risked their lives so Americans of all races could have equal voting, educational, and economic rights.

People change all the time. People are fickle, imperfect, and largely directed by self-interest and their own desires and agendas. Thatï¿½s why we need unchanging, eternal standards given by an unchanging, eternal God. God is unchanging, and that isnï¿½t from the Book of Mormon but from Malachi 3:6 in the Bible that all Jews and Christians love.

You have a right to believe God is a dinosaur. And if He is, Iï¿½m happy to be created in His image.

It beats me!!! | 2:20 a.m. June 19, 2008

Frankly, it beats me with a divorce rate of nearly 60% why anyone would fight for the right to marry. I mean you only have to look at someone nowdays and it seems that your in a relationship and you have to hand over half of everything that you own if it doesnt work out or you sneeze!! COUNT ME OUT!!!!

ProvoSubscriber | 3:31 a.m. June 19, 2008

This was coming. Just like abolishment of polygamy came as did the end of blacks not receiving the priesthood. Gay marriage is coming, so let's just deal with it. I remember a few years ago when most of Utah was against "gay-rights". That gay-rights is now history...because gay people have legal rights too. If we could have just supported gay-rights and civil-union for our gay friends, gay neighbors, gay family members, and fellow gay church members...it probably would have been a different story. Why can't we be proactive and ahead of the game? Make civil-union legal in Utah with all rights garanteed to same-sex couples. We do not want to be known as a "throw-back state", a "hill-billy state" or "red neck state". As an active LDS member...I support civil-union but not gay marriage (which is sure to come).

Judy | 5:20 a.m. June 19, 2008

To Ed: Unfortunately, over the years, many many homosexuals have "exercised" this right to marry someone of the opposite sex and the results are often tragic. People often enter into traditional marriages when they are young and in the closet and maybe in denial about their own sexuality. After much heartbreak they often divorce. This doesn't just happen in CA and MA; it happens because people realize that they cannot keep living a lie and cannot continue the intimacy required in their marriage.

To 1:03 AM--of course someone in a same sex marriage still has a mother-in-law! Sometimes the parents cannot tolerate knowing their child is gay but others are happy to have their children in committed loving relationships. When parents are upset to find out a child is gay, it is often because they fear the child will be ostracized, partnerless and mourn the loss of grandchildren. And parents can be as wonderful or as awful to same sex partners as they can be with opposite sex partners.

Many comments reflect the writers' ignorance of real people and couples. Meet the gay people around you there in UTAH--about 10% of the population, like anywhere else!

to fence sitter | 7:22 a.m. June 19, 2008

I have no problem with other peoples sexual orientation. I just don't think any of us need to run around the world talking about it as our defining attribute. I do have a problem with people who don't have enough of a backbone to make a stand or have a belief in something or to have their own opinion. It is really ok to decide what is right or wrong "for you and your family". Don't leave yourself an out so you can agree with whoever makes you feel good at the moment. Eventually you will get yourself NOWHERE by fence sitting.

J. Warren | 8:34 a.m. June 19, 2008

Here is an idea. Lets ban marriage entirely!!! Lets face you hetereosexuals have destroyed it! Divorce rates over 50%, people frequently end up getting married multiple times in thier lives. Lets just abolish marriage, then no one will be left out.

So to protect the institution of marriage lets prevent it.

somebody | 9:06 a.m. June 19, 2008

I personally think the greatest supporters of gay marriage are Divorce Attorneys. They will have a brand new market.

Cherilyn Bacon Eagar | 9:16 a.m. June 19, 2008

Two reasons why marriage must remain between a man and a woman:

1.When a social practice becomes legal, it must then be taught in government schools, whose mission is to ï¿½socializeï¿½ students to the laws of the nation-state. (The National Education Association surveyed its teachers and found that only 28% of them vote Republican.) State standards, curriculum and testing have complied with the national plan (No Child Left Behind), a parallel of the United Nations counterpart (Education for All Framework). Policies from the national and international levels support same gender marriage under ï¿½equityï¿½ language. Bottom line: our children and grandchildren must be taught that same gender marriage is legal and normal. Parents who want a future for their children in which their values are represented must either express their outrage and take back their schools or retreat and find alternative settings to educate their children.
2. When same gender marriage is legalized, children can then be legally adopted. This issue is not about adults and their happiness. Itï¿½s about children and their well-being. No sociological study has yet determined that a child is better off without both a mother and a father.

Cherilyn Bacon Eagar
World Class Education Research

A little reality | 9:23 a.m. June 19, 2008

"Frankly, it beats me with a divorce rate of nearly 60% why anyone would fight for the right to marry. "

That's very high. I think you must be referring to UT which is in the top quarter of state divorce rates for the nation.

MA with its same sex marriages only have half as many -- behind only the District of Columbia. And the rate actually went down when same sex marriages were allowed.

To Anonymous 6:16: | 10:00 a.m. June 19, 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."

We've already received direction from the prophet on this matter on more than one occasion. Unfortunately, many people have chosen not to listen to him or heed his advice.

And to "Get ready": Women already ARE full members of the LDS church. We are not oppressed in any way, shape or form. Please stop perpetuating such a ridiculous rumor.

YBU | 10:01 a.m. June 19, 2008

"Bottom line: our children and grandchildren must be taught that same gender marriage is legal and normal."

If same-sex marriage becomes legal, what is wrong with teaching that it is legal? It will be a fact.

Normal? It will never be the norm because only about 10% of the population is gay, so,it might be taught that a few people have marriages like that, but 90% of them do not. Besides, I don't remember being taught anything about marriages in school until maybe a high school sociology or psychology class. I think most high schoolers know about homosexuals by then.

Think of the children | 10:26 a.m. June 19, 2008

Every child should have a loving and caring mother AND father. That is the ideal, but that is not always possible so we have adoption which more closely approximates the ideal. Single parent households and gay parent households are not ideal, but maybe they are better than children having no parents at all.

John Lambert | 11:04 a.m. June 19, 2008

The comparison of anti-interacial marriage and anti-same-gender marriage laws is a misguided comparison.
Man and woman are designed as complimentary to each other. Psychological stuies show that children are best adjusted if they have a father and a mother. The definition of gender is obvious and biological. The status of men and women are inherently different because among other things only women get pregnant.
Anti-interacial marriage laws are another issue completely. It is a sad fact that Utah had one. How did it end you may ask. The state legislature repealed it in 1964. It is true that Virginia and several other states had their anti-inter-racial marriage laws repealed in 1967 by the supreme court, but these laws were not universal or from the beganing of time.
While marriage between a man and a woman has been that way since Adam and Eve, race and marriage are much more complexed issues. Race is not biologcial. Depending on who you ask there are between 3 and 100 or maybe more races. Although most Americans would be classed consistently in one race this is not always so.

John Lambert | 11:10 a.m. June 19, 2008

I have more to say on race and marriage.
What race is Barak Obama? Interestingly enough in theory his parents marriage would have gotten them thrown in jail in Virginia at the time of his birth.
However the Loving vs. Virginia case that caused the end of anti-interracial marriage laws originated with a marriage performed in DC, where it was entirely legal.
Race had never been an integral part of marriage. Maryland's 17th Century law recognized that white women and black men were actually getting married. In fact it made a woman who insisted on entering such a marriage a slave if her husband was. The issue never was if a white and black could enter a marriage, but whether such was legally recognized.
There are a lot of people in the United States whose race is not easiy defined. The census has five racial categories, but three of these also have lots of subcategories that are recognized as races to some extent. Then there is the "some other race" designation. Over 20% of the people in Los Angeles County marked this. Actually even this is a misleading statement.

Mike Mayers | 11:11 a.m. June 19, 2008

The sad fact of the matter is, hate is driven by fear! The reason all of you are so opposed to the issue of gay marriage is because you are afraid of what may happen! Why hate and be afraid? Why not instead try and educate your narrow minded views and learn something. Gay people are all around. We are your friends, your coworkers, your family members! We work in the stores you shop in, the banks you go to, and the restaurants you eat at! We are people just like everyone else and I am so sick of hearing all of this insane banter! Marriage is between consenting adults! Whether it be two men, two women, a man and a women, or seven women and a man, it doesn't matter! It is none of any of your business to say who should be allowed to get married as long as all parties involved can make the decision for themselves and are adults! I have always tried to be cival and love people for what they believed in, even though I might not agree, all we are asking for is the same respect! Stop being afraid!

John Lambert | 11:15 a.m. June 19, 2008

Why is the 20% in LA county misleading. If you read through census directives on interpreting race you find that in the process of tabulating results they changes what people actually said. If someone marked "some other race" and put in say "Arab" then they were counted as white.
There is also the number of people who marked more than one race. Then there are people like me who marked Native American. My last full blooded Native American ancestor died sometime in the 1600s, and I am only sure about having Margeret daughter of Quadequina on one line. President Hinckley also descended from this lady so he was probably more Native American than me. I marked the census the way I did because I distrusted what the government would do with those marking more than one race. I had been incluenced to do this by a man who was only going to mark his Native American ancestry because he was afraid if he also marked his African American ancestry he would only be counted as such.
Next I will give a short consideration of anti-interracial marriage laws.

John Lambert | 11:21 a.m. June 19, 2008

As I have tried to show, race is complexed. Anyone who has followed attempts by people to trace their race through DNA will know that some people have found their DNA does not put them in the race they always identified with.
In Virginia they had a two part rule. There were only three races acknowledged in the law. Whites, Blacks and American Indians. Anyone with any black descent was black. A black could not marry a white. With American Indians I believe the threshold was one sixteenth. This is because everyone of the first families of Virginia could trace their descent from Pocahontas and her husband John Rolfe, who was White. This marriage would have been illegal under latter Virginia law, but at least their descendants could marry white people. If you were one sixteenth or more Indian you could not marry whites. No laws governed marriages of Indians and blacks. I am not sure how they dealt with Chinese and other groups from Asia.
One last thing. Such marriages were criminal. There were jail penalties assigned. These were nothing like laws aginst same sex marriage.

John Lambert | 11:46 a.m. June 19, 2008

ANyone opposed to same sex marriage should ask their local school librarian if the library has a copy of "it's perfectly normal". This book supports same sex marriage, homoseuality as normal, accused those who aoppose it of being hate mongers and bigoted. This is before we consider the fact it is aimed at 8 to 12 year olds, takes an irreverent approach to sexual relations, advocates 8 reasons to have an abortion and not one not to have an abortion, and mocks faiths that teach that masturbation is anything but "perfectly normal". I know they have it in the children's section at the public library here in Sterling Heights, Michigan. I do not know if your neighborhood library has been invaded by this vile book in a place where children can easily access it.

John Lambert | 11:53 a.m. June 19, 2008

People have misunderstood EDTT's comments. His point is that people will sue the church. However current church policy would prevent a same-gender couple from getting baptized.
I just hope the constitutional admendment passes in California.

To YBU | 12:08 p.m. June 19, 2008

NO IT IS NOT NORMAL. There is no way to convince self absorbed, selfish people to change. I will never teach my children that the gay lifestyle is normal. My children are in their teen and twenties and not in Utah. We have few Mormons here. But, they see the bad behavior of Gays and are repulsed by what they are doing openly in our community. You are far from total acceptance anywhere but San Fransisco.

John Lambert | 12:14 p.m. June 19, 2008

I am in theory left handed, but I chose to write this piece entirely with my right hand. I may not be able to chose my basic abilities but I do chose my actions.

John Lambert | 12:42 p.m. June 19, 2008

If the people who oppose same sex marriage are the same as those who opposed women getting the vote, than why was Utah the second state to give women the vote?
People keep on claiming those of us who defend traditional marriage are the haters. Yet, it is the advocates of same-sex marriage who claim they understand our ideological views.
I have done my part to try to end racial segragation, at times meeting the anger of people who still want the races seperated. Do not claim that those of us who believe that only a man and a woman should marry are racists. I see as my heros such men as Marcus Martins. If you do not understand why this proves my point, do an archive search of the Deseret News and bring up the picture of his family.

for the archive | 12:42 p.m. June 19, 2008

I hope the Des News archives this thread. Future generations will wonder, what were they thinking?

Homosexuality is almost certainly a genetic or otherwise biological attribute. The latest findings from brain shape studies add to the evidence. If you know a gay person well, like I know my brother, then you know it is no more a choice than being right handed is a choice.

Gay people are different, but they are not legally inferior as Americans, and more importantly: Heavenly Father loves us all.

I agree with the RM from Boston who suggested Civil Unions as a compromise. Resisting reality will only haunt the Church, like the exclusion of blacks did.

John Lambert | 12:48 p.m. June 19, 2008

Who has been thrown in jail for same-sex marriage? What governor has issued an extermination order against same-sex couples?
The thowing of men in jail, shipping them hundreds of miles from their families, bagering their wives, revoking the normal husband and wife judicial immunity rules, deneying people the vote on the grounds that they belong to a church that supports polygamy are a far far cry from the issues involved in same gender marriage.
Has any state passed a law banning homosexuals from voting? Have homosexuals ever been denied the vote anywhere in the United States? If you can find one instance of this ever happening at any location in any state of the United States then we can start a discussion of persecution. Until that time you are misusing the term. The Idaho test oath banned all Mormons from voting and was upheld by the Supreme Corut of the United States.

"Total Acceptance" | 12:49 p.m. June 19, 2008

It is true that gays are far from total acceptance, but Saints are also far from total acceptance outside Utah. So please, stop hoping that America might love you if you hate on the gays.

John Lambert | 12:54 p.m. June 19, 2008

To YBU:
Incidentally 1960 is about the year Senator Obama's parents married. Not all states ever banned inter-racial marriage. By 1960 it was legal in most states.
Anyway, as people have pointed out, the issue is very different. For one thing, no one claims that the sexual attraction is different in same-race and different race marriages. I wonder which my marriage would count as. Since my ex-wfie was 1/32nd Native American and I am only 1/2000th or so Native American, was it an interracial marriage?
What about the half Dutch and half African descent lady I knew who married a half-white American and half-Japanese man. For those of you who may think I am making things up to lob them at the false wall of race, I could not have thought up that last couple if I tried. The wife was born in Guyana but grew up in St. Vincent and then moved to New York where she met her husband.

John Lambert | 1:00 p.m. June 19, 2008

I think we need to worry about the world. Maybe individual parents are doing good. However, do we want our children exposed to a constant pro-homsexual, pro-masturbation, pro-sexual exploration campaign at school. It is bad for society as a whole to have such things happen. We can maybe save our children, but it will be a lot easier if homosexual ads are not spread across the sky and if evil books like "prince and price" are not introduced to elementary school children.

Dear John Lambert | 1:00 p.m. June 19, 2008

Please continue to use your right hand the rest of your life. No matter how unnatural it seems to be, it is much better to be right handed. Please do not write, do not even blow your nose, in fact, do not do ANYTHING with that evil left hand. It is not natural and I cannot even think of using my left hand for anything that is good and righteous. For thousands of years, the Devil has been associated with the left hand in various ways and is normally portrayed as being left-handed in pictures and other images. In the seventeenth century it was thought that the Devil baptised his followers with his left-hand and there are many references in superstitions to the "left-hand side" being associated with evil. The right hand often symbolises 'male' while the left hand is 'female'. A left-handed toast is tantamount to a curse on the victim. And there are many more myths regarding your evil left hand.

There are also many myths regarding homosexuals.

John Lambert | 1:06 p.m. June 19, 2008

To YBU,
To suggest that we are breaking the law by advocating that existing laws remain intact is one of the most bizarre accusations I have ever read.
Anyway, Thomas S. Monson is not my prophet, he is the Lord's prophet. I follow him because he recieves the word of God.

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.