Deseret News | Same-sex couple from Salt Lake plan to marry in California

Reader comments
Same-sex couple from Salt Lake plan to marry in California

244 comments | Read story

True Mormon | 10:12 a.m. June 28, 2008

If marriage is such a holy institution among you mormons, why is your divorce rate so high in Utah...???? And how many LDS married men are on the down low, who actually break their temple vows and have sex with men on the side? I am LDS, and do back up our church teachings, but I do so with love for my gay brothers and sisters, they are a part of my life as friends, and they know I disagree with them, but I choose to love, not to hate, some of you forget that the Saviour hung around with sinners, prostitutes, tax collectors, and all and he had very harsh words for bigots and hateful venom from so-called followers of His who condemned others while in secret practiced the same things they condemned. Love our brothers and sisters, the gay community, you don't have to agree, but you must love if you truly are following Christ.

MY SLC | 10:15 a.m. June 28, 2008

Congratulations to the couple. Equality for all under the law will occur someday! yes even in Utah.

It would be difficult to . . . | 10:18 a.m. June 28, 2008

imagine a more apologetic article to the gay cause. Portray them as love-struck victims of an unsympathetic church and laws that, in their view, discriminate. That same-sex marriage would trample what others hold sacred and believe is not in the interest of society is given only perfunctory mention or ignored entirely. I would have expected more balanced journalism from the D News.

Comments continue below

GK from England | 10:22 a.m. June 28, 2008

It's a shame that the State of California has to lower it's standards yet again to appease a minority few. But then again, does California have any standards left?

To T.H.R.O | 10:28 a.m. June 28, 2008

Being gay is one thing but when the couple tries to start a family by adopting children and raising them in that demoralizing enviroment that is when the real moral decay begins. Can you imagine the results of a child being raised/reared by two gay men or women. The life for that child would be a tragedy.

Morgan | 10:31 a.m. June 28, 2008

The people of the state of Utah have spoken on this issue. Marriage is only between a man and a woman. Why is the DNews touting something that the vast majority of Utahns find offensive and sinful?

Non-resident | 10:33 a.m. June 28, 2008

It may be a bit off topic, but it is interesting to me that almost without exception, those who are most concerned with Utah's long standing practice of granting firearms permits to non-Utah-residents are also among those most happy that California will be granting gay "marriage" licenses to non-California-residents.

I also note, that under prior California "civil union" laws gay couples had virtually EVERY legal benefit of marriage the State conferred, save only the word "marriage." This ruling in California really puts the lie to the claims that this is about "discrimination" or "legal equality." Gays in Cali ALREADY had legal equality in everything except the name "marriage" to describe their unions. Make no mistake, this is NOT about equality. It is about normalizing gay relationships and altering societal values.

Julie | 10:38 a.m. June 28, 2008

why in the world is this front page news?

Park City Resident | 10:48 a.m. June 28, 2008

This has NOTHING to do with equal rights.

This is just an perverted IN YOUR FACE move by a couple of homosexuals to desecrate the sanctity of marriage.

Christian | 10:53 a.m. June 28, 2008

Are there any Christian Mormons who would do unto others . . . . ?

Anonymous | 10:58 a.m. June 28, 2008

Well said 'True Mormon'. Our duty is to respect their agency and love them. Not to point fingers and call them sinners. I think we all have enough of our own sins to worry about. If you get offended over this article it is entirely your problem.

To: David Decker | 11:01 a.m. June 28, 2008

Bu-bye.

Mormons for gays. | 11:07 a.m. June 28, 2008

For you "Mormon's" that are speaking against the church leaders about gay marriage, that is your right, but do not be filled with anger if you have church discipline taken against you. If you are honest with your church leaders, as I was when I fornicated, you may be excommunicated, as I was. I was not angry with my leaders, I made a stupid choice and I as a member had to be willing to pay the price. But your voices against the church are apostate and just because your family or friend chooses to embrace that, doesn't make it worth your spiritual self. We are told to love the sinner not the sin. I personally think it is silly they went to CA to get married, they will still not get any State of Federal benefits, at least if they stay in Utah. I got a great email that was quite silly, but it showed the loopholes in broadening the definition of marriage. I support benefits for room mates, partners, siblings, for single people who live with someone outside of marriage, but I do not support gay marriage. I choose God's side, I love Him more and honor Him.

Bob | 11:08 a.m. June 28, 2008

Congrats Ron and Todd! You might be too classy to thumb your nose at anyone, but I'm sure not, so I'll do it for you!
(Hey Utah, this is my nose being thumbed at you! Neener neeener neeener, gays can get mar--ried!!)
PS-We're going to have a black president too.

so easily offended | 11:23 a.m. June 28, 2008

Some who posted on here are so easily offended that it makes me wonder: How is your marriage or your family hurt by gay couples registering for legal rights? What if one of your kids turned out gay, what would you say then? Would you kick them out? Would you want them to remain alone and lonely for their entire life?

My youngest brother is gay and we are all happy that he has settled down with a nice guy. Yes, even our TBM parents are happy for him, although it did take time for them to accept. My kids, who are teenagers, don't even understand why their sweet and generous uncle is supposed to be a threat to society. I can't explain to them why the Church is so funny about gay people.

In my opinion the First Presidency is making a historic mistake by making a big deal out of this issue.

congrats to you... | 11:24 a.m. June 28, 2008

How wonderful for the both of you. I hope you have a wonderful life together.

I am a straight, christ loving, female, that believes "judge not less they be judged". Until 3 years ago I believed that being gay was a sin, that was until my cousin came out and told us he was gay.

My question to all of you who thinks that being gay is wrong, ask yourself "why would anyone choose to be different?".
Would you CHOOSE to be treated harshly and have your family turn their back on you?

Just think about things before you judge.

Who cares?????? | 11:29 a.m. June 28, 2008

Who cares??????

Carole | 11:31 a.m. June 28, 2008

Ron and Todd...Congratulations to both of you! I am proud to have such fine men as members of my family. We love and respect them tremendously, and wish them a lifetime of marital happiness. To the small minded nay-sayers commenting, I will pray for you. Your conception of God is pretty whacked. What if God hated Mormons across the board, or redheads, or white people, or dumb,unthinking Utah red-necks? God, thank heaven, is certainly more loving and kind than you are. I say "God bless everyone..no exceptions!" Ron and Todd, we love you, are proud of you, and are so pleased about the love and hope of the article. We love you guys!!! Cousin Carole

irony | 11:32 a.m. June 28, 2008

Recent polls have the majority in California supporting marriage. The legislature supported it it too, but it was vetoed by the governor. This is a civil institution, and people who claim the bible is the authority should know as authorities that plural marriage was the flavor of marriage the bible described. Also, it never used the word marriage once! It was not written in English. Nor the `new testament'. Jesus never spoke a word of English, never uttered the word `marriage', even on his trip to the Americas, I'd guess, unless it was olde or middle English he was speaking to the `indians'?

Californian | 11:36 a.m. June 28, 2008

This is news?

How many male-female couples got married today as God has directed and the traditions of all human societies have upheld for centuries, and they didn't get news stories?

whatever | 11:39 a.m. June 28, 2008

God said he would protect this land and preserve it for us as long as we worship him. God has defined marriage and accepting this is directly against God there is a reason this country is going to hell we are turning our backs on God and he is doing the same. If they want to be happy in sin then let them but stop pushing this filth on society we dont care and dont want to hear about it. I agree " Back to the closet."

nottyou | 11:43 a.m. June 28, 2008

Congratulations! 'Til death do you part.

En Hedu' Anna | 11:51 a.m. June 28, 2008

You say that this ruling in CA is "not fair" because the people voted. Yesterday, the AZ House voted to recommend the people vote on defining marriage as one man-one woman, despite the voters there voting down an amendment to deny marriage equality. The people in AZ voted already, so is this new recommendation "fair?" I may not agree, but law evolves.

I'm for marriage equality defined as between two consenting adults. A legally recognized union. If the recognition is the thing that's the sticking point, then call it civil union equality and require legal approval before any religious/other ceremony celebrating the union.

In my opinion, if society truly wishes to strengthen families, we would require successful navigation of the first year before children are brought into the union by proceating or adoption. If the first year bombs, let annulment reign, or let the unhappy couple attempt to work things out the second year pre-kids.

If creating families is a sacred purpose, let's rethink all the requirements. It would save a lot of heartache for children, including those who accidentally created a child then tried to do the right then by getting bound to each other "for eternity."

CatBus | 11:53 a.m. June 28, 2008

Go ahead. Pretend to be married. I will never recognize any homosexual marriage. Never. Homosexual marriage is an abomination. Activist judges may force it upon the population, but they cannot force us to recognize two men or two women as "married".

concerned | 12:01 p.m. June 28, 2008

Homosexuality has been around for centuries. It has always been illegal-until today. This is not just an annoyance, but this is an issue that will affect the foundation of our society. It is MUCH more complex and has many more hidden agendas than we can realize or see right now. We MUST do all we can to reverse this decision!!

irony abounding | 12:06 p.m. June 28, 2008

Interesting how religiously adherent parents would prefer their gay children to "live in sin" with their partners than be married, yet would prefer their straight children to be married than "live in sin."

~EH'A

Mike Mayers | 12:10 p.m. June 28, 2008

Bottom line is, if you don't want a gay marriage don't get one. Don't, however, take away my right to do so. Lastly this is big news because people are finally starting to pull their heads out and realize that we live in America and everyone deserves equal rights. I guess if it isn't about Joseph Smith, or the church, then nobody in Utah thinks it is legitimate news.

Think About It | 12:20 p.m. June 28, 2008

I am a heterosexual male. As such, there is nothing that could persuade me to want to be with another man physically even once let alone in a prolonged, committed relationship. No images, propoganda or news stories like this would even create the smallest spark or curiosity. I inherently found myself attracted to females at puberty without anyone telling me that I should. What is more natural than the sexual attraction all humans feel?

That is why there is no question in my mind that sexual orientation is a genetic, God-given trait. Each of you ask yourselves if you could suddenly choose to switch your current sexual orientation? I propose it simply can't be done. I suppose for enough money anyone can force themselves to do anything but I am talking about a real choice to permanently change your natural sexual preference. It can't be done. No way in the world I could just decide to find men sexually attractive.

This is genetic folks and therefore each of you who fight against the equal rights of homosexuals must do so with the honesty that you do not believe someone should have the same rights based on a genetic trait.

winds of change | 12:21 p.m. June 28, 2008

Hasn't it always been in this nation that people push their own point of view of what constitutes the good life? Wasn't it those who felt god-allegience who pushed for laws to change what was already established and add "under God" and "in God we trust?" It is not the privilege of each citizen to push for legislation to legalize their point of view and bind everyone else to it: helmet laws, seatbelt laws, grass laws (take it how you wish...lol)? It is also eveyone's right to push to be unbound by laws they disagree with. As vocally as they wish. It is not to destroy society, most people don't think of anything but their comfort and security.

Moral? Apparently most of us can't begin to comprehend the moral greater good outside our selfish points of view. We think we're right. So does everyone else. But, they aren't, because we know we're right. So aren't we, so do they.

Define your life and truly live it. Enjoy it. Be selfish within your sphere and generous without. Allow maximum opportunity for all to create happy lives. Afterall, we are all of the same dust.

Brad | 12:37 p.m. June 28, 2008

Fine go do what you want to do but don't call it marriage!

PROUD TO BE GAY | 12:40 p.m. June 28, 2008

I am so tired of always ad nauseum seeing hetertosexual wedding announcements and pictures and seeing heterosexual blatantly kissing in public and more...DISGUSTING!!! I am so happy to see a GAY wedding! Anyway The US Constitution calls for liberty for ALL so heterosexuals stay out of our lives and bedrooms and we will stay , thank God!!! out of yours. As to gays and lesbians not able to have children,,,,many do. How many LDS couples cannot? Happy to be gay...would NEVER want to be heterosexual!!!

MTM | 12:41 p.m. June 28, 2008

This issue is fought because it is wrong. And all of your attempts to make it right won't make it so. It's not about hatred or any perceived right. Homosexual marriage is just wrong.

supposing | 12:45 p.m. June 28, 2008

My guess there are about as many gay individuals with a hidden agenda to usurp the lifestyle of this nation as there are straight people with their hidden agendas. Are there some in both groups? Surely. However, most of us quite happily have squandered years of vigilence letting the current crop of "hidden agendites" have their way with us. Better we go after rooting them or those they influence out of office than worry about someone else's lifestyle choices.

Did you ever wonder what the perfect misdirection would look like for those weilding corrupted power? How about a power play focusing attention on a "moral" threat? While we skirmish with one another, they win. Boy, do they have our number.

ahem | 12:48 p.m. June 28, 2008

Someone earlier posted this

(New Testament | Matthew 7:13-27).
When God created life, he created life to reproduce itself, male and female after its OWN KIND

(Old Testament | Isaiah 5:20)

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

_____

To that person I say, "Thank you for posting a work of fiction. It sounds like an entertaining novel." You can't make a law based on your religious beliefs, because this is America. We are free to practice religion as we choose. And my religion doesn't believe in the Bible. You can't make a law based off of it.

to Think About It | 12:49 p.m. June 28, 2008

Amen.

Well and truly said.

re MTM | 12:58 p.m. June 28, 2008

Civil rights were fought for and against. Abolition of slavery was fought for and against. Equality for women was fought for and against. Equal access for the disabled was fought for and against.

How do you view your statement now? "It's not about hatred or any perceived right. ________ is just wrong."

UofUman | 1:01 p.m. June 28, 2008

Yes, the majority rules in a democracy. But NOT absolutely!!!

Otherwise, states with Baptist majorities would round up missionaries of other religions and have them jailed.

So the next time you hear that your son, daughter, nephew, whatever, missionaries is free and doing the lords work in a state where the LDS religion is not the most popular one, rejoice that courts can overturn the majority when it is WRONG. As it has done in California on this.

Never would have thought | 1:09 p.m. June 28, 2008

I never thought I'd live to see the day this "behavior" led to getting married. This has beome a strange world.

gay marrige is wrong! | 1:28 p.m. June 28, 2008

how dare them use them name Gay to describe themselves! i know people that are considering having their name changed but they were name Gay when it meant happy, joyfull not two men in a homosexual relationship sodomizing each other! I am glad to know no matter they are allowed to marry here on earth God will not acknowlege their relation ship and marriage when the 2nd coming happens or when they die.

Re Think About It | 1:35 p.m. June 28, 2008

I would propose that the majority of those who take a stand against homosexuality mjust do so with the belief that sexual orientation is a choice rather than an inborn trait. One likely has to convince themself that it is a choice as it would be difficult for most to truly believe that God would create some of his children a certain way and then command them to live another way.

It is another example of being forced to fit all that one believes into the box, perspective, or world-view that Mormonism (or other religious or philisophical beliefs) are true. That belief takes precident above all and requires all other actions and beliefs to follow suit or fit. At times this requires a great deal of illogical thinking and mental gymnastics but for the believer there is no other choice.

It reminds me of my father who goes to great and ridiculous lengths to explain why and how all that occurred in the Book of Genesis from Adam through Noah actually occurred in Missouri, USA. Joseph Smith being incorrect is not an option so all logic must follow from that. It is similar in the way many view homosexuality.

To Anonymous | 1:46 p.m. June 28, 2008

The Catholic, LDS and other demoninations' doctrine is not about hatred and division as you misrepresent. It is about scriptural references to marriage between a woman and a man. Agree or disagree as you like, but don't inject hatred into the discussion. You can invent your own philosophy and name for a same-sex relationship, but it is not marriage.

Judicial Imperialism | 1:52 p.m. June 28, 2008

This article wouldn't even be in the paper today if it wasn't for the judicial imperialism of the California Supreme Court.

I am amazed at the time and effort the gay rights movement spends on tearing down traditional values and organizations. These are the same folks that tried to destroy the Boy Scouts instead of starting up their on scouting organization.

RE: En Hedu' Anna

There is a law already banning gay marriage in Arizona. The amendment from 2006 had nothing to do with banning it but more to about defining marriage.

RE: Winds of Change

Your anything goes approach to life proves exactly why this country is going in the wrong direction with its morals. We might be of the same dust but God created that dust and I believe his judgement will be more just than some politically motivated judges in California.

love | 1:51 p.m. June 28, 2008

I love you all!

STEVE-O | 2:25 p.m. June 28, 2008

Those opposed to gay marriage will probably never understand the others point of view... and vice-verca. So a person who disapproves is not a bigot or closed-minded. And they are not a religious fanatic that "follows blindly."
On the other side of the coin, pro-gay folks can't wrap their mind around why anyone could disapprove or try to deny a gay person equal rights.
When this earth is over and all is said and done God will judge us for how we lived and choices we made. I will sincerely try to find myself on the right side and defer judgement of everyone else to God.

Taking a stand | 2:45 p.m. June 28, 2008

The LDS church has chosen to take a stand against gay marriage, which makes sense in light of the church's theology. But please stop trying to throw around the "hate the sin, but love the sinner" mantra. Even without legalizing gay marriage, I've seen very little love toward homosexuals in the LDS church. Come up with a new mantra, because that one just doesn't hold.

re: love | 3:19 p.m. June 28, 2008

I feel a group hug coming on.

The rifts in society's fabric I see are those created and perpetuated by those who will not settle for anything less than their point of view being legislated for all to subject to.

There is a middle ground - equal under the law.

luxury | 3:31 p.m. June 28, 2008

Let's see: marriage equality, Chaffetz/Cannon, FLDS, FLDS, Cannon/Chaffetz, FLDS, sports, sports, marriage equality, sports. . .

Good thing there's nothing really pressing to bring to the public discussion.

Gary L. | 3:35 p.m. June 28, 2008

To the people who like to refer to the bible when this topic comes up: The book is a product of a premedieval world. We have thrown out most of the theories, laws, practices, etc. from that era. Why not let that text go too? You already don't adhere to a lot of the rules and regulations stated in the book. Doesn't that mean something about the book?That is fine if the LDS church and its sheep want to take advantage of the current political situation in Californa to proclaim their bigotry, but y'all look pretty backwards when you have to rely on a very, very old book to support your reasoning. Sometimes, I wish you would just do what the books states, and stone me.

uh, gary | 3:46 p.m. June 28, 2008

better we should all get stoned on our own

carry on.

Ronald A. Young | 3:49 p.m. June 28, 2008

I am against Homosexual Marriage (not against equal protection regarding property, medical care and Custody, or Natural or Adopted Kids). and I strongly believe that the Voters of California will take care of this matter in November. That being said they look like a nice happy couple. Homosexual Relationships are just as stable as Heterosexual Relationships and the Divorce Rate is Far Lower. We have a rough time wrapping our minds around Homosexual Relationships but they are supposed to accept heterosexual Relationships without question. Even when the Eternal Marriage has brought on the Eternal Buffet. Or people are staying together just for the Kids and their Planet. Now that evolves "calling forth" and I wonder why, someone that was Buffet up on or Closed Down on would want to do that. Real Good Medical Reasons Aside. Homosexual Marriage brings up things such as Homosexual Divorce, Child Custody and Child Support. Some Female Homosexuals still have the urge for motherhood. I assume some Males for fatherhood. We are always less grossed out by Female Homosexuals then Males. The Male with Male Idea is much harder to wrap your mind around. In you Bias, and outrage. Pray for them.

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.