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

Stenar | 3:58 p.m. June 28, 2008

HURRAH for Todd and Ron! :)

A Homosexual Divorce Rate | 4:06 p.m. June 28, 2008

I have posted this on a previous article but wanted to mention it again. I personally am for marriage and all other equal treatment for homosexuals.

But a friend of mine who also happens to be gay and a pretty influential gay activist in Boston has long struggled with what he believes is a very high rate of promiscuity in the male homosexual community - much higher in his opinion than in the heterosexual community. His lifelong involvement in the homosexual community leads him to believe that female homosexual marriages would have a far lower divorce rate than heterosexuals but that male homosexual divorces would be at a far higher rate and would risk hurting the cause or at least confirming negative biases and fears about homosexuals.

Mike Richards | 5:14 p.m. June 28, 2008

If all your friends jumped off a cliff, would you jump?

It doesn't matter how many people think that gay "marriage" is right. It doesn't matter how may people think that God is wrong. It doesn't matter how many people jump off the cliff.

If something is wrong, it is wrong, public opinion notwithstanding.

Let anyone do whatever he/she thinks he can. At the very least, there will be a public record of everyone who spit in God's face and told Him that His way was not their way.

Comments continue below

Anti | 5:34 p.m. June 28, 2008

Utah has alot of Homosexuals despite their religiousity. True Mormon @10:12 I would almost say you are a christian! but, you admitted you are LDS. sorry, good luck trying to love people. you know the word love is widely used. Look at Rod & Todd... they LOVE eachother.

Re: Anti | 6:12 p.m. June 28, 2008

HOw do you know they LOVE each other? They may, but will it last?????? I may love my dog, but I don't think I will marry him! Some of you scream intolerance, but it goes both ways doesn't it? If we have to be tolerant of you, why aren't you tolerant of others? If some disagree with same sex "marraige" we are told it is because of hate (homophobia). Not so, we just disagree with you just like you do us!

Dave | 6:13 p.m. June 28, 2008

I love how the Snooze always shows gays and liberals happy. Hillary and Obama, this gay couple, etc. As if they've found Shangri-La.

But isn't the paper's owner opposed to gay marriage? I don't get the double speak.

Gal50 | 6:19 p.m. June 28, 2008

Congratulations to Ron and Todd. You shouldn't have to travel for your wedding. You should have the same rights as everyone else. I like the way you make the best of everything, even when it isn't what it should be.

To the person who wrote this:

This is wrong because the people of California voted it down. The people didn't want it and the government overthrew their vote.

If the government thought that the people could decide every issue, there wouldn't be a court system. The court system exists in part to make sure when people act out of ignorance, other people's rights are not abridged.

We heterosexuals who are uncomfortable with homosexual marriage owe it to the homosexuals in our communities to adapt rather than limit their rights.

Martin Luther King once said, "I refuse to accept the idea that the "isness" of man's present nature makes him incapable of reaching up to the "oughtness" that forever confronts him."

And this, folks, is exactly where our country is on the issue of homosexual rights.

to Re: Anti | 6:21 p.m. June 28, 2008

Last time I checked "will it last??????" isn't one of the criteria for getting a marriage license. Perhaps it should be.

to Dave | 6:24 p.m. June 28, 2008

I believe the paper's owner opposes suicide bombing, genocide, ethnic cleansing, overeating, use of tobacco, and possibly hang-gliding over the freeway and yet these stories are still reported.

I don't get your suggestion of double speak.

David | 6:24 p.m. June 28, 2008

In the first paragraph shouldn't it read the "California anti-marriage amendment" since the proposed amendment would be invalidating legal marriages? I'm confused as to why the Mormon church, that claims to be pro-family, would be supporting the amendment.

Wow | 6:31 p.m. June 28, 2008

This is news? Who cares? It's wrong, let them do it on their own, most people don't want this on the front page of their paper.

Charles | 6:34 p.m. June 28, 2008

The author of the article needs to work on her Constitution reading and understanding. To inject the separation of church and state in this is poor journalism. Nowhere in the Constitution are those words found. Do your homework and quit reporting incorrectly.

Homosexual behavior is nothing more than an abnormal, unnatural act being committed. For those who seem to think of themselves as being more enlightened than others, I find it interesting that they don't understand the very basic concept of Anatomy 101. We are to reproduce after our own kind. Homosexual behavior will result in their extinction.

What's actually more disappointing is the utter lack of understand of the doctrine of Jesus Christ by those who profess to be members. Some of you think Jeffrey Nielsen is your prophet? WOW!

My scriptures tell me that the Lord said, "whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." They also say, "I, the Lord, cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance."

Lehi's dream is correct; where many who are members are deceived by Satan and let go of the rod and find themselves in the big and spacious building. Sad!

Pat | 6:43 p.m. June 28, 2008

Hey, if a couple of consenting adults want to get married--straight, gay, father and son, grandfather and grandson, mother and daughter, grandmother and granddaughter, brothers, sisters, or any polygamous combination--hey, why not? There is no reason why we shouldn't put our legal stamp of approval on it. Wouldn't that be a beautiful thing?

Charles | 6:48 p.m. June 28, 2008

I'd also recommend to those who profess to members of the LDS church and believe in the doctrine of Christ to read

Moses 1:37 The Lord's purpose
Abraham 3:24-26 Obedience to all things commanded
D&C 76 - 3 degrees of glory based on obedience
D&C 132 - New and everlasting covenant - Celestial marriage

2 Timothy 3
1 Ne 8 - which group are you in?

Matt 19:1-6 which says, "The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh."

And Mark 10 "And Jesus answered But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
And they twain shall be one flesh."

Apostasy will abound. Sad

To Charles | 6:56 p.m. June 28, 2008

My parents are two of the loveliest heterosexual people you will ever know, and they gave birth to a gay child.
Once again, the fuzzy math of the feeble minded does not add up.
They won't become extinct; because, if you haven't noticed, gays do not beget gays....heterosexuals do.
So clearly by your logic, we should stop heterosexuals from reproducing...they might just have a gay child.

To Charles | 6:57 p.m. June 28, 2008

I don't see Jeffrey Nielsen as my prophet, but his words have often been meaningful, empathetic, well thought out,and worth repeating. (Well actually, now that you mention it, perhaps Professor Nielsen has been more "prophetic" than some other men who've held the title.)

To Charles @ 6:34 | 7:12 p.m. June 28, 2008

Are you seriously afraid that the world is in any danger of running out of people?

Why do you call this particular attraction a sin? When the Lord has made it clear in the Bible that so many other things are also "sins" that deserve even the death penalty. Yet no one in their right mind would advocate killing witches, or stoning disobedient children today.

Why are you so hung up on this ONE sin? Why doesn't the Church use it's great wealth to rid Las Vegas of prostitution and gambling? Or to stop pornography in all hotel rooms? Why no proclamation against beer brewers? I'm sorry, but this all seems so hypocritical.

Two men are choosing to share their love, to make a visible and long-term commitment to each other, and all you can do is call them sinners?

What was that thing that Christ mentioned? Oh yeah, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Priorities | 7:40 p.m. June 28, 2008

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE these judgemental Mormons really upset at the materialism, the heterosexual divorce rate, the rude arrogant drivers in this fair state.

To Priorities | 7:48 p.m. June 28, 2008

I agree. It's all about "priorities" isn't it? Can you even imagine the impact for good the Church might bring to pass if they were this concerned about say the environment, honesty, gratitude, and kindness? It's simply awesome to think about.

From a Great Political Leader | 8:02 p.m. June 28, 2008

"And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy? Should we go with Leviticus, which suggests slavery is okay and that eating shellfish is an abomination? Or we could go with Deuteronomy, which suggests stoning your child if he strays from the faith?..."

It bothers me greatly that we may be choosing our civil laws based simply on one's religious belief.

must be joking | 8:18 p.m. June 28, 2008

Yeah, I want the "RIGHT" to have lead called "grey gold." That way, me, owning the lead, can have all the benefits of those who own gold. Then I'll be just as happy as the people who have gold. Also, I'll make sure to just call it GOLD to people, so they won't realize I only have lead. Also, the state will be legally obligated to trade me legal tender equal to that of gold for my lead. I'm sure I'll find some idiot California judges to do that for me.

Charles | 8:29 p.m. June 28, 2008

It's always comforting to see the homosexual crowd bring out Leviticus without having an understanding of the scriptures.

To 8:02...ALL laws are based on someone's beliefs; religious or secular. All laws. So what's your point?

to 6:56..your parents gave birth to a baby who has homosexual behavior desires. Nothing more; nothing less. One can act on those desires or not. It's our choice.

to 6:57...I feel sad for you. You've obviously lost your way and need to look within yourself as to what and whom you believe.

to 7:12...I'm hung up on this ONE sin because that is the topic of this article. If you've read other articles, you will know that I have spoken out about many things. If you actually paid attention, you would notice that the Church speaks out on a great many things. Go read any General Conference report and pick your subject; it will be there....

As for your last scripture quote...don't forget that after what you quoted, Christ told the woman taken in adultery to go and sin no more.

And let's quit referring to homosexuals as gay. It's a hijacked word to make their behavior seem more natural and seemly. Apostasy abounds today!

Sinner | 8:50 p.m. June 28, 2008

It may be important to remember who leads the LDS Church. If you are a Mormon and don't recognize who makes the rules, maybe you should start praying for guidance. Non of us are without sin, but the goal is to be "perfect even as our Father in Heaven." So, if you can honestly believe that Christ would engage in same sex marriage himself, then you are probably on safe ground. I for one can not accept such a concept.

If it is ok for Gays (a distortion of the word)to enjoy Temple rights, then I guess it would be acceptable for me to have extra-marital relations and still go to the Temple. From personal knowledge, most gay people I met (a former San Fran resident) they slept around frequently. I was a close friend to a gay couple, one of whom was LDS. It is my understanding that he died from AIDS. Please, I did not hate them; in fact I loved them in a brotherly fashion; I just felt sad for their life style. They are God's children and my heart goes out to the gay community.

Can I Marry? | 9:05 p.m. June 28, 2008

Let's see, my dog, my step son, my brother, my cousin, my uncle, my fish, I don't know, whomever I darn well want to marry. I got a thing about four people wanting to marry, cause they all love each other, actually, I want to marry Howard Hughes and get his money. Hey, let me be married to a bunch of people, I want to marry all dead rich men, got to have Elvis on that list, cause that guy is still racking in the money. These rich people who leave their money to their pets, well, there will be more protection to the pets if they can marry them. After all, they love those pets as much as and sometimes more than a husband and wife love each other. Thank heavens a pet owner doesn't feel that the love they have for a pet would justify what those who love people of the same sex feel is so natural. But just you wait people, it won't stop at gay marriage, the perversions of marriage and the distortion of that sacred ordinance will be perverted even more, cause we have opened the flood gates, thanks gays.

SLC'er | 9:14 p.m. June 28, 2008

Chuck,

I feel bad that you are this angry and hate filled. Additionally, I'm glad that you criticize the author for using the phrase "separation of church and state." You're right, it isn't used in our Constitution, however, maybe you should do your homework and realize that the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently used that phrase in opinions when discussing the meaning of the 1st Amendment. Feel free to blame the 'activist judges' on that one as well, but please note that Thomas Jefferson (who was divinely inspired when writing the Constitution right?)originally coined the idea by saying that there should be a wall of separation between Church and State. MOST IMPORTANTLY, I'm glad that you have decided you have the authority to pass judgments about whether some LDS posters on this blog are correctly abiding by the Church's following. Pretty weak my friend.

The Mormons, Blacks and Gays | 9:16 p.m. June 28, 2008

Many people thought that there would be a lot of close minded people who would leave the church because of the Priesthood being given to blacks. As far as I know, not many people let this turn them away from the teachings of Christ and from a living Prophet. I think that Satan has found something that's creating a large amount of apostates, who will become, and from how it sounds, they already are, hateful towards the church. For you "Mormon's" who are attacking church leaders, here are the facts, this is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, we have a living prophet, President Monson. Maybe you forgot that a prophet is doing the will of the Father not his own agenda. So, this issue about gays and the church is coming from God, you can spin it all you want, and pretend it is the church leaders, but it is not. We are told that in the last days even the elect will be deceived, I use to think that was our leaders, but I believe is is those who put family and friends before God, sorry, but my own child doesn't come before God.

re: Can I Marry? | 9:31 p.m. June 28, 2008

Well...Considering marriage is a legal binding contract and both parties are required to give written and verbal consent---Good luck getting an ï¿½I doï¿½ out of your dog, Howard Hughes or Elvis. Sorry to disappoint you. :-(

Charles | 9:34 p.m. June 28, 2008

SLC'er....Oh yes, TJ and the letter to the Danbury Baptists. You give yourself away in your shallow reference to it as being something that "should" have been in the Constitution. Actually it is you who needs to go do some homework regarding the writing and circumstances of that letter.

As for SCOTUS referencing that in some of their decisions....well, I'm sorry to tell you that SCOTUS is not always correct in their comments and writings. Many justifications have been given for this or for that. Recently, the liberals on the court actually referenced laws in Europe for their decisions instead of using the Constitution.

Sorry, but just because it is referenced by SCOTUS does NOT make it correct or valid. The 1st amendment says what is says and it does not say separation of church and state.

Can you tell me who the 4 who dissented in the DC gun ban case aren't able to read the 2nd amendment and where it actually says we have a right to bear arms? But I guess you are probably against that one as well...Seems like you need to do some constitutional law study because you bring weak and incorrect arguments.

To: Mormons, Blacks and Gays | 9:58 p.m. June 28, 2008

ï¿½Maybe you forgot that a prophet is doing the will of the Father not his own agendaï¿½.We are told that in the last days even the elect will be deceived, I use to think that was our leaders, but I believe is is those who put family and friends before God, sorry, but my own child doesn't come before God.ï¿½

You are equating LDS Church leaders with God. So much to the extent that you have admitted it could drive a wedge between you and your children. I am sad and somewhat surprised now that I understand that Mormons do not follow the teaching of Christ; God The Son who has given us the single greatest commandment...to love one another.

Indiana | 10:06 p.m. June 28, 2008

To all those who have defended the truth and the Gospel of Christ, THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is hard on these comments to listen to the verbocity that accompanies the lies. Talk, talk, talk and never say a thing important! People, just wanting it to be so, does NOT make it so!

You cannot change nature and you cannot change God. He is as real today as in the day of Sodom and Gomorrah. Oh, for those of you that say the Bible and God are fiction, I am sorry you feel that way. I hope you change before you come before him with a bright recollection of all your guilt. I would implore you to rethink your convenient idea of "Godlessness = lack of accountability". There is a God and you are accountable. This is especially true for those of you who have known the truth, but now deny it.

Homosexuality is a grevious sin and God will not be mocked.

Joseph Smith was a Prophet and the wonderful Gospel of Jesus Christ has been restored to the earth. I hope you will take advantage of this wonderful gift.

I can feel the fiery darts even now.

Mike in Layton | 10:10 p.m. June 28, 2008

Congratulations Ron and Todd...I wish you peace and happiness. Your 13-year commitment is a great example to gay youth. The legitimacy of gay marriage is essential for the health and well-being of the gay community. The less stigma and shame imposed by an often judgmental society, the more stable and healthy gay relationships will become. Way to go!

Anonymous | 10:29 p.m. June 28, 2008

Chuck,

Let's see . . . what did I get wrong? First of all, I didn't say that "the separation of church and state" should be included in the Constitution. What I said, is that's how its been interpreted. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." From the drafters of the Constitution to the Supreme Court, the 1st Amendment has been interpreted to mean that there is a separation of church and state. No need to read deep into that sentence, I think it pretty much speaks for itself. As for my "shallow reference" to President Jefferson, here's another quote from the letter that you appear to know so much about: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship."

The 14th Amendment requires that all people are to given the right of equal protection of the laws. That is the real Constitutional issue here.

Finally, I'm glad that you are so knowledgeable and quick to judge. First you criticize other's religious beliefs, now you are suggesting that your knowledge is superior to the Court's.

To: Indiana | 10:33 p.m. June 28, 2008

That's a big assumption on your part to imply I have a "convenient idea of 'Godlessness = lack of accountability.'" Whoa! I am accountable. To your god? No. However, I hold myself very accountable for living a moral life that benefits my family and my community. I hold myself to a high standard and look in the mirror every day and am accountable. I didn't resign from the LDS organization because I was sinning and trying to run away from guilt nor was I hoping to start leading a life of debauchery without accountability. I resigned so I could live in integrity with the truths that became apparent to me.

Anonymous | 10:43 p.m. June 28, 2008

This is morally wrong. It is against everything God intended.

SLC'er | 10:46 p.m. June 28, 2008

Chuck, that Anonymous post was from me, realized I forgot to title it. Let me guess, you're a big Scalia guy? Goodnight to all and God bless (if you believe in him, if not, just take it as my best wishes).

to to Mormon's Blacks and Gays | 11:34 p.m. June 28, 2008

The church leaders have not caused a wedge between my child and myself. I love my child with all my heart, but I refuse to let the choices that my child makes, which are anti-Mormon, stop me from my relationship with my Father in Heaven. We all have a choice, I could be angry at the church because my daughter stopped going, parents with gay children could be angry, because it doesn't condone their child's choice. What I am saying, is that I love my Father in Heaven, I want to return to live with Him eternally and sometimes that is hard. It is hard to know that my child doesn't have that desire, but by no means am I going to stop my goals, because my child opts to have different goals. Do not put words in my mouth, I do not equate church leaders to God, but I do say and know that they are the mouthpiece to God. And do not tell me that I do not love my child, I love my child, but I had to love myself, I literally was hitting myself with hard wood from sorrow of my childs choice, not worth it.

Infertile hetero couples | 12:00 a.m. June 29, 2008

Many arguments against gay marriage are based on the assumption that male and female were created to reproduce and therefore only a male/female union should fall under the definition and sanction of marriage. My sister, like thousands of other males and females, is biologically unable to bear children. She knew it long before marrying. Shouldn't that then preclude her from marrying if marriage is only about the ability to procreate? If the argument is that a man/man or woman/woman marriage does not have the ability to naturally procreate together don't infertile hetero couples fall into the exact same category? If an infertile hetero couple enter into their marriage knowing they can only adopt children, what makes a gay couple with the same procreative limitations and adoption plans any different?

Rich | 12:20 a.m. June 29, 2008

The LDS does NOT promote hatred toward homosexuals. Just because the church believes that extramarital or same-gender sexual activity is wrong, it does not condone hatred of the participants. Mormons are taught to be tolerant of others and to respect them as children of God even if their actions do not reflect LDS beliefs about what is right and wrong. On the other hand, I see a great deal of hatred expressed toward Mormons by those who do not share LDS beliefs. The hatred expressed on the Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune web sites toward Mormons far surpasses any hateful material that is posted toward gays. Hatred on both sides is wrong and gets people nowhere. I have had gay friends (some have died of AIDS), and though I do not agree with their succumbing to their homosexual urges, I still care about them and hope to meet them in a better world in the next life.

I hope | 12:29 a.m. June 29, 2008

I hope that one day all or you mormons will be told that they don't think your temple marriages are natural and take them away from you! Wouldn't that be ironic! What goes around comes around...

to Mormons....@ 11:34pm | 12:50 a.m. June 29, 2008

Ah...it is past guilt you have expressed. Thank you for the clarification. You are correct. You cannot punish yourself for the choices that others make, but you can spend your energy loving yourself and your child unconditionally and leave the rest for God to sort out. Let the Lord decide who among us all is worthy to come to Him. I am sure you found that it is much easier to focus on the positive when the burden of guilt and judgment has been lifted. I hope both you and your daughter find happiness in your chosen paths, even though they may be different.

Ben | 2:15 a.m. June 29, 2008

Congratulations on the opportunity you two.

As for the commentaries screaming about the downfall of the United States due to this, what about Canada? They are doing fine as a society as is Western Europe. Have you looked at currency exchange rates lately?

Todd and Ron are going to be able to see a government paper related to a relationship they both grow and nurture daily.

If you're that bothered by the article, write a letter to the editor, which will be read by more AND have your name attached to it.

Anonymous | 6:38 a.m. June 29, 2008

Anon said,"Maybe we, in California, should start taking direct action against the LDS Church by following missionaries and and making in clear the represent of church that promotes hatred and division. We could circle them and male in hard to convert people."

Funny how when it is a conservative value it is always "hatred and division" but when it is a liberal value it is called enlightenment and intelligence.

Very Sad | 7:56 a.m. June 29, 2008

Sodom, Gomorah, Rome, all decayed internally. This is a wake-up call for how bad we have become as a nation and world. To celebrate such nonsense tells us a lot that isn't good.

NICK | 10:25 a.m. June 29, 2008

For you who keep telling these gentlemen that they're evil, sinners, etc; Jesus said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone..."

Anonymous | 11:12 a.m. June 29, 2008

"Funny how when it is a conservative value it is always "hatred and division" but when it is a liberal value it is called enlightenment and intelligence."

Yes. Amazing that conservatives could *always* go for the position that best reflects "I've got mine; too bad for you", isn't it? You'd think they could at least *pretend* to have some concern for the less powerful if only for the political advantage, wouldn't you?

James | 11:58 a.m. June 29, 2008

The LDS Church needs to keep its hands out of civil issues. For some, this is a "moral" issue. There is a reason the founders of this nation wanted separation between Church and State so that we can be free of religious oppression.

This is a Human/Civil Rights issue. If the LDS Church (as well as other churches) do not feel it is moral, then they can have their church weddings exclude whomever they choose.

Support equality in this nation...and support FAMILIES (in whatever size, shape or form they come).

D in Utah | 12:04 p.m. June 29, 2008

Could someone please explain the gay agenda to me? Up at 5, Gym at 6,tanning at 7,starbucks at 8, work at 9? Are you refring to the fact that you think homosexuals are out to convert your children? (if you think that, get a life, its not a disease or a learned behavior)AND how exactly is it ruining the sanctety of marriage? I Think that Heterosexuals are doing a fine job of that themselves. Can anyone Say Britney Spears? She was married for a whole 55 hours and then married again 8 weeks later! How about Kenney Chesney and Renee Zellweger A whole of four months! Do you think that makes Jesus happy? What ever happened to judge not lest ye be judged? Can someone please tell me when god became this wrathful Deiety? I though he loved all his children equally, unconditionally? maybe you should read the passages about tolerance as closely as you read the ones you try to use to push your hate agenda. Shame on you, I believe god judges you for the hatred in your heart. You better hope God shows you Mercy when you stand for judgment. Congrats Ron & Todd. Blessed Be.-D

Edddie T. | 12:33 p.m. June 29, 2008

I'm for gay marriage because I think gays should have every right to be just as miserable as the rest of us.

Oh and "D in Utah" that's funny, but I'm pretty sure breakfast is also on "the gay agenda."

Kyle | 1:18 p.m. June 29, 2008

The LDS argument as I understand it, is that this is an issue of marriage being ordained by God for the purpose of procreation. I am a heterosexual, believe in God, and chose to marry in a religious ceremony.

But as a society, we accept other heterosexual couples (atheistic or religious) who marry in civil, secular ceremonies as in fact being MARRIED when those ceremonies are clearly not ordained by God, and in some cases do not produce offspring. I find it difficult to understand the LDS position in denying homosexuals the opportunity to marry secularly, but at the same time, accepting the temporal validity of heterosexual civil ceremonies.

Marriage is NOT always a religious institution in a democratic nation, and it is obvious to me that the LDS church has overstepped religious authority into secular government affairs. Spin it any way you want. The LDS Church has every right to define itï¿½s own membership standards, but by accepting one form of civil ceremony and not another, the apparent reason for the Church's involvement is to promote discriminatory practices in government affairs based on a religious belief that homosexuality is an abomination.

Wake up People! | 1:46 p.m. June 29, 2008

"Behavior has consequences." If Church leaders and members continue to behave in such an arrogant "We are right, you are wrong" type of manner, I'm afraid that the consequence will be even more people distancing themselves from the Church. (Speaking as one who is becoming more and more distant.)

Also, best of luck to the soon-to-be newlyweds!

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.