Comments about ‘Protests over Proposition 8 outcome getting personal’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 13 2008 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Fear God, not man

I realize that there are many difficult situations in our world. People have to make decisions, and usually someone is left unsatisfied. How do we choose what is right? I, for one, will obey the commandments of God. It is difficult, sometimes scary and sometimes dangerous to stand up for what is right. I know that some will lash out at me for standing up for my beliefs but I fear God more than man.

Just the facts, ma'm

Okay, it's an urban legend about Utah women being the first to vote. I googled and now have the facts. Utah women had the right to vote in 1870. (It was a Wyoming woman who cast a ballot in Sept. 1870.) Utah womens voting rights where taken away by Congress in 1887. They got the right back in 1895. The first woman to vote under the amendment was back east in Aug. 1920. But still women rock (were respected and important) in early Utah history!


Supporters of Prop 8 are frustrated that they spoke at the ballot box, yet protests continue. They say, "the people have spoken, accept it." I wish the Religious Right would listen to that, as we've voted on abortion notification laws three times in four years. Makes me think "Do as I say, not as I do."


Go ahead and boycott the Sundance Film Festival, which is arguably the most non-Mormon feature Utah has to offer. And go ahead and boycott the ski resorts here in Utah while you're at it, less people on the slopes would make for a great day of skiing for me.


The funniest part is if Prop8 had failed, the pros would have blamed Hollywood for their big contributions. There was strong lobbying on both sides. Ellen Degeneres was taking a lot of heat earlier for not donating more. No one is happy when their choice doesn't win.

It's also funny that it seems less contentious about the presidential contest. Prop8 has taken that steam, it appears.


"If and when this vote by THE PEOPLE of California is overturned, I will be boycotting any person and/or group that is affiliated with the gay movement. I will also protest in front of their meeting places until the PEOPLES VOTE is restored. It is time to stand up against these intolerant bigots and defend our children, families, religious freedoms, and right to vote."

I completely agree w/ the above comment. Only problem, we will be charged w/ a HATE CRIME. My minister who supported marriage @ the pulpit has already been threathen by a law suit by two gay men who told him "you have no right" to preach in support of marriage. God save us all.


I predict that we'll have to vote on this SAME issue after the courts REVERSE the voter's decision (and they WILL) Let it be settled now and forever: MARRIAGE is defined as ONE man and ONE woman. And yes, I'm an LDS woman who just wants to be clear - I have gay friends who are in committed relationships and those who are compulsively promiscuous (one friend whines plaintively to me, "I don't know WHY, but I just LOVE men" he especially longs for straight men to come over to his "side".He was sexually abused by older boys when he was young and was hooked at a young age) I support their having a civil union if they want it. I do, however, draw the line with calling their committed relationships "marriage" because it's just not the same thing. It's just NOT.

Time Came in Form of Vote

To: It's Only a Matter of Time ...

Weighing the scales of who I should put my trust in ...

George Clooney ...

Prophet of God ...

Sorry, but I chose long before today which house I would serve.


I wasn't aware that there were crimes classified and "investigated as a bias-motivated arson" Is this a term created by the paper or a politically correct police department afraid of offending the gay community by calling it a hate crime. I suppose that "bias" crimes committed against religous individuals and groups that oppose the militant gay agenda should all be tolerated because the perp's have a right to act outside of the rule of law.

Read what Sir Elton John says

He said gays should have civil partnerships and heterosexuals can have marriages. Read the article at protect marriage.com or online at USA today. Also note that Gladys Knight, a Mormon sang at his benefit. He is the world's most famous gay man and maybe they'll listen to his voice of reason. He has a civil partnership and says he has equal rights to those who have marriages.


In answer to "Marriage is not a fundamental right":

From the United States Supreme Court in the case of Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967):

"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State. "

Stop Shaking Your Head

To Shaking my Head:

Please stop shaking your head, the echo is killing me!

You wrote: "Debating this issue with mormons is difficult when they fall back on their god, scriptures that have never been vetted ..."

Yes, putting your faith in man and science is so much more logical than putting it in God and his direct instruction through the years to man. (Do you think this might explain why God is always changing his teachings through the years and science has remained stagnant??? What? It's actually the opposite of that? Hmmmmm ... go figure.)

You wrote: "There's just no getting through the irrational thought and logical fallacies."

Yes, because supporting a lifestyle that can only lead to its own extinction is rational and logical?

You've tapped into the weakest argument ever invented. I love how anybody that thinks different than the Liberal mindset is close-minded and irrational.

Just because someone thinks different than you doesn't mean they're irrational.

No rights taken away?

To those of you who are alleging that Prop 8 didn't take away anyone's right to marry (because gay people can still get married, only to someone of the opposite gender), consider if the Proposition instead said that only marriages between a man and a man or a woman and a woman would be sanctioned by the state. Would you really be sitting here saying that your right to marry wasn't taken away by that law? The right to marry should include the right to marry the person of your choice. To say that Prop 8 didn't take away any rights is absurd.


so this guy gives $20K to pass the prop "for religious reasons" and he's suprised that it's being taken personally?

that's what happens when you push your religious agenda on others.... why do you have to push your religion on others?


The comments that gays will go extinct is hilarious! They're totally self-contradictory. If gays relied on breeding to maintain their population they would have gone extinct thousands of years ago. STRAIGHT people breed gays. They are your children, your nieces and nephews, your brothers and sisters. And you treat them like some sort of alien species... face it people, gays are here to stay.

John Pack Lambert

To the 11:10 poster,
For the 100th time everyone has the right to marry. No law bans anyone who is over the age of 18 from marrying. They merely define marriage as a union of a man and a woman. This is no more a violation of the 14th admendment then the heavy regulations of marriage by those under the age f 18.
If the ERA had passed it would be a different sotry, but the ERA was defeated.


I keep reading that the courts should be making laws. Our lawmakers are in the legislature! Any laws made by the courts/judges are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The courts only have power to INTERPRET THE LAW. This is a basic part of separation of powers.

When courts make decisions, they bypass the people and their representatives, and then confirm the passage of their own laws! This makes the people powerless. We should be glad that the people of California took back this issue from overstepping courts.

Personally, I think that marriage is a social contract between people and the state. The people who are having children to continue the society around them need special protections and supports to do their job. Marriage is not a popular club that everybody should get to join. It is only partially about the individuals involved. It is an institution with the purpose of protecting and promoting the continuation of society.

Commitments of love and life can be made without claiming protections that are due to people who are having children. Children need a mom and a dad--marriage is a protection for children, and a support for their parents.

Apparent Hate Monger

I guess tolerance only runs one direction. Sometimes people make it difficult to live by their own philosopies.

It's funny how some want love, peace and exceptence, yet they won't give it themselves.

Sterile couples?

In response to the argument that marriage should only be between a man and a woman because that union is necessary for procreation and the propagation of society: does that mean you would also support denying marriages to a couple when one or both of them are sterile? They have the same chance of producing a child as a gay couple does, so under that line of argument, why should they be allowed to marry?


I didn't have an opinion one way or the other on Prop.8. Having said that and seeing the hate that has come from opponents of prop 8 my mind has been changed. Acting like spoiled children and jumping up and down when you don't get your way is not benefitting your cause. I believe that churches had just as much right to voice their opinions as did the opponents. I have gay friends who are embarrassed by the hate being generated and worry that this will only create more division than inclusion. Shame on those who are commiting these acts of vandalism, threatening others and spreading hate.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments