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
bigotted bigotry?

Seems to me that parts of both sides of displaying tremendous bigotry. I think it is sad that a small part of both sides are painting each other with such narrow minded strokes.
I am mormon and I supported prop.8. That being said I encourage those who where against prop 8 to protest and to boycott whatever they want. Protesting and boycotts are an important part of governmental process in this country. However, both sides need to show each other more respect, hate filled speech coming from one side to the other is only entrenching positions and validating reprisals.
As a side note, this is an issue that I think should be decided by a vote of the people. There have been comments that this should be decided by the supreme court which I think is ludicrous. The perception that the supreme court is some how omnipotent is sadly wrong. If this were to go before the court it would win or lose on a split decision by one vote. It's no different then a vote by the people except the power is held by a far smaller group of people who can't be boycotted or protested.

to amazed

right on target. i couldnt have said it better


A lot of people I've spoken to are surprised that California allows its constitution to be amended by a simple majority. What makes it a constitution then, as opposed to a collection of statutes that change from election to election? It is also amusing that the supporter quoted in the article has TEN children. Talk about a poor environment for raising kids, I'm sure any study would show that one or two adoptive kids in a lesbian couple's home would have a happier and psychologically healthier childhood than one raised somewhat anonymously in a megafamily. Having so many children is truly immoral. Even having families of four on average every 25 years would give Utah a population more than 30 million by the end of the century, making gay marriage look pretty helpful!


Apparently hate crimes can only be committed against those who have the foresight to be on the "politically correct" side. If they are committed against those on the right they barely get reported.

Shecky I

Anybody besides me think that we should get a list of all "GAY" owned business and boycott the heck out of them? How stupid is this? Just goes to prove that there is nobody more bigoted, obnoxious, hypocritical, or just plain snotty as a spurned gay person. Somebody call the "wahmbulance" for these crybabies. THERE ARE NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BEING TRAMPLED UPON!! I hope that those under attack never compromise their principles

TOO Inconvenient

While the Treaty of Tripoli contains the words you quote, the meaning and context are different than you imply.

The passage in the Treaty was placed there to confirm that the U.S. engagement and defeat of the Muslim pirates was NOT a religious war. This was done in specific recognition and deferrence to the lingering sentiment among Muslims about the Crusades. The government is not an extension of the official Church, or vis-a-versa, as was the case in much of Europe.

Your comments about our founding documents are selective and myopic. The Declaration is the first major document to acknowledge that rights come from a Creator, not the king or Caesar or the sun, and that mankind is inherently endowed with those rights and that governments instituted by We The People are tasked with protecting those rights.

You would deny that God is the source of your rights, then complain that the state (by virtue of the vote) has taken away your rights? If God is not the source, then the state by default must be and can grant, withdraw and deny rights as it wishes and without recourse. Which is EXACTLY what the Founders wished to prevent.


Hey JG-what area do you live in!!! Most my closest friends are not LDS, does that mean I don't live in Utah. Think again. A lot of people that are non-LDS that live in Utah hate mormons and won't let their kids play with LDS kids, so don't go down that road. I will agree that some LDS members are jerks, but it goes both ways. Why don't you try to open up to your neighbors. If they are still rude, you should move (I would).

Voted Yes & Living in CA

I say to the Anti-Prop 8 protesters: Keep it going! I am finding many people I know who voted NO are now changing their mind. They are outraged by the demonstrations and the hate coming from the Gay community. They want nothing of it. I won't have to donate all that money next time. They are doing all this campaigning against themselves without any help.

To JG Reply:

I'm LDS and my children's best friends are not LDS. In fact, the majority of my neighboorhood is not LDS and we all get along great. Quit lumping an entire religion into one sterotype based on your expirence with one neighboor. Should your neighboor reach out to you? Absolutley, regaldless of religion. The church doesn't teach to only associate with our "own". In fact, they teach exactly the opposite. Your problem is with your neighboor, not the church. Maybe you should reach out to your neighboor; friendship and mutual respect go both ways.


All this is telling me is that the LDS faith is unmovable and stands firm in what they believe in. What they believe is that marriage is sacred between man and woman. It is doctrine written by prophets from God. I am God fearing. To me God is unmovable and stands firm in truth. The LDS faith says Your free to choose but their are consequences of that choice, weather good or bad. They know times will get hard and we are prepared as a collective and individually. I am sad to see that bad choices are made. I am not perfect no one is. I love the sinner but hate the sin. I know that sin is in the eye Of the beholder. I made a choice and others made a choice. Respect that we are free to choose. Respect the law. Yes we are unique so is everyone ells. I don't speak for the church. I am speaking for myself and my beliefs.

re Carl

I agree with Carl's point on semantics but would suggest a different approach in application. Why not allow those institutions who historically have used the term marriage in the traditional sense (a man and a women) to continue to do so. Those who are seeking an establishment of rights outside of "marriage" could then adopt a new term and call it whatever they like; civil union, unionage, civility, or homogenation. The point being, don't ask those who view marriage in a traditional sense to give up that term. The Gay community has the freedom to secure every right they can just don't cram it down everyone's throat by insisting that it be called marriage.


removing the lds church tax exempt status for supporting prop 8 would also require the removal of the tax exempt status of all the gay straight rainbow .orgs that opposed prop 8. Thats one for equallity.


When did behavior become a 'right?'

re Weak arguments

I'm sorry I was going to keep out of this but I don't think you portrayed things at all correctly. First off you mentioned how at different times societies have declared women as being inferior. This is very true and it was and is wrong. However just because something like that has happened doesn't mean any minority is free to declare their own perceived rights i.e. a "minority" of society are prositutes. Do you feel we infringe their rights by not legalizing prostitution? Now please don't take this to mean that I am equating gays to prostitutes. I am merely saying that simply because something is a "perceived right" (and having sex with someone for money could definitely be viewed as a right) by a minority doesn't make it so. Dealing with the republic comment: Yes this is a republic, and you hit it right on the head. A republic "PROTECTS the rights of all including the minority through a Constitution enforced by law." Marriage is NOT in the constitution (google "constitution" if you don't believe me). Remember this country is "for the people, by the people and of the people". The people decide what the rights are.


Imagine that... There are consequences for your actions. Who would have thought that?

To Nate:

I notice you didn't refute the argument presented by "Truth about Prop 8" you just used words like "ludicrous" and "malarkey". Let me give you two cases to back up that argument.

The Catholic Adoption agency in Boston is on the verge of shutting down due to threat of legal action by gay protesters for only adopting out children to traditional families. They state the Catholic Church is violating the law because gay couples are also legal in Massachussets.

The gay movement also took action against the Boy Scouts of America for not allowing openly gay scoutmasters. Notice I said "openly". Never mind that they also don't allow female scoutmasters and the girlscouts don't allow male leaders as well. They took this argument all the way to the Supreme Court and almost won which would have shut that organization down.

Ludicrous? Malarkey? No. That is your movement's track record.

It's not about their rights....

The boycott against Utah and the Mormon Church is more about getting free TV and news coverage/publicity than it is about Prop 8. What coverage would they get if they went to the Vatican to protest the Catholic Church? None. Where do you go to protest the Lutheran Church? No, the Mormons are an easy and highly visible target. Just what they need to keep their cause in the limelight.

Yes on Prop 8

I would have voted for Prop 8, but I would not have asked anyone else to vote for it or against it. Every individual has a right to vote their belief. I am completely dismayed at the personal attacks coming out of this against people who voted their beliefs. That is a fundamental right in this country .... to be able to vote safely and freely and not be bullied or penalized based on your vote.

move on?

Would you simply move on if you had just been stripped of rights that had been granted you?

I didn't think so, hypocrite.

Oh, and Brian, the hate attacks against the LDS church such as graffiti HAVE been reported on the news regularly. So, you can quit playing the martyr this time.


Reguardless of the fact that you are for or against prop 8. The truth of the matter is that marriage is recognized by the government and married people get government perks. Therefore the government cannot discriminate against gay people. That does not mean the the LDS church or any other religion or private oranization has to marry gay couples, but the state and federal government entities do. They cannot discriminate. Just like with women and African American people. After the government accepts it everyone else will eventually too.

to comment

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