Reader comments
Sore losers won't let go in California
714 comments | Read story
RE: Thanks to DesNews | 9:26 p.m | 11:37 p.m. Dec. 2, 2008
My advice: Don't gauge the church's attitude as a whole by these
comment boards. What you're seeing here is a clash of the highly
opinionated--those who care enough to say something, whatever it is. Yes--some
of these comments from APPARENT church members (you never know for sure online)
have been downright homophobic and even hateful. Others might be typically more
merciful, but get a bit carried away trying to defend their position.
Some members seem to be under the sad impression that by taking a hard-line "zero-tolerance" stance on this issue, denouncing homosexuality and homosexuals alike, that they're defending their faith. Yet those of us in the church who have gay people we know and love tend to see a whole different side of the issue than those who don't.
Perhaps we who understand that other side need to be the ones responsible for urging TRUE love, compassion, and tolerance on this issue. That does NOT mean we should condone homosexuality, but it DOES mean that we recognize that there are still MANY gay children of God with infinite worth. We can gently stand up for their value while upholding the value of the traditional family as well.
Some members seem to be under the sad impression that by taking a hard-line "zero-tolerance" stance on this issue, denouncing homosexuality and homosexuals alike, that they're defending their faith. Yet those of us in the church who have gay people we know and love tend to see a whole different side of the issue than those who don't.
Perhaps we who understand that other side need to be the ones responsible for urging TRUE love, compassion, and tolerance on this issue. That does NOT mean we should condone homosexuality, but it DOES mean that we recognize that there are still MANY gay children of God with infinite worth. We can gently stand up for their value while upholding the value of the traditional family as well.
To Thanks to DesNews: | 11:48 p.m. Dec. 2, 2008
I too am saddened that the Des News has carried this subject so far.
This bitterness has subjected a lot of people to pain and hopelessness I'm afraid. I sometimes wonder if they (the church) are not trying to complete a purge of members who question some stands.
Meanwhile, I too have disassociated myself with the LDS and asked that my name be removed from the membership. I was granted that from SLC without question prior to Thanksgiving.
I read the paper on line from So. California to keep a handle on what is going on in Utah. It saddens me.
This bitterness has subjected a lot of people to pain and hopelessness I'm afraid. I sometimes wonder if they (the church) are not trying to complete a purge of members who question some stands.
Meanwhile, I too have disassociated myself with the LDS and asked that my name be removed from the membership. I was granted that from SLC without question prior to Thanksgiving.
I read the paper on line from So. California to keep a handle on what is going on in Utah. It saddens me.
Comments continue below
jason | 11:58 p.m. Dec. 2, 2008
What this "journalist" and most pro prop 8 people dont see is the
legal ramifications of the cali prop 8 issue. California courts deemed same sex
marriage a costitutional right. Thus this was not a simple def. of marriage
issue but rather a removal of a constitutional right. That is a slippery slope,
we generally add constitutional rights in our country not remove them. What
rights are next on the conservative/religious agenda?
Gordon | 1:11 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
When I believe in something with all my heart I fight for it regardless of the
'vote'.
As an active member of the LDS Church there are many beliefs that I have which would receive a low vote if opened to public opinion. That doesn't mean that I would give up my viewpoint.
So.....I understand when those who feel that this vote has gone the wrong way stick to their commitment. I choose not to ridicule them but rather try harder to understand them and I pray that the only one who can provide peace, healing and true understanding will do so.
The commandment to 'love' is still in place.
As an active member of the LDS Church there are many beliefs that I have which would receive a low vote if opened to public opinion. That doesn't mean that I would give up my viewpoint.
So.....I understand when those who feel that this vote has gone the wrong way stick to their commitment. I choose not to ridicule them but rather try harder to understand them and I pray that the only one who can provide peace, healing and true understanding will do so.
The commandment to 'love' is still in place.
Don of Cal | 2:51 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
I worked very hard for prop 8 and voted yes. There is more at stake here than
just marriage, even though the left would try to make you think otherwise BEFORE
the election.
In San Francisco a teacher took 4 graders to a gay wedding... during school hours. Time and discussion away from curriculum, with no parental warning. When I taught I had to get parental permission to show anything other than a "G" rated movie.
In Massachusetts where gay marriages are legal, elementary kids are taught about gay marriage without parental ok or warning and one man was imprisoned for trying to keep his kids from such discussions. And yes, no matter what our lying state school superintendent said on an anti-prop 8 commercial, teaching kids about marriage is in the mandated state curriculum.
Personally, I could care less whether gays marry or not. Of course, they can marry, they just won't have the little piece of paper from the state.
I don't want to see churches discriminate against because they don't perform gay marriages or have gay leadership.
Do your own thing, just let us do ours. I have no antagonism towards any gay.
In San Francisco a teacher took 4 graders to a gay wedding... during school hours. Time and discussion away from curriculum, with no parental warning. When I taught I had to get parental permission to show anything other than a "G" rated movie.
In Massachusetts where gay marriages are legal, elementary kids are taught about gay marriage without parental ok or warning and one man was imprisoned for trying to keep his kids from such discussions. And yes, no matter what our lying state school superintendent said on an anti-prop 8 commercial, teaching kids about marriage is in the mandated state curriculum.
Personally, I could care less whether gays marry or not. Of course, they can marry, they just won't have the little piece of paper from the state.
I don't want to see churches discriminate against because they don't perform gay marriages or have gay leadership.
Do your own thing, just let us do ours. I have no antagonism towards any gay.
Kevin | 4:17 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
What else is to be said by the moral majority when our rights have been run over
by the moral minority. They are taking away my rights. The majority rules.
That is how this country is suppose to work. But somehow, my rights aren't
important - only those of the minority groups. Maybe it's time for the
majority to march and demand our rights.
Chris | 6:28 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Okay, let me see now. You want to cry about a church that has the nerve to
defend, that which is just. Traditional marriage. So what your saying is that
the church should allow people who decide that they want to be gay, and yes, it
is a choice. Some folks choose to take drugs, alcohal and such, and become
addicted. There are those who choose to rape women and/or children until it
becomes a habit. You have people who choose to abuse their families, until it is
routine. You have people who are married and choose to have affairs. And I
suppose you would want the church to stand there and just let it happen to? Get
real. It is about time that folks realize that you shouldn't need to pass
a law to justify a decision to choose immorality, as if to trick your conscience
that it is okay. On the other hand, I have never heard the church come out and
actively persecute those who practice it, other then to preach repentence,
tolerance, patience, and love. Last time I checked, God didn't marry Adam
and Bob, or Eve and Alice. He married Adam and Eve.
odd | 6:31 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Yes, there are many single parent families. Does that make them good or
preferential? Do the children from single parent families disproportionately
attend college and go on to advanced degrees? Oh wait, no they don't.
Children from single parents families are high risk children more likely to drop
out of school, become pregnant at a young age, and remain poor. Statistics
support that as fact. Children of two parent families, are indeed more likely
to attend college and further their educations beyond that. Girls are less
likely to have early pregnancies and the families and the children are more
likely to not be at the level of poverty. The children are less likely to have
addiction issues. Yet bizarrely, these families are held up as the standard to
compare their differences with gay marriage?
JG | 6:57 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The irony is, most companies in California refuse to hire gays or lesbians due
to their contentious attitudes and disruptive nature. If they do get hired,
they rarely make it past their 90 day probationary period. On one occasion, we
had a female transexual who insisted on using the men's room...she lasted
another 45 minutes before getting fired, she then sued and lost! Gays and
Lesbians are absolutely nuts, and getting nuttier.
Dave | 7:23 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The author's credibility is shot because he purposely left out Arizona in
2006 where an amendment to ban gay marriage was voted down.
This was such a big deal because it was the first time a right that a minority had for a period of time was stripped by a slim majority. That should never have been allowed to happen and that is what the California Supreme Court will rule on in March.
This was such a big deal because it was the first time a right that a minority had for a period of time was stripped by a slim majority. That should never have been allowed to happen and that is what the California Supreme Court will rule on in March.
Civil Unions !!! | 7:52 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
You can have the rights you seek without it being a marriage!!!!! I have
family members that are openly Gay!!! I'm for many of the things you want
just not a marriage of anything other than a man to a woman!
Just as God had intended (Duh -that's why there is a man and a woman)! Being Gay is a choice you have made! Nobody is born Gay I repeat It is your choice!
What you need is to get civil unions to be recognized by Law to give you the same insurance and legal rights.
If you put your effort into civil unions you will have what you are claiming you want!!!!!!
Just as God had intended (Duh -that's why there is a man and a woman)! Being Gay is a choice you have made! Nobody is born Gay I repeat It is your choice!
What you need is to get civil unions to be recognized by Law to give you the same insurance and legal rights.
If you put your effort into civil unions you will have what you are claiming you want!!!!!!
Winning or Losing... | 7:56 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
This debate is not about someone winning and someone losing. I take it from the
writers stance and ignorance, as with many of the posters, he has nothing
personally at stake and finds this commical. Lets change the circumstances. In
2010 the state of Utah passes a measure to do away with gun rights for it
citizens. A right that was given to you has now been taken away, just as in
Prop 8. You think there might be some "whining" from the pro-gun
groups.
To the author and like-thinking posters - How does gay marriage affect you and your life? Is your marriage and beliefs so insecure that it would make your marriage and beliefs somehow less meaningful? How about accepting the fact that gay marriage can bring some happiness to people in a world that has so much unhappiness. The argument of children or higher divorce rates is laughable. Are you oblivious to the world around you? Watch the news tonight. How many heterosexual marriages have neglected children and end in divorce, like half!
Get off your high horse, worry about your own lifestyle and choices, and let these humans find true love and be happy.
To the author and like-thinking posters - How does gay marriage affect you and your life? Is your marriage and beliefs so insecure that it would make your marriage and beliefs somehow less meaningful? How about accepting the fact that gay marriage can bring some happiness to people in a world that has so much unhappiness. The argument of children or higher divorce rates is laughable. Are you oblivious to the world around you? Watch the news tonight. How many heterosexual marriages have neglected children and end in divorce, like half!
Get off your high horse, worry about your own lifestyle and choices, and let these humans find true love and be happy.
Gary C. Rowtin | 8:00 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
How does spending millions of dollars legislating an issue assure gays of free
agency? If free agency is, in fact, a gift from God?
here here! | 8:02 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Finally, an article that calls it like it is. Whining plain and simple. Get
over it people. You lost in a fair vote!
Hey Dave | 8:20 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
You missed the memo that said "marriage isn't a right."
maklelan | 8:22 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Robert Johnson-
No, what's scary is that four old guys in California can all by themselves decided that something is suddenly a binding part of California's Constitution. That so many people seem to think that they outweigh the voice of the people is equally as disturbing, but it's that principle you cited: The ends justify the means. You'll go to your grave fighting for the right of four men to dictate to the people what their Constitution says if it serves your ends. Don't be a hypocrite.
No, what's scary is that four old guys in California can all by themselves decided that something is suddenly a binding part of California's Constitution. That so many people seem to think that they outweigh the voice of the people is equally as disturbing, but it's that principle you cited: The ends justify the means. You'll go to your grave fighting for the right of four men to dictate to the people what their Constitution says if it serves your ends. Don't be a hypocrite.
Denny | 8:50 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Many who have posted here are an embarrassment to the church. I am truly
discouraged we have such hatred among us.
To Don of Cal | 8:57 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
"In San Francisco a teacher took 4 graders to a gay wedding... during
school hours. Time and discussion away from curriculum, with no parental
warning. "
See, things get so convoluted that the truth is buried beneath distortions.
If you, Don, would have taken the time to look up what really happened in San Fran instead of taking what you heard as truth, you would have found out that it was the PARENTS of the children that organized the outing to the teacher's wedding. Permissions slips WERE handed out and two children's parent opted out. The parents were totally in control of what their children learned. This is all documented online and very easy to find.
If you told others the incorrect story, YOU are guilty of distortion and half truths. This kind of actions from so many Mormons is what has angered the gays to protest. Look in the mirror.
See, things get so convoluted that the truth is buried beneath distortions.
If you, Don, would have taken the time to look up what really happened in San Fran instead of taking what you heard as truth, you would have found out that it was the PARENTS of the children that organized the outing to the teacher's wedding. Permissions slips WERE handed out and two children's parent opted out. The parents were totally in control of what their children learned. This is all documented online and very easy to find.
If you told others the incorrect story, YOU are guilty of distortion and half truths. This kind of actions from so many Mormons is what has angered the gays to protest. Look in the mirror.
thankful for democracy | 8:59 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The common people , not the high and might supreme court of California, voted to
protect marriage. This simple but powerful act is the foundation of a free
society and democracy. With all the powerful , liberal, corrupt groups in the
country like the ACLU and other equally poisonous groups it is comforting to
know that the simple voice of the people still rules in this great land. Both
sides of an issue present their views and then a vote is taken. Very simple but
so important in this land of free men and women.The fight for morality in our
society continues with gay marriage, abortion and other destructive vehicles
which in the end punish the most innocent and least protected in our society -
the children ! I am thankful for a democracy that allows our voices to be heard
and our votes to be counted.
Re: Gary C. Rowtin | 9:03 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Prop 8, and all of the other 29 constitutional amendments addressing homosexual
marriage, don't have any bearing whatsoever on a person's free agency.
Those people affected are not banned from having relationships and acting on
their feelings. They are not stripped of their homosexual status, they are not
prevented from having a committed relationship, they are not stopped from doing
anything they currently do. They are simply not allowed to legally define their
union as a marrage. They can still call it whatever they want to, even, they
just can't do so in a legal setting. That does not affect their agency in
the slightest.
If I wanted to call an apple an orange, I could do so whenever I wanted, it just wouldn't make it true. That doesn't affect my agency at all, and it doesn't stop me from doing whatever I want to with my life. It just means that an apple is not legally an orange, regardless of what I want to call it.
If I wanted to call an apple an orange, I could do so whenever I wanted, it just wouldn't make it true. That doesn't affect my agency at all, and it doesn't stop me from doing whatever I want to with my life. It just means that an apple is not legally an orange, regardless of what I want to call it.
Webster Online Dictionary: | 9:12 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or
wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the
state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of
a traditional marriage b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c:
the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry
2: an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected ; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3: an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry
Of one heart | 9:30 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
I've read a lot of comments on here that "we're protecting
marriage" while also stating "we love our gay friends, neighbors, ward
members" and "nothing against gays and how they choose to live their
lives." IF THIS IS SO, come together and start petitioning our legislators
to draft law that will provide for everyone to have civil unions and if special
privileges for taxation, benefits, etc are to be provided that all in civil
unions are covered.
Actually in this day and age of so many different household configurations that meet the financial and familial needs of the residents, members of any household should be able to register as domestic partnerships and have equal access to tax benefits. If this seems ridiculous then eliminate tax benefits for everyone. Let each individual be taxed as such.
Living wills and medical power of attorney cost nothing other than the notary fee.
Inheritance issues always require a will and/or probate court.
There has got to be a solution that protects equal treatment under the law with which everyone can agree not based on union status. Take it out of the equation.
Let churches provide marriage according to their beliefs.
Actually in this day and age of so many different household configurations that meet the financial and familial needs of the residents, members of any household should be able to register as domestic partnerships and have equal access to tax benefits. If this seems ridiculous then eliminate tax benefits for everyone. Let each individual be taxed as such.
Living wills and medical power of attorney cost nothing other than the notary fee.
Inheritance issues always require a will and/or probate court.
There has got to be a solution that protects equal treatment under the law with which everyone can agree not based on union status. Take it out of the equation.
Let churches provide marriage according to their beliefs.
St. McCleod | 9:31 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Ahh, we have seen a shift.
Their argument begins to crumble, their credibility to fail. So now I see the same people that argued against 8 change tactics and start saying things like "Man DN should just get off this topic"
Their argument begins to crumble, their credibility to fail. So now I see the same people that argued against 8 change tactics and start saying things like "Man DN should just get off this topic"
new vote | 9:32 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
I propose a new vote.
Marriage is supposed to be a religious ceremony. Governments didn�t even perform marriages until the last few hundred years. This change probably occurred because of the stigma of those couples who wanted to start a family (the power to procreate is a natural tendency), but who refused to enter a church in order to get married. Remember that marriage is ordained of God. Personally, I don�t think government officials should be allowed to perform marriages. Let them perform civil unions to opposite-sex couples all they want. But let�s call it what it is.
Marriage is supposed to be a religious ceremony. Governments didn�t even perform marriages until the last few hundred years. This change probably occurred because of the stigma of those couples who wanted to start a family (the power to procreate is a natural tendency), but who refused to enter a church in order to get married. Remember that marriage is ordained of God. Personally, I don�t think government officials should be allowed to perform marriages. Let them perform civil unions to opposite-sex couples all they want. But let�s call it what it is.
Mike | 9:38 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Well of course you don't understand it Mr Benson. Most LDS people
don't. California courts determined that California laws that have been in
places forever did not preclude people of the same sex from being married.
Organizations and people from outside the state, primarily the LDS Church based
in Utah began a campaign to write a new law banning same sex marriage. In other
words, the citizens of California didn't really speak, money and special
insterests from elsewhere, especially Utah, swayed the outcome of an election
and that vote denied the rights of a minority that was previously protected
under California law. Now why in the world would those people NOT be angry
about that?
Perhaps a massive campaign needs to be undertaken to unite all gay people from California and other states, have them move to Utah and become the new Utah majority. Then they can write a few new Utah laws of their own on same sex marriage. Maybe throw in a few laws stripping away some rights from the LDS Church while they're at it? Lets see what kind of sore losers they become?
Perhaps a massive campaign needs to be undertaken to unite all gay people from California and other states, have them move to Utah and become the new Utah majority. Then they can write a few new Utah laws of their own on same sex marriage. Maybe throw in a few laws stripping away some rights from the LDS Church while they're at it? Lets see what kind of sore losers they become?
DESTRUCTION | 9:38 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Here�s the real issue: allowing same-sex couples to adopt
children. God has already discouraged it, unless gay or lesbians have found a
way to procreate without telling us. But living in a society where we allow
God�s children to be taught that it is normal to be gay
will most certainly bring destruction to our nation.
Cindy from California | 9:39 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
It's not California that doesn't get it. It's rich, white,
'educated' elite classes who are accustomed to getting whatever they
want by throwing a tantrum, be it political or physical. Many in the gay
community are part of this, and in my opinion, many of them are gay BECAUSE of
this. Remember, California has twice now upheld the marriage tradition. And we
have in part people of color to thank, who really know what it is to be
oppressed and without rights. The majority of those populations supported the
Amendment. Rich white Hollywood and university elites are the sore losers here.
to winning or losing | 9:47 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Here is the flip to your argument: Are gays and lesbians so insecure that they
need to mimic heterosexuals and marry? They already have the same legal rights
as spouses under the domestic partnership registry.
realitycheck | 9:53 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The solution here is for the church to put its money into a solution rather than
a fight (that they will lose). This will get on the ballot every two years in
just about every state until a solution is found, and does the church really
want to spend millions every two years fighting the inevitable? If this goes
to the supreme court, you will lose.
Your church has a lot of money, and friends in powerful places. Why not have one of your senators submit a federal bill that would give gay unions the same RIGHTS as any other couple but uses a different word than "marriage" since that seems to be your main sticking point?
I said earlier - "if you don't come up with a solution, one will be forced on you" - and it was misconstrued. But the fact is, if you don't come up with a solution that you can live with, a solution will be made (by the courts) and you will have very little say at that point. Better to have as much say as possible.
For the record, I think gays are strange (but then I think mormons are strange, too).
Your church has a lot of money, and friends in powerful places. Why not have one of your senators submit a federal bill that would give gay unions the same RIGHTS as any other couple but uses a different word than "marriage" since that seems to be your main sticking point?
I said earlier - "if you don't come up with a solution, one will be forced on you" - and it was misconstrued. But the fact is, if you don't come up with a solution that you can live with, a solution will be made (by the courts) and you will have very little say at that point. Better to have as much say as possible.
For the record, I think gays are strange (but then I think mormons are strange, too).
to Chris @ 6:28 | 9:54 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
. . .and everyone else who keeps mentioning it. Did god marry Adam and Eve? I
keep reading the Bible and have found no indication of that. Seems Eve was
given to Adam as a helpmeet, but I see nothing about husband and wife or being
spouses. Please cite the reference, preferably not in some recent
"translation" that was never actually translated from the original
Hebrew.
While we're at it, can anyone give me a biblical citation for where the "wedding/marriage" vows are in scripture? I've never read them in the Bible.
While we're at it, can anyone give me a biblical citation for where the "wedding/marriage" vows are in scripture? I've never read them in the Bible.
Deflecting the Issue | 10:14 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Proponents of gay marriages completely deflect the issue.
They say they can't get married.
They can. It's just that two men or two women can't marry each other. But a gay man can still marry a woman. They still have that right.
Geeze, people two straight men can't get married either.
How's that discrimination?
I mean, not getting what you *want*, simply because you want it does not equate to discrimination. A gay man may not WANT to marry a woman, but he's still allowed to do so.
That's a far cry different than a person of color not being allowed to sit in the same seats on a bus. Proponents of gay marriage are asking for a special seat on the preverbial bus.
They say they can't get married.
They can. It's just that two men or two women can't marry each other. But a gay man can still marry a woman. They still have that right.
Geeze, people two straight men can't get married either.
How's that discrimination?
I mean, not getting what you *want*, simply because you want it does not equate to discrimination. A gay man may not WANT to marry a woman, but he's still allowed to do so.
That's a far cry different than a person of color not being allowed to sit in the same seats on a bus. Proponents of gay marriage are asking for a special seat on the preverbial bus.
D Shields | 10:15 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
What is all the crabbing about judges reviewing legislation and making a
judgment about it? That's what they are there for. It's part of our
checks and balances by having executive, legislative and judicial branches of
government. What's been happening is a beautiful example of how our
government works.
The ugliness is found in people's lack of awareness of or chosen ignoring of what is in favor of repeating their opinions as nastily as possible. For the most part it's congenial debate which is also an excellent blessing of living in this country regardless of whether or not opponents are banging their words against brick walls.
The ugliness is found in people's lack of awareness of or chosen ignoring of what is in favor of repeating their opinions as nastily as possible. For the most part it's congenial debate which is also an excellent blessing of living in this country regardless of whether or not opponents are banging their words against brick walls.
re destruction 9:38am | 10:21 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
see - your problem is you think this is a religious issue. While you spend all
day praying to God, who finds it quite annoying, we spend all day trying to
ensure everyone has equal rights under the law.
And being gay is simply different - not normal, not abnormal - simply different. Like left-handed or red hair, it's just different than most people.
destruction to our nation? Organized religion has brought more destruction to the world than gays could ever do.....
And being gay is simply different - not normal, not abnormal - simply different. Like left-handed or red hair, it's just different than most people.
destruction to our nation? Organized religion has brought more destruction to the world than gays could ever do.....
re Cindy from California 9:39am | 10:30 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
and it's religious zealots who are the winners here, simply because they
spent a ton of money in tv ads that were deceptive. Just like the poster saying
kids were taken to a gay wedding in san fransisco. the fact is - the parents
wanted them to go and signed release form for it - but the mormon church paid
for ads that said the children were taken with no parental approval.
how is that the right thing? don't you abide by the "thou shall not lie" commandment? or is it a matter of "it's ok to lie as long as you think it's God's will" (like the FLDS do)?
Marriage can be civil or religious. Keep your religion and stay out of civil ceremonies...
how is that the right thing? don't you abide by the "thou shall not lie" commandment? or is it a matter of "it's ok to lie as long as you think it's God's will" (like the FLDS do)?
Marriage can be civil or religious. Keep your religion and stay out of civil ceremonies...
Anonymous | 10:37 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The LDS church overstepped its boundaries by being a tax-exempt organization.
They clearly are not supposed to be involved in political activities. The
involvement of the LDS church and its members who donated to support Prop. 8 is
another example of how people can justify discrimination in the name of religon.
re Chris 6:28am | 11:00 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
"you cry about a church that has the nerve to defend, that which is
just".
you defend what YOU deem to be just. We defend what WE deem to be just.
Your idea of what's just and my ideas of what's just are different. You haven't figured that out yet? We don't all believe in seer stones, and some of us actually believe in dinosaurs. (sorry to burst your bubble.)
you defend what YOU deem to be just. We defend what WE deem to be just.
Your idea of what's just and my ideas of what's just are different. You haven't figured that out yet? We don't all believe in seer stones, and some of us actually believe in dinosaurs. (sorry to burst your bubble.)
re Kevin 4:17am | 11:01 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
under your rules, we'd still have slavery....
realitycheck | 11:10 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
re Deflecting the issue 10:14am
African Americans used to be able to ride the bus, use public bathrooms, go to public schools, and go to restaraunts.
They just couldn't sit in the front of the bus, eat in white-owned resturaunts, go to the well-kept white-only schools, or use white-only bathrooms...
should we have just left it like that?
try to think before you post....
African Americans used to be able to ride the bus, use public bathrooms, go to public schools, and go to restaraunts.
They just couldn't sit in the front of the bus, eat in white-owned resturaunts, go to the well-kept white-only schools, or use white-only bathrooms...
should we have just left it like that?
try to think before you post....
What do homosexuals really want? | 11:50 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
1. I hate that homosexuals have co-opted the word "gay". Does that
mean that heterosexuals are not happy? I will not call homosexuals
"gay".
2. Do homosexuals really want marriage, or do they want recognition by the government? If what the religions are offering (marriage) is what they want, then they need to play by the religions rules. If they want recognition by the government, calling it marriage is counter-productive. Marriage is a religious institution. The Government should license legal unions and get out of the marriage business.
3. If we discount religion, and their "fairy tale books" then looking at evolution, biology, etc. shows that homosexuality is aberrant behavior. If a species is homosexual only, then reproduction has to be asexual... and that does not and will not happen in humans. They say, "Well, look around! Other species have homosexuality!" Just because a male dog wants to hump another male dog doesn't make it acceptable. No more acceptable is the man who wants to hump every woman. We can be tolerant and accept aberrant behavior, but calling it normal does not make it so. It is giving into desires and proclivities. That is a choice.
2. Do homosexuals really want marriage, or do they want recognition by the government? If what the religions are offering (marriage) is what they want, then they need to play by the religions rules. If they want recognition by the government, calling it marriage is counter-productive. Marriage is a religious institution. The Government should license legal unions and get out of the marriage business.
3. If we discount religion, and their "fairy tale books" then looking at evolution, biology, etc. shows that homosexuality is aberrant behavior. If a species is homosexual only, then reproduction has to be asexual... and that does not and will not happen in humans. They say, "Well, look around! Other species have homosexuality!" Just because a male dog wants to hump another male dog doesn't make it acceptable. No more acceptable is the man who wants to hump every woman. We can be tolerant and accept aberrant behavior, but calling it normal does not make it so. It is giving into desires and proclivities. That is a choice.
re new vote 9:32am | 11:57 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
where did you get the idea "marriage is supposed to be a religious
ceremony"? cuz that's entirely untrue...
STEVE-O | 11:58 a.m. Dec. 3, 2008
Many are comparing this issue to slavery and women's rights and
there's a large difference between Gay rights and Slavery/women's
rights!
I could compare this issue to the Nazis or the Taliban and state that the Gay issue is completely wrong... but that comparison wouldn't make sense either would it.
Each situation is different and this is a new unique scenerio. Some feel it is right and others feel it is wrong. The fact is that this Proposition passed and I do get the feeling that there are sore losers and whiners who are only hurting their own cause for the next time we vote on this.
Can you imagine Martin Luther King getting up there and throwing rocks through a Temple Window, or saying racism remarks in rebuttle to the way his people were treated? I can't! He protested in an honorable way and eventually people listened.
I could compare this issue to the Nazis or the Taliban and state that the Gay issue is completely wrong... but that comparison wouldn't make sense either would it.
Each situation is different and this is a new unique scenerio. Some feel it is right and others feel it is wrong. The fact is that this Proposition passed and I do get the feeling that there are sore losers and whiners who are only hurting their own cause for the next time we vote on this.
Can you imagine Martin Luther King getting up there and throwing rocks through a Temple Window, or saying racism remarks in rebuttle to the way his people were treated? I can't! He protested in an honorable way and eventually people listened.
re what do homosexuals.. 11:50am | 12:06 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
first, marriage is NOT a religious institution. Never has been, never will be.
Just because some people get married in a church does not make it a religious
INSTITUTION. It makes your ceremony a religious ceremony....
and most species have a small (2%) population that show homosexual tendencies. Perhaps we should shoot the male dogs trying to hump each other...
the most ironic part is that most gay relationships have very little to do with sex, yet you make it the main issue....
and most species have a small (2%) population that show homosexual tendencies. Perhaps we should shoot the male dogs trying to hump each other...
the most ironic part is that most gay relationships have very little to do with sex, yet you make it the main issue....
re STEVE-O 11:58am | 12:08 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
and yet the black panthers bombed building and everything else...
not all blacks were peaceful protesters - not all gays are throwing rocks...
why do you all need to make such bizarre comparisons without actually thinking it through?
not all blacks were peaceful protesters - not all gays are throwing rocks...
why do you all need to make such bizarre comparisons without actually thinking it through?
STEVE-O | 12:28 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
The same bizarre comparisons that are being used against mormons. Protests at
the Temples and valdalism because a few mormons donated some money. It's a
double edged sword here.
Mark | 12:30 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
To re what do homosexauls.. 11:50am / 12:06pm
Sorry but marriage IS a RELIGIOUS institution. It is a "sacrament" for Catholic and Orthodox Christians (Orthodox Christians believe that it is Christ himself who joins the man and woman together in marriage)and an "ordinance" for Mormons. Sacraments for Catholics and Orthodox Christians are not just mere rituals, but manifestations of God's grace in people's lives. "Ordinances" for Mormons are similiar, except they are regarded as eternal relationships.
To ignore the religious aspects of the discussion regarding Prop 8 is to ignore the possible attacks on religious indiviudals and communities that could come through anti-discrimination laws if gay marriage is legalized. This is more than a discussion of gay marriage, it is a discussion on possible infringements of religious liberty.
Sorry but marriage IS a RELIGIOUS institution. It is a "sacrament" for Catholic and Orthodox Christians (Orthodox Christians believe that it is Christ himself who joins the man and woman together in marriage)and an "ordinance" for Mormons. Sacraments for Catholics and Orthodox Christians are not just mere rituals, but manifestations of God's grace in people's lives. "Ordinances" for Mormons are similiar, except they are regarded as eternal relationships.
To ignore the religious aspects of the discussion regarding Prop 8 is to ignore the possible attacks on religious indiviudals and communities that could come through anti-discrimination laws if gay marriage is legalized. This is more than a discussion of gay marriage, it is a discussion on possible infringements of religious liberty.
re STEVE-O 12:28pm | 12:34 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
and yet the ads in California specificly state "Major funding supplied by
the Church of Latter Day Saints" in the disclosure statement at the bottom
of the screen...
"a few mormons donated some money"? get real, stevie. you all spent over $20mil - that's not a few mormons... that's putting the full weight of your entire church into ads that were ripe with deceit. Nice church - guess the "do not lie" commandment doesn't really apply to mormons, eh?
"a few mormons donated some money"? get real, stevie. you all spent over $20mil - that's not a few mormons... that's putting the full weight of your entire church into ads that were ripe with deceit. Nice church - guess the "do not lie" commandment doesn't really apply to mormons, eh?
Matomand | 12:35 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
JG - I do not know what planet you are living on, but in my California I have
worked with numerous gays and lesbians and found them to be among the best and
the brightest. The ones I know and am proud to call my friends are
hard-working, intelligent, compassionate individuals who are a lot like me (not
sure about you.) I am a senior manager in an aerospace compnay, and know that
employers don't avoid gay employees any more than they avoid Mormon ones.
It's not like a sign is tattoed on someone's forehead.
re Mark 12:30pm | 12:40 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
It's a religious ceremony in your church and it is a civil ceremony for
those who don't follow your religion.
Yes - you do have specific ceremonies that you could consider INSTITUTIONS in your church... No one goes to the courthouse to get Communion. No one is Baptised in the county clerk's office. Those are religious INSTITUTIONS.
But just because you make something a special ceremony in your church doesn't mean everyone does. Yet it's still called the same thing. Marriage. Regardless of where it is held...
Yes - you do have specific ceremonies that you could consider INSTITUTIONS in your church... No one goes to the courthouse to get Communion. No one is Baptised in the county clerk's office. Those are religious INSTITUTIONS.
But just because you make something a special ceremony in your church doesn't mean everyone does. Yet it's still called the same thing. Marriage. Regardless of where it is held...
Keep it in check | 12:44 p.m. Dec. 3, 2008
keep in mind that when we resort to labeling people "losers" --- we
are drawing attention away from the issue and we are using labels to make fun of
in a non-constructive manner.
Remember, from May till Nov. it was legal for gays to marry ---
Would it have been for gays to point the finger at the LDS conservative community (or any other group, for that matter) --- and call them a bunch of losers because marriage was finally allowable?
This is not a game, folks.
Another reason why I am not hetero and I don't get into the machismo bits guys play --- it's boyish and middle school.
If we turn this into a name-calling every time one side wins we're no better than the other side ---
Let's keep it in check --- put the testosterone in check --- and address the issue from a legal point.
To the religious --- respectful of your views --- all things considered.
Sodom, Gomorrah, Rome, Leviticus, we get it --- we hear you.
But how will you bring those arguments into the courtroom?
Remember, from May till Nov. it was legal for gays to marry ---
Would it have been for gays to point the finger at the LDS conservative community (or any other group, for that matter) --- and call them a bunch of losers because marriage was finally allowable?
This is not a game, folks.
Another reason why I am not hetero and I don't get into the machismo bits guys play --- it's boyish and middle school.
If we turn this into a name-calling every time one side wins we're no better than the other side ---
Let's keep it in check --- put the testosterone in check --- and address the issue from a legal point.
To the religious --- respectful of your views --- all things considered.
Sodom, Gomorrah, Rome, Leviticus, we get it --- we hear you.
But how will you bring those arguments into the courtroom?
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.
- Plenty of H1N1 vaccine available 6:38 p.m.
- Obama orders 30,000-troop boost 6:37 p.m.
- 2 arrested in Roy double slaying 6:33 p.m.
- Working on new HIV/AIDS vaccine 6:32 p.m.
- BSA to host audiocast over Internet 5:47 p.m.
- Garbage trucks to trash teen drinking 5:47 p.m.
- Court seeks judicial candidates 5:29 p.m.
- Simple candies for the holidays 5:15 p.m.
- Latkes from frozen hash browns 5:14 p.m.
- Cakes taking a starring role 5:14 p.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- Witness: Mitchell wanted attention
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- MWC '09 season in review
- Jazz win 6th in 7 games
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Jazz ready to be without Harpring
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
901 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime482
- Hall reprimanded by MWC400
- Max Hall issues apology387
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal342
- Utes won't respond to Hall272
- BYU says Hall incident resolved223
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game151
- BYU is champion of the state142
- Religion in politics is tiresome127
My husband was teaching his 6th-grade class in Salt Lake last year when...
Latest comments
Jorgensen repremanded last week, Hall this week. Wonder who will be next...
I usually watch channel 5 but man all those commercials drive me crazy....
I thought Sylvester was an excellent linebacker the past two seasons. I...
Would it have been different if BYU had lost and Max had made such remarks?...
This race is as much about Nancy Pelosi as Matheson! She will remain speaker...
There is a basic truth that you need a certain amount of roads to service a...
I'll comment. I was in the BYU band at RES in 2000 (think "last miracle for...
OK, that probably made sense in print, but after 20 seconds I've trying to...
Great comments from a great man.
I hate it when the haters come out with their hateful hate.
Advertisements
I myself voted Yes but have gay friends and relatives--I think it's a matter of preserving marriage and the traditional family. Sadly, that's been called "discrimination" and "hate" when those are actually far from the intent. The church has said it won't stand in the way of finding LEGAL solutions to this problem that don't have moral overtones and don't undermine traditional marriage and family.
Exactly right--THE CHILD CAN'T CHOOSE. We have no right to make that choice on our future children's behalf. We need to have traditional families available--and strong ones, too--to raise children that will contribute to society.
That's not to belittle single-parent families; most of them are doing their best. But we ideally want strong mother-father families to preserve the society in which we live. No other unit can do that--including the same-sex-couple family. We have to preserve the traditional family first and foremost, whatever else we do.
Good luck!