Comments about ‘Last gay-rights bill is voted down by panel’

Excellent Job Utah!

concerned about providing security for his "long time partner" perhaps he could marry her.

Hopefully this type of victory for morality will continue in the future. Although the tide of evil and immorality (speaking of a practice and belief system and not of individuals) grows bigger and more ominous as more and more people fall for its seductive lies, the truth will out in the end. In the meantime, I hope and pray that sexual morality will continue to be upheld by the people of Utah, if not the nation.

My thoughts exactly, 6:59. If Patwari cares so much about his "long-time" partner's welfare, why doesn't he just marry her?

oh, excellent job to deny protection to tax-paying citizens? excellent job to make it ok to evict or fire someone simply because someone might *think* someone else is gay? what is wrong with you people?

what makes me feel better is that these antiquated, arrogant, and condescending ways of thinking are slowly dying out, and as MLK said "The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice".

the common ground initiative has never been about anything other than pushing us closer to gay marriage. Its proponents have tried to deceive us by saying how it would apply to a much larger group of people.

But the example cited in the article, of Neal Patwari concerned about his girlfriend's father possibly being given control of her health care should something happen to her, blows that deception wide open. If either he or she were really concerned about her father being given control, they could marry each other and that threat would be gone.

I don't know either of them and do not know the nature of their relationship, but it seems that they are not committed enough to each other to legitimize their relationship.

If Patwari doesn't want to marry his partner (his right) he CAN have her sign a legal document stating that he is the contact for all medical decisions. She can specifically list that she wishes to have no information regarding her health care given to anyone BUT him. She can also make a will stating he is her heir. There are all sorts of legal avenues available for every single issue the the Common Ground initiative attempted to address. Is this really about legal rights, or are those supporting the CGI looking for acceptance of their moral decisions? I would LOVE to have someone explain why there is a legal need for any of the items in the CGI!!

Hopefully the new stimulus package which includes Billions of Dollars for education will be well spent in Utah, there is an apparent ignorance which needs to be addressed there.

The belief that only "Certain" human beings are entitled to protections under the law, that only a specific group of "Traditionalist" are morally able to judge everyone else, has throughout history been considered a black mark on any cultures past. America's slavery, nazi Germany, KKK Riots to name only a few embarassing examples of believing that one "Type", or "Race" or belief system is acceptable while others are legally stripped of rights.

Utah use the educational stimulus package well, you've just announced it's need in your state loudly to the rest of the nation.

"The belief that only "Certain" human beings are entitled to protections under the law"

I'd be fine with removing certain married peoples entitlement to inheritance and visitation protections in the name of equality,
IF in the name of the same quality if we also remeove certain homosexual peoples entitlement to hate crime protections as well.

MTB, I'm afraid your wish of extra education dollars for Utah is in vain. I heard somewhere that we are 41st in the nation for per capita spending from BO's porkulus package. And since BO's interior secretary took further money from state coffers by cancelling those oil leases, there's even less money available.

I'll respectfully disagree with your assertion that the failure to agree with you is the same as being uneducated or mis-informed.

Hey the writer of this story is in the back of the second picture of this article. :)

Their should be no special rights or protections given to gays.

All these special laws for "hate crimes" are ridiculous. Our govt now legislates who I have to like and who I can hate? How ridiculous is that?

Think about it...when you perpetrate a violent crime against someone do you like them? Probably not. I mean the domestic abuser who kills his wife? I would guess he is feeling hate at the moment he does it. Do we develop extra laws for him? No, there is already a murder law or an assault law on the books. Should be no special laws discriminating or protecting gays.

All that said--nodody should treat gays any differently. They are people just like us. They are just immoral and have lost their way.

Now I totally diagree with their behavior but I still employ several of them. They work very hard because the are insecure about the behavior so they think that if they work themselves to death and perform well at work it will somehow prove their gay behavior is ok. It won't.....but if they want to work themselves to death...works for me.

"The debate, at times, took ugly turns including a full-page ad that ran Sunday in the Deseret News and the Salt Lake Tribune disparaging homosexuality."

"Disparaging homosexuality" Isn't that redundant?

I don't always agree with what happens on the hill but I am very pleased to see the the direction taken with this group of initiatives in upholding our marriage constitution amendment. None of us would even be here without the traditional family. It deserves our upmost commitment and protection.

"Would have pave the way for same-sex marriages in Utah."

Howe is NOT a spcial rights?

When you are demanding special right because you have CHOSEN to BEHAVE a certain way,

REMEMBER we are humans with the capacity to reason, and CHOOSE how we behave,

Sounds like like some group is demanding special rights and privileges.

re: Anonymous at 3:18

It hasn't been proved one way or another whether homosexuality is a choice, or whether it has genetic factors of causation. Until it is, this is just one more minority group fighting for equal rights and protection under the law.

Just as they did during the fight for Women's suffrage, the Civil Rights movement.

The Mormon Church once re-defined marriage as being between one man and multiple women. This was touted as an eternal principle, but was abandoned because of external pressures, the threat of confiscation of Church owned properties, the loss of certain civil rights and the desire to attain statehood for Utah.

It is surprising to me that this Mormon heritage has been forgotten and the people of Utah are willing to continue to oppress gays and lesbians when many of their own ancestors were once oppressed.

Homosexuality is not a choice and there is much in scientific literature confirming this fact. What gets me is how good legislation is stifled in committees headed by people with their heads in the sand. Are they afraid of good debate on the floor?

Another thing. . . there are many definitions of family that would have been protected in the Common Ground . . .siblings who live together, the aged parent living with a single child, the common law family, the couple who decide to not have children, in addition to the couples of same sex. Many of these families have been discriminated against all across this country. Read the article in the July/Aug issue of Utne Reader, "It's Not a
Gay Thing" to really LEARN and UNDERSTAND this issue.