Quantcast

Comments about ‘Utah gay-marriage advocates disappointed’

Return to article »

But LDS officials say the California court's ruling is 'welcome'

Published: Wednesday, May 27 2009 12:56 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Great news!

California does have judges who have common sense in intrepreting the law and will of the people. I worry about gays spreading AIDS and making it legal for them to marry would just sanction deviancy.

@Anonymous

Why are you railing on Utah for what happened in California? You seem to have a very illogial sense about cause and effect. Tearing down Utah does not build up California nor the gay cause. Threating Utahns only makes them more opposed to anything you might have to say. You should get out of the motorized chair more often and look around you. There are many good people on both sides of this issue. Don't be childish just because you don't get your own way. It is unbecoming of you. Keep writing the books and supporting the organizations. thats the way to go the word out that I think that you want to do.

To the moron who votes 4 morons

Ex-Post Facto | 8:49 p.m. May 26, 2009
why allow any gay marriage? | 5:27 p.m. May 26,

"The United States Constitution does not allow for the passage of ex-post facto laws. This means a law cannot be retroactive in nature. It can only have its effect on persons after passage not before. Had the California Supreme Court declared the 18,000 same sex marriages performed before passage of Prop 8, null and void., the U.S. Supreme Court would have quickly overturned their decision."

So the Courts can overturn the vote of the majority (Prop. 22) which defined marriage as being between one man and one woman and allow gays to marry the same sex and when the people vote to amend their Constitution because the voters on the Court violated the rights of the majority of Californians the Court can then say that the amendment can't be applied retroactively.

That's really good to know since the 13th amendment outlawing slavery applied to every slave that came before it was passed and freed them but according to you that would have violated the constitution.

Is that it retarded voter/future congressman

Chantment

Finally, a court rules for the citizens. They were scared of losing their cushy jobs...otherwise they would have ruled the other way.

Californication is such a joke anymore. It's just a mess. The sodomites won't stop, though. They will try to push their evil on Utah and other states as fast as they can. Take courage and hold strong, Utah! You will be a beacon to others.

Whats next? Everyone's a Senator

Cats,

"I just love the way gays and gay supporters always try to claim that if you disagree with them it's either because you hate them or you're afraid of them. They clearly just can't handle honest disagreement."

That's obvious. They either win at the ballot and get their way or they try to win in the courts and get their way. Anyone who disagrees hates them or is afraid of them. It couldn't be possible that they are themselves bigots and tyrants who think that they are always right and that everyone must agree with them.

"And, BTW, Marriage is NOT a right. It is a privilege. That's why you have to get a license."

The word privilege isn't correct anymore than saying that being a U.S. Senator is a privilege and not a right even though technically marriage and serving in the Senate fall into the same legal category.

Serving in the Senate is also a civil right which everyone has equal opportunity to benefit from and no one is discriminated against based on sex, race, orientation, religion or any other factor yet it's restricted and has requirements.

Gays <= marriage

Being Gay is a life style and can be terminated at will therefore no law is needed to sanctify or bless it. What Gay's as well as other non conforming masses seek are financial gains and not really a right. These alternative lifestyles have the same rights and privileges allowed to any other citizens conforming to the laws. Our country was and is established under the doctrine of Christianity that teaches right and wrong and how humanity should treat each other. Not accepting gays does not violate their choices and they are not persecuted because of their choices. Their own guilt is persecuting themselves as it should, Gay is not acceptable as a marriage defined by law, it is homosexual as defined. They do not deserve the rights of family and are not fit as parents or propagating the species. Marriage is the recognition of propagating the species and they do not fit in with this concept. You can call being gay many things but a marriage it is not, even with a law it is no marriage. And I don't think the Supreme court would sanctify a gay union of homosexuals as a marriage.

Realize

I just realized that I am really sick of these gay people not understanding what no means. It's kind of like a 5 year old who won't take no for an answer. I say lets boycott everything "gay". No more watching gay actors, no more allowing newspapers that support this behavior into our homes. No means no.

MJH79

It's not about Hate! Get over it.

Skippy

Marriage should be between a man and a woman.

RE anonymous 5:55

That sounds like a threat from one who wants love and acceptance from all. What if we decided to threaten anyone who is gay or supported them? That would be considered a hate crime. Why do you think you are above the law?

Anonymous

The devil is offended too

SLC gal

If gays want to get married so bad, why don't they just go to the states that already allow it and get'er done already?

Personally I believe allowing them to be married is mocking God, but what about a CIVIL union which would give them the CIVIL libertys they keep railing about?

logic?

I find it interesting that gay people speak of how their 'rights' are being denied. It is the reality of democratic ideals that the majority rules. The majority, at this time, does not favor gay marriage. While I support gay peoples 'right' to continue to petition the gov't for change, they need to be more respectful of the decissions made that don't 'go their way'. They attack the majority, call us bigots, etc... They accuse us of violating their rights, yet it's okay for them to violate our right to voice our disapproval. They complain of two standards within marriage, yet allow two standards for their judgement of others. Hypocritical if you ask me. I see the gay lifestyle as a choice. People choose that for themselves. I don't agree with that choice and feel it's my 'right' to voice my opinions against it, just as I voice my opinion against other issues I don't agree with. We call that freedom of speech. I also support their right to choose that lifestyle, just don't force me to choose it! If gay marriage becomes legal, I'll be in the minority. So be it.

nottyou

I should have the right to marry poultry or anything I want. I demand equal rights! Don't be a bigot. Don't hate. Give me my rights! Love is beautiful.

Hallsy

God will not be mocked. The gay mafia would be better spent preparing for judgement day.

AZ

Yea!!! What a great day in America.

Constitutional Constitution

I'm glad they upheld P8. Overturning it would've rendered the state constitution pointless. This particular legal challenge was bad law.

Anonymous

Don't be fooled. when they say all they want is to be married. First come marriage, next is to force the State to teach their sinful behavior(Romans 1:24-29) to our children in the public school. yes, their books are already finding their way in the public school library.

Remember they are waiting for the old to die so they can get their way. What a surprise when they found out Miss California is not old.

cinbu

1. Slavery was an issue of real equality and civil rights - Slaves suffered real abuses until those laws were changed.
2. Women's rights was a real issue of civil rights. Woman suffered real abuses until those laws were changed.
These things needed a change in legislation so that segment of our population could be treated as humans, these were true issues of Human Civil Rights.
NOBODY IS ABUSING GAYS based on this "marriage" issue. It is not the same. There is a problem, but the Gays have defined it very badly, and are not clear themselves about exactly what is real in this issue and what isnt.
Gays are not being treated inhumanely by not allowing them the priviledge of their CIVIL UNIONS to be sanctioned as MARRIAGE. What needs to be adjusted to accomodate these folks is the laws regarding Civil Unions.

Don'd Understand

I just don't get how the gay marriage supporters continue to throw out references to womens rights and slavery as if that somehow automatically makes them right and the majority wrong. Is it really that simple that if i want something and i'm in the minority i just lable people haters and bring up slavery and i should get my way???

btw, do you gay marriage supporters also support polygamy? how about underage girls marrying older men? the list could go on and by your logic anything should go because "it won't affect my marriage" right?

to comment

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