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

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Sick and Wrong

I can't believe we have come to this. What is wrong with our society? What's next? Can I make it legal to marry my sibling? How about the 8-year neighbor kid? Or how about my horse? Marriage is not a right. It's a privileged.

I am LDS

And I am proud to say that I am against gay marriage. It isn't like we are the only church who are against gay marriage. We are the ones who have the guts to stand up and say it. Gay marriage is wrong. Just as gay people have the right to say that they think gay marriage is ok we have the right to say that it is not. This is a good victory!


We all have an equal right to marry. The right to marry someone of the opposite sex is available to everyone.


This is not about hate or inequality or civil rights. I would defend, with my life, the civil rights and freedoms of any American. However, "marriage" is and should always be - between a man and a woman.

Grandpa Bill

I'm a heterosexual Mormon. Many who oppose gay marriage are railing against the claim that they are bigoted just because of their opposition. I agree that just being opposed to gay marriage does not necessarily make one a bigot. However, there does seem to be a lot of bigotry on the side of those who oppose gay marriage. Take the following example from Victory | 1:25 p.m. May 26, 2009

"The people have voted, now shut up or leave. Those that support gay marriage are parasites looking for ways to bend societies values."

Certainly this is what many in support of gay marriage are reacting to when they claim bigotry on the other side. For my brothers in the GLBT community, lets refrain from reacting to this type of communication with a similar level of vitriol. Lets stick to the issues and be kind and professional while doing it. When those who are apathetic to your cause see hate spewing from some opposing gay marriage, and they see your levelheaded approach, theyll understand your situation much better. Dont be angered by those who express such anger and intolerance. Use it to your advantage.


@Why | 3:22 p.m. May 26, 2009

"If we are so bigoted, why do you try so hard to seek our acceptance?"

I don't want your acceptance, per se. I want equality under the law.

Equality means:

1. The punishment for a Christian beating up a gay because he is gay is the same as for a gay beating up a Christian for being Christian. FYI, they're not the same.
2. A Christian employer cannot fire an employee for being gay just as a gay employer cannot fire an employee for being Christian. The former is legal, the latter is not.
3. Homosexuals can marry their same-sex partners as heterosexuals can marry their opposite-sex partners.

So I don't want your acceptance. We can agree to hate each other. I do need to you to recognize these disparities in civil rights.


Everybody has the same marriage rights. I'm straight but I can't marry a man even if I wanted to.(I can't believe I just said that!)I gay man could still marry a woman just like I can and will.

you're not that special

You choose this lifestyle and laws aren't up to speed. I just want to say that you feel 'special' for joining and supporting a 'cause' it's just part of your egocentric need to belong and feel liberal...i'm sure the laws will crash soon and you'll get your ways, and society will start to crash as the institution God gave will be attacked. I don't understand why you have targeted mormons just because they believe what they do. Stop attacking them and worry about yourself

Good News Bad News

California should have never allowed Gay marriages while it was still being appealed. They rushed to open the doors because they knew it wouldn't stand so they had to do it "underhandedly." Shame. They have messed up for many years to come.


Those trying to turn this into a Human rights or civil rights issue can not be taken seriously at all. This isn't about creating something equal, especially when you are deal with a minority group that isn't functioning normal. They say it's about LOVE... well I love my kids, brother, dog and cat... should I be allowed to marry them? They say they are born this way, which there is no REAL scientific proof of this other than it still becomes a CHOICE of action. If you want to be gay, I'm happy for you and wish you all the best. You know the consequences of those actions and it is what sets you apart from a heterosexual couple. Marriage is NOT a right. It never has been a "RIGHT". It is a god given privilege that was not merely thought up by man. Marriage is a bond between god and couple, a civil union is a bond between state and couple. If gays want to be recognized by state, than a civil union is what they should seek. But I feel this has more to do with insulting religion and morals.

Same Anonymous

That is supposed to say "A gay man"

Way to go

Congrats to the Cal courts. They got this one right!

Utah Dilemna

At least in California gays and lesbians have some legal protections via civil unions (but no federal protections).

Here in Utah, I have to wonder if this is really about "Marriage". When the LDS Church promoted, and the Utah Legislature pushed through Amendment Three, which prohibits ANY recognition of a gay and lesbian relationship, they knew this would impact gays and lesbians as individuals, let alone those in relationships.

Utah's hate crimes bill was defeated for eight years simply because the draft text mentioned gay and lesbian individuals. It passed the moment gays and lesbians were excluded (despite being one of the most targeted demographic groups for hate crimes).

The Common Ground bills attempted to bridge a few of the legal problems facing gays and lesbian Utahn's, but were instantly scuttled by the legislature, and the LDS Church went strangely silent.

So is this really about "marriage", or is this part of a broader more insidious campaign to force gays and lesbians out of public sight?


If Marriage is a privilege, and not a right, why should only straight couples be allowed that privilege?

Anonymous @ 5:55

Very tolerant and non-hateful of you. Seems as if you are guilty of the very traits you accuse others of. And your threat to mormon-owned stores? Shades of Hitler's Germany and Jewish-owned stores. What is it you plan to do, exactly, O Tolerant One?

Born that Way

Marriage is not a right, it's a social institution. There's nothing natural about it. In fact it's defined to be (at least among the heterosexuals) quite the opposite. It is the suppression of biological urges for the fostering of a condition in which children may safely be introduced into society. This is why it has endured since recorded history, because it places a societal responsibility upon the couple to care and provide for any genetic offspring the pairing may create.

All other perks and exceptions to this initial socio-biological contract are extensions and only exist if the core stays sound. By making marriage about sexual preference and sexual relations, one further corrupts society.

It is interesting that in some island societies like Bali, where homosexuality is almost ritually accepted if not promoted, they maintain the sanctity of marriage as strictly heterosexual by only granting tribal rights to those who enter into heterosexual marriage and contribute children. Essentially one "grows up" by putting off sexuality of any form (which isnt condemned other than its perception of immaturity) and accepting the ultimate parental responsibility--not by persisting in a lie, as our society seems wont to do.


Grandpa Bill, I think what this comes down to is that we have been asked over and over to be accepting and to adjust our moral code of something that is simply wrong. But now that isn't enough and they want more, and again we are being asked to sacrifice the bond and meaning, what is considered to be a sacred, between man and women and god.

I think enough is enough. I think the very fibers of our society failed to grow and were actually weakened by the first acceptance of homosexuality as just a way of life. The day we start to throw our sacred bonds at the fire of indecency is a sure sign of how weak minded we have become all at the sake of saving our image in the wake of moral standards.

GLB&T knew the consequences of their actions, if they didn't want to accept those than they shouldn't have made that decision. Blacks and Jews never had a choice and thus comparing this to the civil and human rights of those times is insulting and pure mockery of the innocent lives that were taken.


So, I've seen the signs ("How can 'love' be wrong", etc), and have heard many of the arguments from the LGBT community (it's only fair, right, etc). So, let's say I agree with you. What harm does it do, eh? You love each other. What the heck. And, you're being denied some kind of 'right', after all. Your loving each other and living together, no matter what it is called, is certainly not going to hurt anyone else, or jeopardize anyone else's marriage. All right, then. Fair enough. You have convinced me. We'll call it 'marriage', and give you a piece of paper issued by the state.

But, what if I really, really love more than one other woman? And they love me? Is it really hurting anyone else if I marry them both? How can our love be wrong? So, I'll support you if you support the FLDS 'right' to have more than one wife. Or, is that wrong? And if so, why? And if you do support it, you should be marching in support of the LDS church, which had it's rights taken away by the federal government.


Pitted against each other while THEY loot our country's Treasury. I respect the feelings of BOTH sides. I do not want my child told man on man sex is "ok". As far as my neighbors being married, regardless of sex or orientation that is fine. But instructing kids that sodomy is "ok" is wrong!!!


The California Supreme Court did the right thing in upholding the vote of the people. Homosexuals cannot disagree with that principle. They live in the United States where the vote of the people means something. Had the shoe been on the other foot, while I may not have liked the outcome, I would have supported it. Like the Presidential election, I do not like the fact that Obama won the vote, but the people -- although highly misinformed -- spoke through the voting process. That's the way this democracy works. Of all the states that have a gay marriage law, none were implemented through a vote of the people. Interestingly, of the 30 or so states that have denied gay marriage, all outcomes were a result of the vote of the people.

to comment

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