How could they leave, if they were detained and handcuffed? Why arrest, if they
never been issued a tresspass warning before?
I'm a gay Mormon and lived in Utah for a time during college years. It's no
secret that the LDS church finds any GLBT activity or PDA inappropriate.
Certainly I'm not shocked when anyone gives anyone a peck on the cheek, some
people were, it's private property. Although I'm all for equal rights, and can
understand why the gay couple was upset, private property is not the venue for
such arguments. Both sides overreacted. It's hard to deny the humor in the
arrest and later with the protest, but in all honesty it is a shameful way for
the GLBT community to react and does not represent the whole as rational,
decent, human beings. This is not the higher road to equal rights. Such a
protest should have taken place at the capital building, in a political arena,
not on private property. Just as GLBT should have equal rights, so should the
LDS have the right to determine appropriate behavior on their own property.
Nobody's saying you have to become a member. Your beliefs are between you and
God. But there's a fundamental difference between Mormons suggesting to others
that they read the Book of Mormon and study it out for themselves and
non-members doing their best to sway members from their testimonies, and that is
this: LDS members are trying to build people up by giving them the greatest gift
we members have to offer. They're trying to bring love and joy and every good
thing into the other person's life. The people who come out and make comments
like the ones I was referring to are only trying to tear down the people they're
talking to, and to bring them misery and contention.The LDS church
does NOT believe that all other churches are entirely wrong about everything.
That's not even close to what we believe. We believe that other churches have a
lot of wonderful things about them, and that they have some very important
truths to teach. But people will hear what they want to hear, and insist it's
the truth when it's not.
Wow, there sure is a lot of judgement and hatred towards gay people in these
comments! We don't know the whole story, so stop making judgements on what
happened. If the security guards harrassed this gay couple for a
simple kiss on the cheek, then shame on the security guards. If the gay couple
was doing something that would also get a heterosexual couple harrassed, then
shame on the gay couple.
To Re: Anonymous 10:07 a.m. | 1:45 p.m., Coul YOU please tell me why
LDS MEMBERS feel the constant need to explain to non-Mormons how they need to
repent and realize how wrong their churches ALL are? Whenever somebody who IS
LDS finds out that I am NOT, they feel the great urge to sit me down and tell me
to read the Book of Mormon (fiction) and PRAY about it!Well, I'VE
read the Book of Mormon AND the history and I've listened to all the arguments
anybody can come up with, and I have found out the truth for myself. THAT'S
PRECISELY WHY I AM NOT A MEMBER!
Could you please tell me why non-members feel the constant need to explain to
Mormons how they need to wake up and realize how wrong the church is about
everything? Whenever somebody who isn't LDS finds out that I am, they feel the
great urge to sit me down and tell me to read my church's history and find out
the truth, just like you're doing.Well, I've read the history and
I've listened to all the arguments anybody can come up with, and I have found
out the truth for myself. That's precisely why I am a member.
to: Anthony | 2:19 a.m. July 11, 2009 "You presume, simply because they
were gay, that they were trying to "stir something up" and "get on the news"?
Isn't that somewhat of a narrow minded assumption?"what a pathetic
argument. yes, it was done intentionally. if gay man throw a mormn out of his
retaurant, do you think there would be so much coverage? no. the owner would say
it was his property and that the mormon was being inappropriate because he
didn't agree with his views. there is nothing big about this incident. it is a
horrible excuse to turn two con artists into some kind of victims just because
they are gay. gays are always saying how notmal they are, well fine. if they are
capable of being decent, they are also capable of being indecent. that was the
I don't recall ever being at a library or national park where the rules of
conduct were CLEARLY posted. If you live in Salt Lake City and you don't know
the standards of the Church, then you must be either very closed-minded or
stupid.Guess what? Your argument is flawed!
The rules of conduct are clearly posted in National Parks and Libraries.Show me a National Park that will kick you out and cite you for
kissing!Show me a Library that will kick you out for holding
hands!Guess what? Your argument is flawed, just like your bigoted
homophobia! I only hope some day your blinders come off and you understand the
full weight and import of the fascism in which you are trapped!
Since prop 8 passed the gay agendaists have been grating, annoying, hateful and
flamboyant. Guess what its gotten them. Support for gay marriage has dropped
10 points. Keep it up.
"If your Church is going to welcome people and solicit people and invite people
onto their property, you are going to have to tolerate a wide variety of
behaviors from those people."Guess what? Public and national parks,
libraries, grocery stores, restaurants, even gas stations, all invite people to
come onto their private property, and yet they all have rules of conduct that
must be followed while on that property. If you don't follow the rules, they'll
ask you to leave, the same as this couple was asked to leave when they didn't
follow the rules of etiquette expected on LDS church property. You
don't expect libraries to close their doors to the public just because they
expect you to keep your voice down while inside, and you don't get huffy when
gas stations demand that you wear shoes and a shirt when you go inside, so why
are you complaining about this? There's absolutely no difference. They're all
organizations that own private property that is open to the public so long as
the public follows basic rules of conduct while visiting the property.
The comparison was definitely not stupid. It was very rude to say that.By default, you are also saying that Mormons are trying to oppress gays
with uncivil legislation. They are NOT! They are defending traditional
marriage. Family is one of the most important things. Homosexuality causes the
family to be nonexistent. I would definitely not want to be raised by a gay
couple. Think of the harassment and ridicule a child would face.We
need to preserve the family in it's true form.
But Myself and a friend of mine were filming a home video and being a little
loud and "irreverant" by the reflection pond inbetween the temple and the JS
memorial building and the same thing happened to us. We were asked to leave,
argued and got handcuffed and cited. IMO many posted here are making
this more of an issue than it is. There was no hate intended and nothing done
wrong on the part of the security guards. I have close friends who
work security on the church grounds and these things happen EVERY day. Why is
this a big deal? Because the Gay community makes it one. Check yourselves and
start practicing the "stop the hate" that you preach.
To ask yourselves ...,"Why don't we see stories about the Mormons
going to gathering places for Gays? Does it happen?"Because gays are
not trying to oppress Mormons with uncivil legislation. Duh."Why
aren't the Mormons publishing the names and location of individual supporters of
Gay lifestyles?"They just excommunicate them or send them to shock
therapy to "un-gay" them!"If Gays hate the Mormons so much why were
they there? If my wife and I were on someone's property that I knew didn't like
my lifestyle, I wouldn't feel like kissing. I'd walk around it."If
your wife and you went onto a PUBLIC THOROUGHFARE that had been designated as a
PUBLIC EASEMENT for 150 years, and is the shortest route through a part of the
city... well, you would go through it! Your comparison is stupid. Are you?
Why don't we see stories about the Mormons going to gathering places for Gays?
Does it happen?Why aren't the Mormons publishing the names and
location of individual supporters of Gay lifestyles?Do the Mormons
claim the members are perfect in following it's teachings?Did these
2 young men not realize they were on temple square in SLC? How can ANYone in SLC
possibly not know the Mormons position on basic issues?Did the
Security Guards say "Gays are not allowed to kiss here?"Has anyone
ever noticed the standards the Mormons expect of their own members at other
properties (BYU campus', meetinghouses, etc)?How did this situation
move from "please leave" to "you're under arrest?"If Gays hate the
Mormons so much why were they there? If my wife and I were on someone's property
that I knew didn't like my lifestyle, I wouldn't feel like kissing. I'd walk
around it.If Mormons are so old fashioned, why is it one of the
fastest growing religions in the world?Just take a few minutes and
ask yourself a few of these questions. Do a little research...
To Dear Miind Readers,"There is a time and a place for such
affection. IT is private property and the Church has its standards as to what it
appropriate on their property. I would have the same rights on my property if
two gays came onto my property and started doing that."Do you openly
invite the general public to come and visit your property? No. But the Church
DOES! The Church actively advertises for people to come to Temple Square! The
Church has missionaries - like you used to be - who solicit people to come in
and look around!If your Church is going to welcome people and
solicit people and invite people onto their property, you are going to have to
tolerate a wide variety of behaviors from those people.If you don't
like all the "bad behavior", then STOP RECRUITING AND INVITING AND SOLICITING
PEOPLE TO COME ONTO YOUR PROPERTY!
I read the story several times and nowhere does it say they were pushed to the
ground. It also doesn't state in the article how affectionate they were. As a
former missionary serving at Temple Square I had to ask on a number of occasions
for people to leave who where getting a little too excessive in their display of
affection. It was way beyong a kiss and a hug. There is a time and a place for
such affection. IT is private property and the Church has its standards as to
what it appropriate on their property. I would have the same rights on my
property if two gays came onto my property and started doing that. Such behavior
by a gay person violates those standards.I have dealt with people
similar to this as a school administrator. You make a simple request for a
student to move on to class or they will be late and they stop and argue and
complain, and become belligerent. Then they challenge you to do something to
justify their actions.
They were Laker fans! lol
You really think people actually want to visit Utah??!?!?! Hahahaha! Come on!
You're joking. Right? Joking?
Well, OF COURSE it was staged!They were filming for Bruno II.
Great comment. Glad my children where not around.
re: suttonthe article says they used profanities. i didnt say the
church does kick heterosexuals off the property. i just said that i would
support that too! not too many people are that big of fans of pda.
RE: John Pack LambertSorry that people have been using your name,
but you kinda made it really easy. Sometimes a little anonymity when posting is
a good idea....just sayin'
RE: suttonWe know they used profanity because that's what the
statement from the Church spokesman said. Did you not read the article?
S. A first of all how do you know they used profanities???Secondly... I have no problem with the church kicking these men off their
property. I do though have a problem with the church lying... Hetero couples
kiss, hold hands, ect... all the time, with "NO" issues what-so-ever and anyone
who says otherwise has their pants on fire. I would have had more
respect for the church if they would have just said we don't allow Homosexual
behavior... at least it's honest.
It is private property. It had nothing to do with the fact that these men were
gay. They were asked to leave. And they didn't. ANd then they started using
profanity. Security was allowed to act the way they did. It's not about these
people being gay. I hope that security would do the same thing if they saw two
heterosexuals engaging in the same disruptive behavior. It's WHAT they were
doing, not who they were.
I agree that THE church can set the rules on Their property. Though,
Outsider @ 4:38 p.m. on July 11, 2009 said it best,"... You are so intolerant of
anything that does not conform to your really weird beliefs, you will do
anything to rid yourselves of anyone you deem unworthy." ... "I am just a man
who is embarassed to know that there is a place where religion has warped so
many people."Funny things happen when one group has been in power
for so long it warps their collective perspective. The outlandish and juvenile
behavior of the so-called oppressed and/or minority is equally shameful.Blind conformity and willing anti-social behavior are the ultimate sins.
These men were obviously trying to get on the news, they were actually making
out heavily, no peck on the cheek. The plaza is a place that is full of
families, many with small children. Most people do not want their children
exposed to homosexual behaviors, especially when they are very young. The
security guards asked the men to leave, they refused and became beligerant.
Only then were they handcuffed and police called. The Homosexual agenda has
shown their true colors already, with vandalism and violence. They are the ones
who are trying to force their views on everyone else. They went to an LDS owned
property and began very inappropriate behavior to try to force their views on
the people there. Religious freedom is under attack, and the militant
homosexuals areleading the charge.
So Native Utahn...if brokeback mountain were goin' on in your front yard and you
asked them to leave and they didn't you wouldn't call the cops?This
isn't a gay rights issue but a private property issue. If you don't leave when
asked to you can be charged with trespassing.And by the way, the
main street plaza is the Church's own "private kingdom". That's the beauty of
I again, as I have many times before, call for a restricted name use
policy. I did not make the 12:49 AM comment on July 12th. I was in bed
at that point since it was 2:49 then. I know some people accuse me of
being a liar or a winer, but I do not appreciate people stealing my identity. Have I ever stated I think "the homosexual" should be banned from property.
I try to even avoid this phrase, for it is a false one. Homosexual describes
behavior not a state of being. While people struggle with same-gender
attraction, that does not make them homosexual. I really do not
appreciate whoever is stealing my name and trying to force false words into my
mouth. My only consolation is that they do it in ways that are so
obviously out of line. It is amazing to me how meanspirited some of the
comments are here.
Not great advertising for the upcoming City Creek Center Mall across the street.
It seems to me there will be never be peace and unity in this most religiously
divided of states until this organization ceases to stop treating it as their
own private kingdom and it's citizens as their own personal subjects.
Chris | 5:40 a.m. July 11, 2009 I know you think you are making some
sort of point - what that point is, none of us will ever know.
Leave the religion at the door... The sight of two people of the same sex
kissing and holding hand makes me queezy....who's with me?
If this type of intolerance continues I think the LDS Church should just close
the plaza. If people can't be respectful towards others wishes on their own
private property then close it off. Obviously the citizens of SLC are to
immature to be allowed to pass though the area.
Some of the comments are so laughable. A gay couple breaks the law and is
arrested. Now the LDS Church is the villain. There are some really confused
people in this world. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see through
You forgot the part where you ask them politely to leave first. Most LDS
couples have more common sense than the gay couple in the article and would
leave when asked.
Well, if your neighbors are trespassing on your property and won't leave after
you asked them too then you should call the cops. Common sense.
I'm glad you don't live here either. Wow, you are an angry and confused person.
At a macro level, people being asked to leave private property, this was fine.
What bothers me is the handcuffing by the Church rent-a-cops. That
is beyond accpetable. I expect that alone will generate a lawsuit that the
Church will and should lose. They clearly overstepped their authority.
This is silly. I am active LDS, too. So what? This is wrong. The Church's
security made a big mistake here because they lack good sense and judgment.Gen.27:26And his father Isaac said unto him, Come near now, and
kiss me, my son.Gen 29:13And it came to pass, when Laban heard
the tidings of Jacob his sister’s son, that he ran to meet him, and
embraced him, and kissed him, and brought him to his house.Song.1:2Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is
better than wine. Gen.33:4And Esau ran to meet him, and
embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him: and they wept.Ex.4:27And the Lord said to Aaron, Go into the wilderness to meet Moses.
And he went, and met him in the amount of God, and kissed him.Rom.16:16Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ
salute you.1Cor. 16:20All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one
another with an holy kiss. (2 Cor.13:12; 1Thes.5:26; 1Pet.5:14)
In my more "in your face days" I had a bumper sticker that said "if you don't
like the way I drive, get off of my sidewalk".In essence these two
activists were doing the same thing. They were being "in your face" and
obnoxious about they public displays of homosexual affection. When asked to
leave, they objected and got evicted.I am active LDS and still hold
to "my place, my rules. If you don't like them - go away.
Hey! until god has found these people guilty of sin it not up to any Mormon to
cast stones at them. It is God who will decide which of us he wants to do away
with.... So he who is with out sin cast the first stone.
PDA is not permitted on the property. It is not permitted on any Church
Property at any time. Smokinging, drinking, PDA, and other activities the
Church feels is inappropriate the individuals will be asked to stop or to leave
the premises. That is a fact.This has nothing to do with civil
rights, gay rights or love, it has to do with property rights, especially
private property. Most LDS members for the most part are very tolerant and will
say very little to anyone even if they are displaying unwanted acts. The chapels
do not have security guards present all the time. This was private
property, they were asked to leave. That is the end of the story. Anyone who
disagrees with that are totally wrong. For the person who says no to LDS
Missionaries repeatedly needs to understand that people move and the
missionaries only serve for two years. They are only in an area for six months
maximum in most cases and less in others. They leave and go on to the next
house. Maybe you really should welcome them in sometime. They really are quite
While I'm not sure what a "hippocrite" is, I can tell you exactly what Jesus
would do. He would tell them to "go and sin no more," and He would expect them
to follow the law peacefully - which means leaving the plaza when asked, and not
shouting profanities at the guard who was only doing his job.
What would Jesus have done? There's a lot of anger and hate in these comments.
You are not true followers of Him.
Didn't your mama ever teach you to mind your manners when you went to visit a
friends house? If my childs friends behaved in an inappropriate way
at my house, they would be told to stop and would not be invited back.
"Some people just want to live their lives, to love and be loved."Yes, we Mormons do. So why can't the LGBT community just leave us alone to do
A couple of points. First, the News article leaves out some important
information. The incident took place at around 10:30 on a weeknight. If the
couple was really looking to make a statement they could have picked a much
better time. The News also fails to mention that one of the two was forced to
the ground and both were cuffed. They were obviously not going anywhere, the
police could have been called and no physical force would have been needed.
Second, I'm sure the church as plenty of security film of the incident, if there
was "bumping and grinding" as some have said it would be easy to confirm with
that film.Contrary to many member's view, you are not the center of
the universe and everything that happens in this world isn't an attack on you or
your "beliefs." Some people just want to live their lives, to love and be loved.
Finally someone stands up for morals! Even better is the couple insisted they
shouldn't have to stop and wouldn't leave, so they get arrested! This is great!
Good for church security and the SLPD.
This is not a matter of discrimination!! My daughter and her boyfriend were
attending an event on Temple Square where they were hugging and kissing. They
were also asked to please stop because PDA was unacceptable. If you don't like
what the property owner's rules, don't go there.
Bravo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Great big kudos to the security guard and SLPD for
doing what is right. For a hetero couple to hug and kiss and display NATURAL
affection is one thing, but the over message-sending of kissing and bumping and
grinding is UNNATURAL and God loving people everywhere need to say enough is
enough... Thank GOd I belong to a Church not afraid to stand and be counted.
I think it is just terrible. Terrible. The homosexual is now coming onto our
private property. Property that was purchased using the freely given tithes of
our fellow brethren and sistren. They should be prosecuted to the full extent
of the law. That is just how I feel at this time. Later, I might change my
Property rights were used to justify discrimination against blacks
throughout much of American history. Blacks were considered trespassing when
they demanded equal access to restaurants, hotels, drinking fountains, and
voting booths. Black slaves were considered property, and slavery and
segregation continued until our nation recognized that property rights cannot be
a justification for injustice. The Salt Lake police spokesperson
gave an example of a restaurant owner asking someone to leave. However, a
restaurant owner is not allowed to handcuff and to push someone to the floor who
refuses to leave.
Spencer W. Kimball speaks for the mormon church, not for the nation, not for the
world. So quoting his words about the "unholy transgression of homosexuality"
means nothing to those of us who aren't mormons.
Homosexual activists and sympathizers talk about "intolerance," but this was an
act of intolerance against the LDS church, its teachings, and its members. The
two men went to the plaza to offend people. They knew that most of the people
there would be LDS and would be offended by their conduct, which is why they did
it. It was akin to parading around a Jewish synagogue with a Nazi flag.Here is the truth, for any who care to read it:“The unholy
transgression of homosexuality is either rapidly growing or tolerance is giving
it wider publicity. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor
equal to his condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. The fact that
some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried
to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not
change the nature or the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men,
God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons
of God; and Christ’s church denounces it and condemns it so long as men
have bodies which can be defiled.” LDS President Spencer W. Kimball
Speaking of intolerant -- since you know nothing more than what you read in the
paper about how the situation was handled, don't you think your assumptions and
conclusions are best characterized as "intolerant ingnorance?"
To the person who commented that those who disagree with how the situation
was handled must be gays from California: what intolerant ignorance to believe
that only California gays are disturbed by how church security responded to a
trespass violation. I am a 7th generation Mormon, served a mission, am
heterosexual, supported the Church's position on Prop. 8, and think the men
should have left when asked, but I believe the response by church security was
So, if any mormon couples come on my property, this means I can push them to the
ground, restrain them and press charges right?
Got along without you before I read your post and I'll get along without you
California's Prop 8 was overwhelmingly rejected by African Americans and
Hispanics. Why is there no gay backlash against these groups. It appears that
Mormons, arguably even a smaller demographic than LGBTs, is simply being
targeted because they're an easy mark. Talk about tolerance of minorities.
No one is trying to discount gays whatsoever. The intent of pointing out the
3%-4% number was only to offer a whiff of reality. Demographic studies show
that current U.S. population is comprised of about 3% homosexuals. Although gay
apologists continue to insist that the true number is 10%+.Only saying
that that little segment among us sure sounds like a whole lot more than it
really isWhat is truly amazing is how much good the 2% LDS
population continues to do in the U.S. and around the world on a daily basis.
Now there is an interesting assignment: Compare and Contrast how these two small
communities (LDS and Gays) make the world a better place. One espousing love
door to door around the globe-preaching peace. While the other seeks to serve
it's own cause and perpetuate (an oxymoron) itself by calling the other hateful
and bigoted. A classic example of a the old football strategy: The best
defense is a good offense.
be it heterosexual or homosexual. You can rest assured that this was more than
a simple innocent peck on the cheek or even a lover's kiss, but nothing more
than a contrived publicity stunt as a part of the gay community's well-thought
out agenda to demonize the LDS Church. They know that as long as they keep
yelling loud enough and long enough that Mormons are "haters" that a few will
actually begin to believe.The security police put up with a lot and
are not easily provoked-so there was more going on than was reported by the
media. Any body that starts swearing and fighting is going to receive the same
treatment-gay, straight, young or old.To all my GLT friends out
there, get over yourselves. Nobody hates you or is trying to impose their
lifestyle on you. You can do anything you choose to do in the sanctity of your
home, bedroom, hotel, wherever. In reality it is you that would try to impose
your lifestyle on all the world. Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of the
world rejects your lifestyle totally.Go and live in peace, but leave
us alone as well.
Mc, many people in Utah are not LDS. Utah was once the home of the Freedom from
Religion Foundation.I've always enjoyed my trips there, and will likely
move to Utah from Colorado. You just need to find the right town.
In a public place the rules have to be the same for all people, but that is not
true on private property. The Church can allow a bride and groom to kiss for
pictures while telling a homosexual couple that they cannot kiss on Church
property.FYI: The Church never said they would support civil unions
in Utah. They said they would not actively fight them. They have been accused
of lying because they did not come out in support of laws allowing civil unions
in Utah. There is a big difference between saying nothing and making a public
statement in support of civil unions. The Church kept its word by saying
nothing against the proposed law. I sure appreciate the many people
of Utah who are not LDS, but are good-natured enough to put up with our quirks
and respect our beliefs even though they do not share them. We can all live in
peace if we want to. Some people don't want to.
Utah makes most of its money on tourism, so you aren't helping any.
Glad your not coming to visit us-- we have enough radicals and shallow people
that live here without adding another one to the group.What little you
would spend would never make up for the bad feelings I am sure you would bring
with you as well--- I believe you made a wise decision-- stay home.....
To "I Smell California," who brilliantly made the following comment a few blogs
back: "Tell the world that 10% or more of the population is gay when in reality
it is more like 3%-4%."I guess this 3%-4% number is supposed to
discount gay people.By the way, for the record, only 2%-to-3% of the
American population (and an even smaller percentage of the world population) is
I picked up on the sarcasm.True or not, the Church has a right to
its beliefs and to set rules on its private property.
The Church is just so true. Can't these people see that?
Unless these men have been hiding in a cave for the last year they were well
aware of the result they would get from such displays on LDS property. They were
obviously seeking media attention for gay rights and broke the law to do so.
To the visitors to Utah who have said that they had tickets and now have given
them up, I call you out as liars. But if it is true, then GOODBYE! If your
narrow-mindedness on this issue drives you nuts then you have serious issues.
The two men in question were obviously doing more than just "pecking" on the
cheeks. If they were "grinding" as asserted then they were obviously acting in
a lewd way and should face jail time for lewdness. It isn't about being gay it
is about proper public behavior on private property that is open, in a generous
way, to the public. Why can't this be understood by all?
emanating from a great majority of these comments. Always trying to twist
something into something it is not. I would guess that 40+ of these anti-Utah
and anti-LDS comments are from the same person-multiplying him or herself in
anonymity. Making them seem like more than they really are. A lot like the gay
agenda-declaring that they are many more than they really represent
demographically. Tell the world that 10% or more of the population is gay-when
in reality it is more like 3%-4%Amazing how much noise this tiny
proportion of Americans can make. Seems like a lot more sometimes, eh? Even
more amazing how they are so bold in calling themselves good and the rest of us
bad. Calling us the haters-when it is they that propogate hate at every
opportunity.A lot of noise, but this too shall pass!!
All one needs to do is read the majority of comments on this blog to see why the
L.D.S. Church continues to be a third-rate religion in the eyes of everyone but
Mormons. As the rest of the world - more and more - accepts and embraces the
diversity of cultures, perspectives, and, yes, lifestyles, that make up the
human race, too many Mormons (especially Utah Mormons) continue to be
narrow-minded bigots in a Church, that, if it truly wanted to be taken seriously
would recognize and condemn bigotry in all of its forms, as well as
ex-communicate its bigots. Until it does, the LDS Church doesn't deserve to be
taken seriously and, in the eyes of most people in the world, won't be taken
Is this the same web site that contains so many posts about the seminary teacher
arrested for his actions? You surely couldn't tell it, the tenor is completely
different. The Saints have a hard time accepting the fact that they judge
daily, even when they don't know everything. Read the Trib account of this and
some of your posts will seem very silly. Yes, we are a very bigoted people.
I just hate to see couples kiss in public, oh I am talking about hetrosexual.
So if I am repulsed by a guy and girl kissing in public, then I am also repulsed
to see gays kissing in public. I feel that public displays of affection are
imposing on strangers, don't they have places where people can be in public and
neck, like make out hill and such? They have nude beaches, I won't go there,
well, I won't go to a beach, ha ha. But they have places where smokers can
smoke, drinkers can drink and they need to offer a place for kissers to kiss.
The church has every right to tell anyone to leave, and I don't buy it that
these guys were acting like angels, as I don't buy that security acted perfectly
either. Maybe this was not a planned thing, but based on the
actions of the gay population, I would say that it was very calculated. Guilty
Private property means the owners can set the rules of what kind of behavior
they will allow. The First Amendment doesn't apply on private property.The homosexual crowd talks about being understanding, compassionate, etc
but if you cross the line that THEY choose they unload on you like a ton of
bricks.This is because evil knows no bounds.
You all know they just wanted a reaction! I know it, and especially they know
it! In order to hug someone, you would have to slow down and stop. They knew
what they were doing when they stopped in a place where they'd get a reaction.
It seems that some gay people have become what they hate: intolerant and
unreasonable. None of us are perfect, but could we at least have some common
courtesy?By the way, years ago a hetero-friend of mine was asked to
leave Temple Square because she was kissing her boyfriend. Instead of being
angry at the Church, they were just embarrassed and did leave the property.
the guys were expressing love. This is a Christ-like thing to do. If they keep
expressing that they are the true church then why do they not want people to not
act in a Christ like way. Good grief! What would Jesus do? He would not have
them arrested. Mormons are acting more like the anti-Christ, not the true
ambassadors of Christ that they claim.
WE need to start calling the cops on our neighbors too.
I have visited your city and thank Almighty God that I do not live in such a
theocratic place. I do wish Utah would just secede and avoid embarassing the
rest of the United States. You are so intolerant of anything that does not
conform to your really weird beliefs, you will do anything to rid yourselves of
anyone you deem unworthy. So two gay guys walked on your "sacred place". I don't
blame them for reacting the way they did. I really think this article sounds
like it came from Tehran, not the U.S. And no, I am not gay, am not an "anti" or
whatever you folks use to put everyone in their place. I am just a man who is
embarassed to know that there is a place where religion has warped so many
I can see how showing affection to someone you love is "inappropriate behavior"
-- NOT!What kind of fascist baloney does the LDS Church stand for
What other religion erects walls and barriers to areas in the heart of a city
accompanied with a list of do not's and has people they dislike forceably
ejected and banned from? Pretty telling, isn't it?
I don’t like seeing the European male kiss and hand-holding,
and the Mideast male full-frontal hug and kiss, but that is cultural.It makes me uncomfortable to see gay males kiss and hold hands, but we need to
get used to it, and not be such ninnies about it. One day it won’t even
make us blink. Of course there is public decency for everyone, so
anything beyond mild displays of affection in public should be kept illegal.
(Public park displays in Italy & France — yuck.)
"According to the City Weekly article, the two men said at no point did they
refuse to leave. They were never given that option by the church security
guards, but immediately cuffed and the police were called."And
according to one of the mens own blog (linked to in the article) they
immediately started arguing instead of leaving, and remained there arguing for
around 5 minutes before being handcuffed. I'm more likely to believe the blog
than the City Weekly rag in this case, especially since the blog was written by
one of the gay men himself.It's sad that the irrational people have
arrived here now posting all sorts of stupid anti-Mormon messages. They can go
back to the tribune website where they can downvote and squelsh any opposing
viewpoints for all I care. It's one thing to argue about the matter at hand,
it's another to preach hate toward Mormons just because you get a small opening.
It is universally wrong when a person engages in behavior that is morally
offensive to the property owner (and knows it). It would be wrong,
for example, for a woman to wear a bikini to Mecca or for me to eat a steak at a
Hindu shrine. It's the same here.
We need a state constitutional amendment that would ban this sort of
inappropriate behavior. Such public displays of gay affection should not be
tolerated in Utah.Where is Senator Chris Buttars when we need him?
I have had it up to here......next time I am voting for Prop Hate!
Private property is private property. If you don't follow the wishes of the
property owner you will get cited for trespassing or have other actions taken
against you. It is the law. It does not matter your background or status. That
is not the issue here.
It's not like gays come to your door during dinner trying to convert you. They
don't believe being gay is the chosen sexual orientation. Gays never interfere
with the romances of others.There must be a place for gays or god
wouldn't have created gay people.
It's the Church's property and they can do what they want. I know if two guys
were kissing in my home, I would ask them to please do that somewhere else.
Call it closed-minded if you want, but it's still my property and I make the
rules.As for calling Utah 40 years behind the times, I am so tired
of that. Millions and millions and millions of people around the US and
billions in the world believe that homosexuality is immoral - or, if nothing
else, it makes them uncomfortable/squeamish. You may not like that fact, but
it's still a fact. It's got absolutely nothing to do with Utah.I
left Utah 20 years ago and have lived in four other states and two countries.
Utah is not much different than anywhere else. You will find whatever kind of
people you are looking for - wherever you go.
I'm stymied by the sanitized wording of this article, especially the phrase...
"after security personnel for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
excused them from church property."Excused them? What does that even
mean? Were they ejected, removed, quarantined, immobilized, detained,or what?
Because "excused" sounds like the kind of passive aggressive double speak that
comes directly from the LDS News Room talking points. Not the crisp concise
vocabulary of a reporter from a supposedly independent newspaper.
How Christ-like of the LDS church. Makes me want to join right away.//sarcasm
Race can't be compared to aberrant behavior.Utah is a great place, and I'm
moving there from Colorado.Steamboat Atheist
1. Private property is private property. The church has the say of who is on
their property and what behavior they will allow. It doesn't matter if the gay
community doesn't agree with them. It is a matter of respecting private
property.2. Unlikely they innocently walked through the property.
Obiously they were trying to provoke something and make the news. Unfortunately,
they were successful.
I see some people are trying to put a negative light on this issue. Trying to
show that the LDS Church is nothing but a bunch of hateful bigots.. But I
disagree... The rest of the world that feels that homosexual behavior is a sin
and immoral.. Will be happy someone is standing up for their religious beliefs
and not caving into the gay agenda.
Bully for them! Guess what?!! If the rest of the world does not want Mormons on
their private property, they can make policies against Mormons, and if Mormons
are then asked to leave, they should leave. If they don't then the private land
owner should call the police and have them removed or arrested.Thanks for not adding to the debate at hand, and for displaying your
anti-Mormon hatred and bigotry.
I wonder how many people on here, that are sticking up these two gay people are
gay themselves and are from CA??
He would not pull out a whip, that's for sure. You people must read a different
bible than I do if you think Christ would hate gays. You people must also not
really be mormon, because even the church (according to its website) says to
never indulge in any form of gay-bashing. He would love these two men and do
what ever he could to help them and alleviate any frustrations they might have.
He would not throw them to ground (no matter how profane they were) and arrest
them- "Live by the sword, die by the sword."Too many of you who
claim to be religious need to learn some compassion and forgiveness.
Obviously you don't get my point. They were non-violent resisters. They were
showing the world the intolerance of the LDS church. They made their point, just
as Rosa Parks did. She was not about buses, she was about how society treated
her people. Being gay today or black in the 60's is very similar. By your
argument, if I owned a restraunt and refused to serve a gay couple holding hands
and kissing that would be alright. How is that different than blacks were
treated in the 60's? Why all you homophobes just put up a sign everywhere that
says "Gays aren't welcome if they touch other on my property." No difference
from Rosa Parks' time period. These men followed Gandhi's example as well.
They called out intolerance and have shown it for what it is. Just because you
own property doesn't give you the right to be anti-christian and treat others as
than equal. We are all god's children and we are all loved equally by him.
Christ would not have ordered the arrest of these men. He would have shown them
compassion and service.
If you read the story again, the church really didn't do anything wrong.I'M A PRO-GAY GAY!!!The believe the church is wrong in
pretty much MAKING members vote for prop8 in california but there's nothing
Having first read of this situaton in USA Today I decided to check out the local
paper. WOW! Keep on sticking your head in the sand and pretending the rest of
the nation and the world isn't rolling on the floor in laughter. What's next
the stocks or pink stars. GREAT PR for the LDS church - way to go.
The story is breaking nationally. The response doesn't look good for the Mormon
Guess what?!! The rest of the world thinks MORMONS ARE NOT MORAL!!!
"Fight the Power" is trying to make a civil rights analogy here that backfires.
Rosa Parks courageously, and with aforethought, refused to comply with an
immoral order on a PUBLIC bus. She was arrested and took her case to the courts
and the people. She was not mistreated for sitting on a bus, but for being
black. These two men carried out their "demonstration" (if that's what it was)
on PRIVATE property and refused to stop or leave when politely asked by the
property owners. No one has been escorted from church property simply for being
gay. No relationship exists between the two scenarios. It is not moral for the
gay couple to try to force their behavior on property owners--they have no
standing and shouldn't have. The church (property owners in this case) makes no
secret of the fact that it doesn't condone homosexual activity. In the eyes the
owners (the LDS church), homosexual activity is offensive and not allowed on its
property. And the gay couple involved has every right to bar representatives of
the church from espousing their beliefs on the gay couple's property. A little
mutual respect helps people stay calm.
Thanks for the reminders.I remember a vital Main Street in SLC.
Once, walking Main Street, was great. Main Street was were I fell in love with
what cities could offer. There was an wonderful absence of Disney like fuax
themes, like malls have today.Weather was part of the ambiance of
cities. A rain or snow storm might cause you to seek shelter browsing through
books at Sam Weller's books. You might be forced to find refuge in the
Mayflower. In the heat, you sought relief watching a movie.Main
Street fell victim to Utah's unique culture. I've been to London, Frankfurt,
Munich, Victoria, Geneva, Basel, Turin, Malan, San Francisco and many other
cities. Only in Utah, could a church buy and construct a barrier, on the city's
main thoroughfare.In Strasbourg, Cologne and other cities giant
Cathedrals mark the city center. These Cathedrals are many temples high. People
can drink a beer, smoke and live there lives in the shadows of these Cathedrals.
In Utah, you life is under scrutiny, by the police of god if you get
too near the temple. Utah will never have a little of Paris, its too provincial.
The plaza should never have been made. No matter whether it was: given / sold
or whatever a combination of deals made between the city and the church.Buy it back SLC, bulldoze it and turn it back to Main Street. We all
knew something like this was going to happen and give the church another PR
disaster. It is already hitting the national press.A “little
bit of Paris indeed”.
He drove disrespectful sinners off Temple property with a whip. Security did the
It is not Temple Square-it is a right-of-way--open to the public to get from one
point to another in downtown SLC. It should have never been sold to the church
in the first place.
I hope you are right. I hope we are 40 years behind the rest of a society bent
on leaping headlong off a moral, spiritual, and ethical precipice. I don't
think so, but I wish it were truee.
Dearest Deseret News Censors: We love your lopsided view of the
world and the anti-gay bigotry you promote with your editorial decisions. Yes, your anti-gay bias is that obvious. It thoroughly discredits this
paper as a legitimate source of news and it exposes its owners as hateful.
irrational and dictatorial. That shouldn't be a problem for the
Deseret news and its owner.
Yep--just when you thought it couldn't get any more ridiculous, a couple of gay
guys go onto church property to publicly display their affection and you realize
that it can and will get worse--"gay activists" will see to that
So easy for those with no standards to cry and whine about those with them.
Guess what - MORMONS BELIEVE HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT MORAL!!! We live in peace
with all kinds of people who engage in immoral behavior, including unmarried
cohabitants, people who drink to excess, people who view pornography, people who
are domineering and controlling. . . and people who are homosexuals. Why are
Mormons obligated to accept what they consider immoral on their own property?If you have a homosexual community and heterosexuality is frowned upon,
I promise not to come into your community and make out with my wife.When it comes to the church, there is no double standard - the single standard
is appropriate heterosexual affection that does not go too far. If you think
that's a double standard, good for you, but the private owner of a property does
have the constitutional right to impose standards for his property - including
double standards. You can do the same where you live, including inviting
homosexual friends inside your home and asking Mormon missionaries to leave. If
the Mormons won't leave upon request, I hope you call the police and have them
I seem to recall a black woman who once was asked politely to give up her seat
on a bus and she refused. She broke the law by not giving up her seat in the
black section of the bus to a white person. End of story? Nope. Only by
standing up against inequality will people change the world. Being a sheep as so
many one here seem to think the gay couple should have been is sad. Injustice,
even if technically legal, is wrong period. Hetero couples kiss all the time on
temple square and are not asked to leave, Newlyweds make out quite graphically
all the time.I commend these men for standing up for their belief in
equality. Even they did it to provoke, they were showing the double standards
based on prejudice. They did the right thing, even if it was illegal.
According to the City Weekly article, the two men said at no point did they
refuse to leave. They were never given that option by the church security
guards, but immediately cuffed and the police were called.
While I agree if those people who were "there" make accurate statements then
yes, they were trying to get attention. Unfortunately, people all
the time on these boards claim to be eyewitnesses (on both sides of any given
story) when they are more just trying to justify their position with fabricated
stories. The only people who can have a fair assessment of what happened were
the security guards and the two men that were cited. While it is
true that those stories are probably conflicting, it is really the only stories
that can have any credibility.
Just when you think Utah could not possibly get any more ridiculous, something
like this happens and you realize it can and will get worse.
Very true, this store is indicative of the Gay Rights Movement. They are not
going to be happy until they are treated exactly the same as every other human
being. It appears that they will stand-up and challenge discrimination and
prejudice at every turn. Hourly couples hug and kiss on this plaza and never is
a word mentioned.These stories continue to re-enforce the fact that
Gays & Lesbians are not welcome in Utah. Why does the LDS Church and it's
members continue to falsely claim love and compassion for people they show
constant disdain for at every turn.I have never and never will walk
across the plaza, their square or enter their conference center. Why would
anyone want to go where they are not welcome. But please don't be so
disingenuous as to claim love for those they constantly discriminate against.
Now I know how to treat the Mormon missionaries when they show up at my door
repeatedly after being asked not to.
For a religion that was persecuted nearly to non-existence more than 100 years
ago, the Mormons sure are quick to forget what it's like to be hated and
discriminated against. Perhaps the die-hard Mormons need to go ponder and pray
on the whole concept of love, tolerance and acceptance and remember what it was
like when they were oppressed.
They live in SLC and were walking home from the Gallivan Center. The Church
agreed to a public easement for this very purpose. When the church realized
they could not control behavior on a public easement they bought the property.
Do you know there was a clause in the original contract that said if behavior on
the public easement could not be controlled the sale was still valid? So all
this was anticipated by the church. Read their blog for details. They could be
lying of course, but it makes sense the way they tell it. And they were not
intoxicated. And they were pushed to the ground and handcuffed by security.
Its in other news reports.
No wonder the world views Utah as a backwoods state. Seriously, the LDS security
was a bit heavy handed. It's not like it was some full-on make-out session on
the Plaza. I've seen worse than what's described watching the brides and grooms
posing for photos outside the temple. That's kissing WITH TONGUE.Welcome to Utah, still 40 years behind the times.
From the two statements of those who were there it is clear that these people
were acting to get attention. If the 5 to 7 minutes estimate is accurate, than
none of the claims by some that they have similar situations is ture.
There is also an issue of what else they were doing besides kissing. The
suggestions of the observers tend to lead to a view that this was a more
intimate situation than what is implied by kissing, and there was contact
No those people just harrass them on this board, or worse yet go out for an old
fashion gay bashing.
It's hilarious to compare today's comments about the Mormon seminary teacher
(who was arrested for having sexual relations with his student) and the comments
here about the gays who kissed on the Temple grounds. Dozens of Mormons wrote
in to say the kissers were "disgusting" perverts, while hundreds of Mormons
wrote in to say what a "great guy" the seminary teacher was, and how we should
reserve judgment because hey, nobody's perfect. Wow.
I NEVER picked Perez Hilton. He is bottom feeder and a poor excuse for a human
For all of you who asked what the difference between a straight couple kissing
and a homosexual couple kissing, I strongly encourage you to go to your nearest
community college and enroll in a human biology or anatomy course. Then maybe
you can learn about the difference about males & females and how really it's
just plain gross for two dudes to kiss each other. It's not religion....it's
It's going to be funny in 20 years when all this seems stupid, and you are on a
street owned by a homosexual man and you turn to kiss your
wife/girlfriend...lets see how you react to being told you are being
To the 7:04 commentator, They are also married. Beyound that,
what exactly were these two men doing? I strongly suspect it was much more
intimate than anyone has admitted.
the men were politely asked to leave, but instead of leaving they got
confrontational. They knew that they were in violation of policy. The Church
has the right to ban all homosexual expressions on its property. The Church has
a right to enforce its rules and these men were intentionally seeking to create
Back when the city sold this block to the church, it would be a thorn in the
heart of our city. All welcome? Only Heterosexual Church Members and those who
convert--all others not welcome.
Yes it is their property. And yes, the LDS Church is extremely anti-gay and
teaches its members to discriminate and to act in a prejudice manner.Hourly Hetero couples hug and kiss for photos on the plaza, the only thing
offensive to them was this was a gay couple.They do not choose to
treat everyone equally. Instead they prefer to teach ideas and promote laws
that dicriminate and specifically target gays and lesbians to be treated less
than other human beings.Another example of LDS Values and their
"True Colors". For a group that has the potential to do so much good, they sure
go out of their way to alienate non-members and cement a reputation of
intolerance into the public's mind.
Maybe when those Mormon missionaries visit, I can throw them to the ground,
handcuff them, and send for the police?In reality, I wouldn't be
that cruel. Some of us have standards.
If, as Clayton Norlen reports Sgt. Snyder “...we enforce the law.”
is true then Derek and Matt have nothing to complain about. If they had not
broken the law they would not have been arrested. If what Clayton
Norlen credits to Sgt. Snyder is true, “...once the restaurant asks
someone to leave and that person refuses, then they can be arrested for
trespassing.” The only people who were, and continue to be harassed in
this instance is the LDS Church and the SLC Police.
Unless Derek & Matthew were tourists AND not acquainted with SLC, they probably
knew what to expect; I dare say, they also knew to refuse the request to leave &
use belligerence to escalate the situation wold get the police involved. This behavior's been a standard in homosexual activism; thus I feel safe
in assuming, Derek & Matt not only refused to leave but became loud & rude
vocally & physically vulgar. Does that justify restraining them? YES!I am not advocating or physical restraints as the customary treatment for
trespassing but if the owner wants trespassing to cease they need to enforce it
by power of law. Though because of the “orientation” of these 2 I
anticipate an escalation of overt homosexual behavior on the mall.
My home My rules! That's what the trespassing laws are about. Ignorance of
private property rules is only excusable until one is made aware of them. Derek & Matt can only be given the benefit of ignorance to the point at
which they were asked to leave. Any action, other than immediately vacating the
property in an orderly fashion, has no excuse. It matters not if
everyone but Matt & Derek are allowed to “display affection” on the
LDS mall, they were asked to leave by the owner's recognized representatives and
that is enough. As I understand it, the trespassing laws have no requirement
for motive on the part of an owner or their representatives I repeat
this is a case of My home My rule and Matt & Derek broke the rule at least x2.
For the record I am gay. I believe this couple was purposefully and mindfully
trying to make a scene, and I do not find it appropriate in the way they chose
to make a point. They knew where they were, and they knew exactly what they
were doing and they deserve any consequences for their actions. That being said, THERE CAN BE NO DOUBLE STANDARDS ON PDA. People so often
complain if they see a gay couple showing any form of affection in public. This
story was unclear on how much affection was shown and there are varying reports
that I do not give any credence to because those people were not there.
However, if they were asked to stop holding hands or stop kissing, fine. But a
statement like "Two individuals came on church property and were politely asked
to stop engaging in inappropriate behavior – just as any other couple
would have been" seethes in hypocrisy it boggles my mind. If you do
not like PDA from one couple, it CANNOT be ok for another. You either allow PDA
or you don't. You cannot have both. I don't care if it is private property or
This story exactly defines the currant status of gays/lesbians in America. They
are not content to be homosexual, have their "relationship", and live and let
live. They insist on being objectionable, offensive, and "IN YOUR FACE" to those
who do not share their lifestyle. And then they have the gall to
complain when they, by their own choice, PURPOSEFULLY act in a manner IN A PLACE
where THEY ARE SURE TO ELICIT OBJECTION. Just as gays would find it
offensive and objectionable to have Mormon missionaries crash a gay pride
function and demand everyone repent. Average straight citizens do
not try to bait gays and lesbians in gay bars, hotels, sporting events,
establishments etc. Why can gays not follow the same rules and refrain from
"tossing bait" on LDS property??
This manipulative behavior from gays has got to stop. Playing victim will never
further your agenda. It will increase hate. But this is what the gays want. This
is why they pick people like Perez Hilton and Sean Penn to represent them.
Richard Judkins is right, this never would have happened if the plaza would have
remained public property like it should have.It does seem like there
could be a sex discrimination claim here if the church treats men and women
differently by allowing women to kiss their boyfriends on the plaza, but not
of what's to come. My husband and I (his wife) gave each other a smooch (peck
on the lips) at Temple Square and were reminded that PDA is inappropriate there.
I agree. Our mistake, and we owned up to it. I wasn't there and didn't
witness the event with the gay couple, but having witnessed the militancy of the
gay movement here in CA, I would not be surprised that there was much more to it
than "a peck on the cheek." The Church has become a target to be vilified and
harassed for standing up for what is right. Homosexuality is deviant, perverse,
unnatural, and ungodly, and we get attacked for saying so.
From reading the blog, posted from the gay couples own words, it is apperant
that they were publicly intoxicated and beligerant, argumentative (all behavior
of intoxicated people) and refused to leave. They are lucky they did not end up
going to jail. The reason they got their pictures taken is because the are
going to be persona non gratis on the plaza, and if they are seen or caught on
the property again they will be arrested for criminal tresspass. A
question for the Blogger? How is this a civil rights issue. No one has a civil
right to go on some one elses property and act as they choose, no matter what
the act. Also, the city did not cave into the Mormon's on the Plaza issue. The
city knew it was on the losing end of the lawsuit, even though they had some
success in the 10th circut, so they accepted an additional $8 million from the
Mormons to settle the suit and give up any easment.Maybe they suold
have prtested their right to make out in public at the Galivan Plaza.
These people were obviously trying to cause a stir. It is all part of the good
is bad and bad is good mentality that is now being taught.
Private Property - Conversation Over !!!
Bottom line - they broke the law. However, there is more to their efforts than
that. Look at the motivation. They chose the place to do what they did because
they wanted to make a statement.My 12 year old daughter and I were
at California Adventure Park waiting in line for the Tower of Terror standing
next to two gay women who were being very inappropriate. I ignored them but the
more bothered my daughter seemed by it, the more kissing they did. It was
inappropriate whether or not they were gay - a man and a women even married
should not have done that in public ten inches away from someone visibly
bothered by it.My problem is not with gay people - it is with
inappropriate affection in public. Whether or not this couple exhibited that,
the location of their exhibition gives means to a motive of trying to cause
problems. We don't send heterosexual couples into gay bars with
t-shirts saying "Marriage between a man and a woman" making out - so why are
they sending people to temples?
I feel that if they weren't allowed to do that neither should hetrosexual
couples because maybe some people don't want to see them kissing and hugging in
public. It can go both ways I feel
They were handcuffed for arguing, using profanity and refusing to leave when
requested to leave. These guys are just lucky they weren't tasered. If I see two
"Gay Partners" conducting themselves in that matter, I intend to report it to
the proper Authorities. Good job, LDS Security and SLPD.
I was at the same plaza Thursday with my companion. We kissed next to the
fountain several times and held hands the whole time we were on the Temple
grounds/headquarters area. I was never asked to leave or stop this apparently
inappropriate behavior with my significant other. Maybe that's because my
partner is a female and I am male? So I don't buy into the whole "as we
would have asked any other couple" b.s. the church is pushing in the media. This
is clearly about homosexuality and not private property issues.
Men kissing. How GROSS!!! Thank You temple Security.
I am sure they were doing a lot of kissing and hugging at the Indigo Girls
concert. This couple knew exactly what they were doing. Trying to stir up the
pot with another issue with the church. Shame on them for imposing their immoral
practice on private property on LDS church grounds no less. Now its time to
impose a hefty fine and community service to teach them not to do it again on
LDS church property.
I saw the whole thing, this was not a peck on the cheek. It was a full on
makeout! Yes they would have asked a guy and a girl to leave if they were in a
full on makeout as well. It was going on for a good 5-7 minutes before security
got there. When security got there the men just started yelling at them, ans
swearing. The men where trying to make a scene, and a protest. That is when they
were handcuffed, and not "Thrown to the ground" as one of you mentioned. The men
were acting like little high school kids. Why do gay people have to act like
they are so much better than anyone else. That is my problem with them, not so
much their sexual preference!
I had to re-read the article after reading these posts. I didn't read anything
in the article stating there was a "peck on the cheek." You don't know that any
more than I know they were groping and fondling each other. After being "asked"
to leave, they used profanity and became argumentative. From that you assume
the cops "first pushed them to the ground and handcuffed them" in a bullying
manner.Don't insult our intelligence by claiming the couple wasn't
looking for attention or trying to make a point.
Why does inacceptable behavior become justifiable under the guise of
"open-mindedness". Thank goodness the church is inclined to provide a beautiful
property and peaceful ambience in which the public may partake. There are
hundreds of other organizations worldwide that also open their resources up to
the public for entertainment, enjoyment and learning. It is the prerogative of
these institutions to define what is appropriate or not and how the distractions
will be removed. This is not a matter of acceptance of a lifestyle. It is a
matter of respect for the institution that is providing something beautiful.
You wouldn't walk onto Amish land with Usher blaring from your speakers, why
would you enter the plaza and do anything besides enjoy the atmosphere or try to
learn something about the hosting institution. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO VISIT, BUT
SHOW SOME RESPECT.
The issue isn't that the security acted out of line, it is simply that two
individuals were asked to leave private property and refused. Thereby forcing
the security to take some kind of action. The end result was always in the
hands of the two gentlemen and not to be blamed on the security. Since when did we become a society who quit believing in the consequences of
our actions. If any descent person was asked to leave private property and
refused and became vulgar then they would be treated in the same way.I do believe most of us would be offended if asked to leave private property
for almost any reason. However, I do not believe any descent person would create
a scene or a standoff by blatantly doing the opposite of what we were asked.
That is the childish thing that the two gentlemen did. They acted like children
by doing exactly the opposite of what they were asked even throwing a little
temper tantrum as we would call it if they were actually children.
Martin Luther King Jr. and the freedom riders did it. It's not really childish
to believe somebody would actually want to get arrested just to get on the news.
Regardless of what they were doing, if they were asked to leave, they should had
left and then make the propaganda. They were handcuffed and pushed them to the
ground because their overly reaction when they were asked to leave. A man can
stand up for their beliefs BUT our rights end when we are standing on private
property. Church security guards had asked others in the past to leave and they
had done so peacefully. Why not this couple? because they are gays and they
think they can do whatever they want no matter what? If they want to be
respected, start respecting others, in this case, if they are asked to leave, do
so. And sorry about them, but PDA between two men is improper according the
Bible. I think they did it in purpose.
Why didn't they just leave when asked to? They were definitely looking for
These guys knew exactly what they were doing and that their behavior was not
appropriate for WHERE they were doing it. Don't tell me they were surprised
they were asked to leave the private premises.
First where does it say it was just a "peck on the cheek"? Also where does it
say the guards had them on the ground? Must be posted on their blog. One sided
comments on their blog for sure. The point is they were doing this on private
property. The LDS church provides a nice park for everyone free of charge. All
they ask is that people act appropriate. Is that too much to ask these days? The
partners realized they were on LDS property when they kissed. The also knew the
LDS church is against homosexual behavior. Anyone who thinks otherwise must
think that these two partners are stupid. If I was on private property and
kissing my wife and the owner or their representative asked me to stop I would.
Had they stopped there wouldn't have been tresspassing charges or handcuffs.
People need to learn to respect eachother.
More hate. More hate on the side of the GLBT against the LDS religion and
anybody who stands in their way. If the two men were honest then they would
have simply said, "OK", when asked to leave (it is Private Property). I
understand they, the two men, got belligerent, using profanity and such, with
Church Security before they were taken to the ground and handcuffed. Why don't
any of you understand this as being part of the equation? I really don't think
the LDS Church wanted anything to happen, yet the two men obviously wanted their
15 minutes of "fame".
what is childish and immature is the fact that 2 people went somewhere where
they knew that doing the things they did would not be accepted.
Regardless if the church security officers acted immaturely, if it is private
property, they have the right to jettison homosexuals and not heterosexuals.
It's not public property.
Everyone that added their comments were not there and didn't see or know what
actually happened. Therefore most of what has been said such as pushing to the
ground, a peck on the check, a stranger asked them to stop, stop being
haters!!!!, etc. may not have been what actually happened. We like to comment
on things like we were there watching the whole thing even when we don't know
anything about what happened except what was written in the article. Lets all
grow up and see if we can learn something from what we read. Thanks.
Next come the demonstrations. Then the lawsuits. Then the politicians jump on
the bandwagon. Sooner or later, some clueless activist judge will
issue an order that, since young married couples are photographed by commercial
photographers in the plaza after their marriage, the plaza is now a place of
public accommodation, so the Church must permit the same behavior by LGBT
couples. So the Church will be required to prohibit photographs of couples on
the mall.And all we hear from the LGBT community is that they are no
threat to us.Yeah, right.
None of you know the facts of the case and have no right to judge. I was a part
of a news story once. I watched the new that night on channels 2,4 and 5 and
guess what; the facts of each report were completely different, and none on them
got it right. I wonder though, if it had happened to a heterosexual couple,
would we have even heard about it. Everyone is discriminated in one way or
another but it doesn't make it O.K. to break the law.
That's right, it is appropriate for heterosexual couples to display affection,
and it's not for homosexuals. Homosexuality is inappropriate in all its forms.
Gays are really only trying to turn Christian morality on its head anyway.
Anthony has the only worthwhile comment on here. I'm LDS, but let's not be so
narrow minded here people. If in fact all that happened was a kiss on the cheek,
then I tend to think security over-reacted. Once again if that's all that
To Anthony, Tim, candb and all others with one sided logic: Your arguments
amaze me. You say it is OK for one side to stand up for its rights, but the
other side has to back down? Even when it's on their own property? Hogwash! So
if I have someone on my property doing something I don't like, I can't ask them
to leave? And if they don't leave I am supposed to stand by and let them
verbally abuse me on my property? So who is not respecting who?
Funny thing is that Channel 2 last night never said anything about them being
handcuff. So were they or not? However, if they were first asked to leave by
church security and refused I beleive the church has the right to act legally,
be it handcuffing them, if charges are going to be pursued.
What happens if this couple kiss and hug, in a few years, while shopping at the
mall being built across from temple square. This type of behavior leads one to
a small camp outside of Munich, Germany. Nothing good came of it, except for
the resolve to never let it happen again. I hope the LDS church will resolve to
change. Otherwise who will shop at the new mall. I won't!
2 gays going on private property, belonging to a church that has standards
and beliefs contrary to theirs, and they start an in your face display against
church beliefs. Can't the gays stop being haters!!!!? Can't the people who claim
to be so tolerant, and so above the rest of us, practice what they preach. I
doubt it. Prepare for more of this. I particularly like the idea about the line
up of kissing gays, during GC. Go haters! Just because God loves everyone,
doesn't mean you wont recieve your just rewards in the next life.
This is the whole problem that was anticipated when this area was turned over to
the LDS Church. What people need to do is monitor how many times heterosexual
people engage in this activity without being arrested then see if the ACLU wants
to challenge the Church.
i spent over a year in iraq with the military, and you know what? even in a
conservative place like iraq, men are always holding hands. and a kiss on the
cheek? serious? that is grounds for asking two men to leave and then pushing
them to the ground when they ask why? they weren't making out. it doesn't
sound as if they were going for attention and trying to make the news.why is the church so scared of something like this? last nov. the church said
they will support civil unions and benefits. obviously that doesn't include a
peck on the cheek.hypocrisy at it's best.
If it was truly just a peck on the cheek, I'd say no big deal. If they were
mauling each other, then that's inappropriate for anyone, gay or straight. I'm
guessing the latter, since they were asked to stop and refused. They clearly
knew exactly where they were, because if they'd just walked another 20 feet,
they'd have been on public property and could not have been asked to leave, and
therefore, could not have made the public statement they were trying to make.
No Gays Allowed.
No matter how you look at their cause, life-style or perversion....the reality
is their agenda has no respect for anyone or anything but their own
self-centered, selfish and sad life. Non-contributors to this society
what-so-ever. Unfortunately, they have been given a type of tolerance, under
being politically correct, that a stronger stand against them may have to come.
No easy way to get rid of a cancer......
I was there and the two guys weren't just kissing, they were full on making out
and intensely "grinding". When the guards came up and asked them to stop they
immediately started screaming 4-letter words at the top of their lungs. It was a
ridiculous situation that this article doesn't do justice. If anyone has video,
I hope they post it soon. These two guys knew exactly what they were after and
they got it.
Where does it say that these two men were thrown to the ground? Is it on their
So two gay guys who know that they are on church grounds, know that there are
standards that even husband and wife couples have to follow decide to ptovoke
soemthign, and when asked politely to leave, decide not to. That is like if you
have visitors at your house, and they know of your house rules, and they go and
break them, you tell them to leave, seeing they have no intention of following
the rules, and also become disrespectful; As a result I have to protect my house
and enforce the rules. They don't stop, so the cops are called, and the same
result occurs. So you have people with an agenda trying to be the exception to
the rule. No you don't get to change the rules you don't like. Especially when
you are not correct.
I cannot for the life of me understand why people get so freaked out by two
people showing affection. It is an EVERYWHERE occurance to have a man and a
woman show affection. On the LDS plaza couple pose for their picture kissing or
holding hands in front of the LDS temple. For those of you who are open-minded
enough to learn more of this I would invite you to watch a video (can be found
on youtube) entited "for the bible tells me so". I'm a gay Christian (formally
LDS) man who adores my partner. We get openly critisized and scorned if we
happen to hold hands in public. We used to go dancing at Studio 600 club (a
no-smoking, no-drinking club) but was kicked out by the owner, who screamed at
us like we had committed some horrible crime. We were just doing an activity to
enjoy as a couple. Just because someone is gay doesn't mean you have to be. I
suggest you work on your own relationships instead of critisizing you can't
possible understand unless you are gay yourself. Thank you for taking time to
read this. God bless.
They had the entire city of Salt Lake to go kiss and do whatever, and they chose
to do it right where they did. So of course the church is now the bad guy.
Well, here's a news flash for people, you can make your own choices, but you
can't choose the consequences. Had they kissed across the street, you never
would have heard a word about it. But they made the choice and now they got the
consequence. As for dealing with immaturity, to the poster above who said gays
should line up at General Conference time and kiss, way to show your respect for
I don't care if its politically incorrect, if I see two men kissing each other,
it turns my stomach. I don't want to see it anywhere. I can't believe we even
have to be talking about it --its so unnatural. The militant gays turn my
stomach. Do your smooching at home. I feel the same way for heterosexual
couples as well... Leave PDAs at home, or hotel room, please. Gay or not gay,
it was just inapprorpiate for them to behave that way. It was a flaunting and
in your face action. Grow up.
They went looking for trouble and they got it. I personally find it VERY weird
for men to kiss, especially in public. That's why I don't live in San
Francisco.Go push your lifestyle agenda in a more appropriate
manner. This was a very calculated act, hoping to gender sympathy
for their sexual lifestyle.Poorly done.
Take a look at the comments of this website on a regular basis and you'll see
that the philosophy of "We shouldn't judge" is reserved for a certain few.Everyone else is apparently fair game.
you said: i think its childish to assume that somebody would actually want to
get arrested just to get on the news. there are better ways to get noticed. Really? Did you not just see the spectacle at Mt Rushmore this week?
Some in the homosexual activist camp have verbally attacked Mormons and
vandalized Mormon property ever since Prop 8.
Forcing their agenda again!!!Why the LDS property? Its all a show to
get more attention.I would have even approached the two if they were
doing the holding, kissing and groping in a general public place. There's a time
and place if they want to show their passion. Obviously these were just two
queers trying to force their agenda to see just how far they could go. Childish
to see how the courts handle this one-- the two men will sue and in 3 to 5 years
the Supreme Court will hear it.. In the mean time the point has been made by
the two gay gentlemen.I wonder if they would be upset if a Mormon family
set up a picnic on their front lawn?? But then I'm guessing they are renters so
they don't have a front lawn so it won't matter...@ candb-- get real,
these guys were trying to make a point and I would guess it got out of hand when
they decided to resist the order to leave the grounds.
they knew what they were up to. Hoooorahhh for Church security. If these two
morons didn't know this was an "in your face move" I'll eat . . . well lima
beans or something equally disgusting. Let me at em with my pepper spray too ! .
I've been asked on those same grounds to not kiss my wife. It's true, PDAs are
not allowed on that property.
Dave,"This is a clear-cut case of religious freedom and property
rights, but it will, of course, be portrayed in the national media as a matter
of anti-gay discrimination."Most people understand that this is a
case of their private property, religious freedom and freedom of association
being violated. When asked to leave a person's property the debate is over. It
isn't time for a vote or a damn debate. A person has the right to refuse to
debate you and to order you off their property."The Constitution is
being twisted beyond all recognition to justify same-sex marriage and to now
discriminate against anyone who honestly believes that open homosexual behavior
is "inappropriate," even if the beliefs are religious."What people
do in their own homes, on their own damn property or on public land is their own
business but what they choose to do on private property must meet with the
approval of the owner who may choose for whatever reason to ask someone to leave
including random reasons such as not liking their shoes or tie. The reason
doesn't matter. If told to leave then you leave. End of discussion!!!!
I see people leaving the temple all the time just married and and kissing... of
course these people are straigh, so Why the double standard??
Yes, but the kiss was not to his wife, or to her husband. It was actions that
the owner of the property did not want on its property. This issue is not about
gay-rights, it is about property rights that are upheld by the constitution and
by current courts. Imagine how you would feel if a visitor to your house
decided he/she wanted to disrobe in front of your children and you asked him/her
to leave and you were informed it was his right and you could not ask him to
leave. Well i am sure you would disagree. As should all owners of property
would. That is what happened here. Does anyone think that this was not planned
for and procedures put in place prior to it happening? I am pretty sure this
was anticipated and the legal department informed the security department what
was allowed. This is supported by the comments given by the police for the
article. Not every issue is about gay rights.
In Europe it's very common for two men two men to kiss on the Cheek... Whether
they be straight or gay.
The usual rabid gays who hate heterosexuals are all out in force to push their
agenda. The two arrested were there to start trouble and provoke
and were looking to get arrested so they could get some press.Normal
thinking peopel are not fooled by the latest silly gay hate directed toward
heterosexuals.As for the gay posters to this thread, do tou get paid
to spam open forums with your hate-filled agenda?
Re: ralph"More of the homosexual agenda. They don't want equality -
they want to force acceptance of their lifestyle, "warts and all", on everyone,
even on private property. Another example of the "dummying-down" of decency in
our society."Private property means nothing to some people. Not only
do we have to put up with their stupid votes when we go to vote but now private
property isn't even off limits.When asked to leave by the owner they
can expect them to swear and refuse to leave and to try to debate them on the
Constitution and what the law should be. Why wait until the next election when
they can harass people on their property and show them that they won't be left
alone unless they get their way.The idea that everything is up for
debate and vote is getting out of hand. What we allow on our private property is
not up for debate or vote. It is not up for someone to refuse to leave when
asked to do so. The first sign of hate is refusing to respect a person's private
property when asked.
In order to avoid an escalation from verbal altercation to physical violence
police (and private security) often have to take immediate control of the
situation. I'm sure that the private security did exactly what they were
trained to do within the law. Mormons find same sex public displays of
affection as offensive, and they have the right under the law to ask anyone that
is disruptive to leave their private property. Publicity seeking homosexual
couples can protest to their hearts' content on the public right of way (the
sidewalk), but this is nothing more than a lame display of disdain for Mormon
Please understand that the church has a right to enforce it's policies. Whether
the gay men intentionally went there to cause a problem (which I doubt),then
they must pay the consequences regardless. If they did not do it intentionally
then they should have respected the policies and property of the church when
confronted and left apologetically and everything would have been fine, but they
got ignorant. Gays get angry and they cause problems. Be who you want to be, but
do it out of the public eye, especially if you can't be respectful of everyone.
Have respect for yourselves. Don't bring attention by inappropriate behavior.
Have PRIDE as a gay person and follow the rules that we all should be living by.
Even Mormons would be asked to leave if they used such poor judgment, but we try
to live a higher standard and still there are those who fight against common
decency. A NATURAL CONSEQUENCE will ALWAYS follow an action. YOU can CONTROL
whether it's good or bad. NOTHING can stop it. It's a law of God. His
judgment WILL prevail.
They were probably pushed down not for just refusing to leave but for then going
off on the people who asked them to leave. Loud swearing like that is an
offense to others. These gay actists who were obviously just trying to make a
point do not have the right to detract from the temple square experience of
others. It is as simple as that.
People get a grip. The two individuals were trying to stir the pot. They know
and so does everybody else. The Church is not going to accept your perverted
lifestyles, no time, no how. Get on with your lives and we shall get on with
ours. The Gays and Lesbians are trying to force their lifestyles on us and they
call us haters because we don't accept their behavior. If we look at history,
all the great societies in history fell because of homosexuality, Greece,
Roman, etc. Get ready for America to fall into the same cesspool. I for one
will tell these people they are the catalyst to the fall of our country.
Somebody has to speak up against this perverted way of life and thank goodness
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has the backbone and intestinal
fortitude to do so. If I am a "hater monger" then so be it.
If this would have happened in Hurricane, the local police would have used their
Tazer gun and subdued these two dangerous people.
Sounds like if the couple would have just left the property when they were
asked, there would have been no problem.
Anonymous,"More hate. Did the security have to act that way? seems
sort of aggressive and intolerant to me. Maybe all gays should line up on the
sidewalks around the area during general conference and kiss away! Yes yes."It wouldn't be funny if they didn't restrain them when they placed them
under arrest and one of the security guards died as a result of a weapon being
pulled by one of the men. We must not forget that these men had used profanity
after they had been told to lead and their refusal was trespassing. It's clear that the profanity and their manner of behavior could be considered
assault since it would lead a reasonable person to believe that they were
unreasonable and dangerous.
I might not like it if a property owner asked me to stop doing something on
their property, but I'd still quit out of respect for their rights.I'd go
home or get a motel:)
1) Engage in activity you know is offensive to the propeerty owner.2)
Refuse to stop the behavior when asked by the property owner.3) Refuse to
leave the property when asked.4) Make the property owner out to be the bad
guy when he calls the cops.5) make the story better and spread it around.
"Maybe all gays should line up on the sidewalks around the area during general
conference and kiss away!"I suggest you guys do this in Mecca.
It's private property! The argument stops right there. If a person is asked to
leave private property for any reason at all and does not comply with the
request the property owner has the right to have them detained and arrested. It
dosen't matter what the reason, if you are on private property and you are asked
to leave you leave. The reason you are being asked to leave is completly
Aren't there signs at the entrances stating it's private property and that
certain activities are not to be done? I could be wrong, but I think I remember
that being the case. In any event, these guys knew they were in conservative
Utah and knew they were at the heart of the Mormon church - at its "Mecca" so to
speak. I think they knew what they were doing and I think it was their intent
to create a stir.
"Our hearts reach out to those who refer to themselves as gays and lesbians. We
love and honor them as sons and daughters of God. They are welcome in the
Church. It is expected, however, that they follow the same God-given rules of
conduct that apply to everyone else, whether single or married." - Gordon B.
Hinckley, Oct. 1999 General Conference.To the 12...I can see your
mouth moving and I know there are words coming out, but I can't hear you. Your
actions are screaming too loud.Same rules of conduct, uh huh.
Your comment is typical of special interest groups.You read the story,
embellish it to suit your needs and then pass it along.
First, to Andrew. I didn't read anything about them being pushed to the
ground.Secondly, this is not a gay rights issue, it's a property rights
issue.The owner of a piece of property has the right to ask ANYONE to
leave for ANY reason. Get a motel!
My brother works for church security. They should have just left when asked to
and not tried to justify their behavior with profanity, that is why they got
pushed to the ground and handcuffed. Dont to the gay pda on church grounds just
to get attention.
I had vacation tickets to go to Salt Lake City and the National Parks, but I
just cancelled them. I will spend my dollars elsewhere. Is this really 2009?
I gurantee you it was more than just a peck on the cheek. When have you seen
only a peck from a hetero or gay couple. Public displays of affection are
offensive by either gay or hetero couples. However gays want to force
acceptance of acts by them which are not tolerated of a hetero couple.
I have read the past comments and have thought about the event vs response.
First the fact is that the plaza is private property- this means that the owners
of the property have the right to determine what is acceptable on their
property. The pair of homosexuals obviously knew this and decided to push the
issue with their acts. They are free to act anyway they want on public property
but the LDS church acted correctly. When the pair used profanity it broke a
second ordinance that is a public offense and a private offense. On the
reverse if a pair of LDS members went to preach their faith or sing at a gay bar
I would imagine they would be treated in a similiar way by the gay bar owner. I
believe that we have to respect the rights/laws of private property regardless
of the desires.bronx1810
Actually getting arrested is a good way to get noticed for your cause; ever
heard of suffragettes? The civil rights movement? Greenpeace?
I want to know if it really was a "peck on the cheek," and I want to know what
really happened to cause security to call police. Not enough truth in this
story, from either side. I am sick to think how this story will be broadcast far
and wide, but does not have solid facts - only one word against another.
How blatant dose this need to be. Those two new exactly how the church
security would react that’s why they did it. If it wasn’t intended
to get a reaction and get on the news then why didn’t they just leave when
asked? Why did they become argumentative? At that point security has the right
to detain them. And if they where forced to the ground then its because they
gave resistance. But I’m sure the gay rights community will come up with
more stunts in the future and then cry “poor me, those mean LDS people,
how dare they stand up for what they believe in”
Just another example of outlandish behavior by homosexuals. They are just
hurting their cause. Not unlike when they demonstrated outlansish behavior
outside the Los Angeles Temple.
i think its childish to assume that somebody would actually want to get arrested
just to get on the news. there are better ways to get noticed. especially for a
gay couple. stop being haters!!!! these people were singled out. showing
affection for you loved one is not "acting out" randy. start to learn to accept
people for who they are. not everybody is a sheep
Childish and immature? Its always easier being ignorant and presuming things
isnt it? Imagine how you would feel if someone told you to stop kissing your
husband or wife. It'd piss me off for sure. I wish people would try and expand
their minds a bit and think before they post on here.
You presume, simply because they were gay, that they were trying to "stir
something up" and "get on the news"? Isn't that somewhat of a narrow minded
assumption? Imagine for a moment what you would feel like and how you might
react if you were approached by a stranger and asked to stop kissing or being
affectionate with your spouse or significant other. I know I would get
frustrated by it. While church security had the prerogative to ask them to stop
on church property, try and understand the genuine reason for why they may have
reacted and refused to leave, especially when confronted. I see nothing
childish or immature about a man standing up for himself, regardless of whether
or not i agree with the thing he is standing up for. I am continually sadden by
the lack of tolerance and understanding so many here have for people they do not
know, understand, or agree with.
More of the homosexual agenda. They don't want equality - they want to force
acceptance of their lifestyle, "warts and all", on everyone, even on private
property. Another example of the "dummying-down" of decency in our society.
More hate. Did the security have to act that way? seems sort of aggressive and
intolerant to me. Maybe all gays should line up on the sidewalks around the area
during general conference and kiss away! Yes yes.
I agree the behavior was childish: getting physical, handcuffing and pushing a
guy to the ground (a detail omitted in the Deseret News) is childish and
bully-like behavior. It sounds like rogue rent-a-cops on a power trip - and
that's scary. Really, all of this, and handcuffs because of a peck on the
cheek? Yes, there was childish behavior, but it was on the part of church
This is a clear-cut case of religious freedom and property rights, but it will,
of course, be portrayed in the national media as a matter of anti-gay
discrimination. The Constitution is being twisted beyond all recognition to
justify same-sex marriage and to now discriminate against anyone who honestly
believes that open homosexual behavior is "inappropriate," even if the beliefs
are religious.We are engaged in a culture war, and this is just one
of the first skirmishes. According to many in the U.S. now, the Boy Scouts and
Mormons are evil and homesexuality and abortion are good. Didn't Isaiah have
something prescient to say about that?
Agreed, the way church officials acted was immature. Both sides were
wrong on this issue, but each for very different reasons.
I agree, why do they think they need to act that way? Seriously - handcuffing
and getting overly physical with two people because a peck on the cheek - that's
childish and bully behavior for rent-a-cops. They were out of line.
Interesting that they wanted them to leave but instead of just calling the
police they first pushed them to the ground and handcuffed them so they could
not leave. This is just legalized gay-bashing. Shame on the church security
I am supposing they were trying to get on the news, and in the newspapers. And
trying to stir something up because they are gay. And yes acting in this manner
is childish and immature.
Why do some people think they need to act that way? It seems childish to me!