Reader comments
Signs say plaza private property
165 comments | Read story
Kevin | 8:26 p.m. Sept. 29, 2009
Excellant! It is private property and the church should be able to dictate who
is allowed as would anyone else with private land.
Sweet! | 8:38 p.m. Sept. 29, 2009
Very appropriate sign...except for the Roller Skating part.
Now where are both roller skaters going to go?
Now where are both roller skaters going to go?
Glad that the sign is posted | 1:39 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
This sign will clarify things for those who don't understand the concept of
private property and who think that they can refuse to leave when asked.
There is likely to be some backlash because people think that the LDS Church needs to explicitly state what behavior is and isn't allowed on the property but that list would be to long to post and wouldn't be all-inclusive of every possible behavior which would be considered inappropriate.
Church security should make it clear in future interactions that people can cease inappropriate behavior and remain on the property or leave and that they are exercising their right as official representatives of the property owners.
To make it clear that they are reserving the right to refuse access to anyone for any reason makes it clear that they aren't going to get into debates about why someone is being asked to leave.
It is unfortunate that this sign had to be placed as a result of the recent criminal activity of a couple who felt they could refuse to leave private property but it is good that the rules are clarified before the LDS General Conference this weekend.
There is likely to be some backlash because people think that the LDS Church needs to explicitly state what behavior is and isn't allowed on the property but that list would be to long to post and wouldn't be all-inclusive of every possible behavior which would be considered inappropriate.
Church security should make it clear in future interactions that people can cease inappropriate behavior and remain on the property or leave and that they are exercising their right as official representatives of the property owners.
To make it clear that they are reserving the right to refuse access to anyone for any reason makes it clear that they aren't going to get into debates about why someone is being asked to leave.
It is unfortunate that this sign had to be placed as a result of the recent criminal activity of a couple who felt they could refuse to leave private property but it is good that the rules are clarified before the LDS General Conference this weekend.
Comments continue below
It Is Private Property | 2:49 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
The signs are accurate. It is private property. The church paid market rates,
or above, for the value of the land to Salt Lake City Corporation. And fee
title of the land was transferred to the City of Salt Lake. Private property,
at least for now in an Obama world, is still private property. This is such a
non-issue. The media needs to quit running to wacko Rocy Anderson everytime
there is a plaza story and just quit covering the professional agitators who
want to just poke their finger in the eye of the LDS Church on this matter.
Janadele | 3:26 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Welcomed and well overdue :-))
Stando | 5:17 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I it shouldn't be the mind set of who or who isn't allowed.....I think
everyone can come to the garden and see the flowers, fountains, cracks in the
side walk, everyone is allowed, but leave your extracuricular behaviors at the
gate!!
Anonymous | 5:57 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I am curious as to why a portion of a thoroughfare is sold to a church. Most
people assume walkways are public property. Why is it constitutional for a
church to assume this kind of control. To think that tithing funds are spent in
this fashion is curious.
Anonymous | 6:28 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
"The church reserves the right to refuse access to anyone." My goodness, how welcoming is that?
Salt Lake City should post a sign visible to those leaving the plaza that reads, "Welcome to Salt Lake City. Everyone is welcome. Please leave your bigotry behind."
Anonymous | 6:42 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Looks like Utahns might as well say all non mormons leave now. We don't
want you around. I was raised here in Utah and now feel like a foreigner cause
I don't agree with the LDS Church. Looks like I better look for state that
accually supports ALL people in its communities.
Concerned | 6:42 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Iam sure eventually the new Morman Mall will also have the same restrictions.Of
course that will keep out the gang bangers which will be good!
Doug G | 7:11 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Excellent. We all need to respect private property. The problem is that this
ever became private property. We got hoodwinked on this one, and I for one knew
the church would lawyer up and forget the good will floating around when they
massaged this piece of public land away from us. I respect private property, but
i also admire those who remind the church we not all happy about what it does,
and we don't offer slathering praise for it.
clholli | 7:22 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I find it quite nice that our rights as property holders are still at least
somewhat protected from our ever growing government.
Himself | 7:29 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
To Glad that the sign is posted:
The church need not be explicit, but the members should be in the comments here. How else we the rest of know how to behave? The churches of Italy require modest dress, does Temple Square expect the same? Please
claify so we will not inadvertently offend our dear LDS
neighbors.
The church need not be explicit, but the members should be in the comments here. How else we the rest of know how to behave? The churches of Italy require modest dress, does Temple Square expect the same? Please
claify so we will not inadvertently offend our dear LDS
neighbors.
Anonymous | 7:32 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Now we can enjoy the plaza in peace.
suzyk | 7:36 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
The sign states the way it is "exactly" and should be taken as that.
nonymous | 7:48 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I really feel sorry for you. There are about 2 millions other public places you
can go in Utah. If you fell like you dont belong maybe its your attitude that
needs to change.
@ 3 X Anonymous | 8:00 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
How typical for you to set up a straw man arguement so can knock it down.
The LDS Church did legally buy the property at above market value. That should have settled the issue of ownership and property rights, but this is the LDS Church afterall. As your and others perceived doormat, thay were required to go the extra mile and cave in to Rock Anderson's extortion and "give" an additional 2.1 acres to the city in order to appease the dissidents.
The "Mormon Mall" as you call it, is financed by the church, but is a commercial, not a religious venture, as you well know.
Were it not for you and others like you who cannot seem to respect the rights of others to govern their private property, the signs on the plaza were installed to accomodate the city. The LDS assumed (falsely) that people would respect the plaza. It is you and those like you who have forced the position to be taken. When you point fingers Anonymous, point them at yourself.
The LDS Church did legally buy the property at above market value. That should have settled the issue of ownership and property rights, but this is the LDS Church afterall. As your and others perceived doormat, thay were required to go the extra mile and cave in to Rock Anderson's extortion and "give" an additional 2.1 acres to the city in order to appease the dissidents.
The "Mormon Mall" as you call it, is financed by the church, but is a commercial, not a religious venture, as you well know.
Were it not for you and others like you who cannot seem to respect the rights of others to govern their private property, the signs on the plaza were installed to accomodate the city. The LDS assumed (falsely) that people would respect the plaza. It is you and those like you who have forced the position to be taken. When you point fingers Anonymous, point them at yourself.
Re: Anonymous | 8:04 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Dear Anonymous,
I was thinking of getting a few thousand friends of mine together. We were wondering if we could come over to your house and just hang out. Don't worry if you can't be there. We will just come over; check out your home and property; walk around, maybe help ourselves to what you have; stay as long as we want; and not worry about the mess we leave-(you can clean up after us). And to think you paid property tax to maintain your own private property!
I was thinking of getting a few thousand friends of mine together. We were wondering if we could come over to your house and just hang out. Don't worry if you can't be there. We will just come over; check out your home and property; walk around, maybe help ourselves to what you have; stay as long as we want; and not worry about the mess we leave-(you can clean up after us). And to think you paid property tax to maintain your own private property!
Anonymous | 8:12 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
What would Jesus do? Erect signs that can be selectively used to enforce
discrimination against visitors to the plaza?
Mormons indeed welcome you with open arms.
Mormons indeed welcome you with open arms.
Dutchman | 8:12 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
It became necessary for the LDS Church to buy this section of Main Street from
the City when people with small minds, shall we say bigoted people, began
harrassing wedding parties in front of the LDS Temple. So posters who call the
church bigoted please reconsider. And yes, public thoroughfares are sold to
other churches. Right here in Salt Lake City a section of Romona Ave was sold
to the Catholic Church for the expansion of their senior center. Most of the
millions of dollars paid to the City by the church was used to upgrade and
improve Liberty Park. So go over there and relax if you don't want to be
monitored by church security.
To Anonymous | 8:15 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
You are still welcome in the plaza at any time. What is not welcome is behaviour
which is offensive to most people, whether they be Mormons or not.
Seriously, I live in CA. I see many same sex couples each day. Rarely are they engaged in liplocks in public places. And the same can be said of heterosexual couples.
The LDS Church would have frowned on kissing between the two gentlemen, regardless. But I'm sure prolonged open-mouth kissing by a hetero couple would have also elicited a response by the security personnel to please take it somewhere more private.
My wife and I, though affectionate, would never consider kissing passionately outside the grounds of a Catholic Church, Jewish Synagogue or at a pizza parlor for that matter. The two men in question were not caught up in the moment. The agenda was clearly to take on the Mormon Church and create controversy - and 15 minutes of fame for themselves.
It's sad that a sign HAD to be posted. But please also note it was the CITY, not the Church, that recommended the sign be put up with that specific language.
Seriously, I live in CA. I see many same sex couples each day. Rarely are they engaged in liplocks in public places. And the same can be said of heterosexual couples.
The LDS Church would have frowned on kissing between the two gentlemen, regardless. But I'm sure prolonged open-mouth kissing by a hetero couple would have also elicited a response by the security personnel to please take it somewhere more private.
My wife and I, though affectionate, would never consider kissing passionately outside the grounds of a Catholic Church, Jewish Synagogue or at a pizza parlor for that matter. The two men in question were not caught up in the moment. The agenda was clearly to take on the Mormon Church and create controversy - and 15 minutes of fame for themselves.
It's sad that a sign HAD to be posted. But please also note it was the CITY, not the Church, that recommended the sign be put up with that specific language.
Easement | 8:17 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
The Church was more then willing to allow it to be an easement. But when groups
have to protest and degrade the atmosphere and appearance, then it has to come
to this. Same thing happened at BYU.
Hoodwinked? | 8:18 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
My memory is that the city needed money and welcomed the cash from the LDS
Church. I also remember the former mayor and others working over the Church to
later give up additional property to the city to obtain the rights the church
should have acquired with the original purchase. In effect, the church paid
twice. If anyone was hoodwinked it was the LDS Church
Ned | 8:19 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
This will be fun to watch as the day progresses.....
@Anon | 8:28 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
As with any other private property, you are welcome...as long as yourespect the
wishes of the property owner.
Don't like it?
Stay on your own property!
Don't like it?
Stay on your own property!
Anonymous | 8:46 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
How exactly does anyone establish a market value for a block of Main Street?
There is no record of anyone else purchasing a block of Main Street.
S!X | 8:52 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
They shouldn't need a sign. How stupid and petty can people be? Do I have
to post a sign in my front yard telling people I refuse the right to kick
whomever I want off of my property? The gay couple was trying to manipulate
their sexual preference to work in their favor. Instead of being professional
and mature about their situation they took the passive agressive option. If they
want to be taken seriously maybe they should stop waking people up at 8 AM on a
Saturday with their supreme gay leader screaming "whooo" through a
megaphone while "Celebration" is blasting in the background. Political
protests are for people who think that whining in public makes a bit of
difference. What reason did I serve in the Army if people are going to abuse
their freedoms? It only takes a few stupid people to ruin the whole group.
tigerlily | 8:53 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Doug G::we were not hoodwinked as you say. We as citizens of Utah didn't
even get a say. The mayor of Salt Lake did it. I would have voted for it anyway.
That park is beautiful. And people need to respect the churches property
@@3x... | 8:54 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
" As your and others perceived doormat, thay were required to go the extra
mile and cave in to Rock Anderson's extortion and "give" an
additional 2.1 acres to the city in order to appease the dissidents."
Please. Learn the history. The Church thought when they bought the peoperty that they could control behavior on the plaza. After LOSING THE COURT BATTLE over the easement, Rocky turned on US and sold the easement to the church.
The LDS church had to buy the rights to control the behaviour of all who cross the plaza. Now they own us if we go there.
Please. Learn the history. The Church thought when they bought the peoperty that they could control behavior on the plaza. After LOSING THE COURT BATTLE over the easement, Rocky turned on US and sold the easement to the church.
The LDS church had to buy the rights to control the behaviour of all who cross the plaza. Now they own us if we go there.
Anonymous | 8:57 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
"Re: Anonymous | 8:04 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Dear Anonymous,
"I was thinking of getting a few thousand friends of mine together. We were wondering if we could come over to your house and just hang out. Don't worry if you can't be there. We will just come over; check out your home and property; walk around, maybe help ourselves to what you have; stay as long as we want; and not worry about the mess we leave-(you can clean up after us). And to think you paid property tax to maintain your own private property!"
If I had a sign posted that said, "VISITORS WELCOME" and my property used to be a thoroughfare (and still is), yes, you'd be welcome.
Dear Anonymous,
"I was thinking of getting a few thousand friends of mine together. We were wondering if we could come over to your house and just hang out. Don't worry if you can't be there. We will just come over; check out your home and property; walk around, maybe help ourselves to what you have; stay as long as we want; and not worry about the mess we leave-(you can clean up after us). And to think you paid property tax to maintain your own private property!"
If I had a sign posted that said, "VISITORS WELCOME" and my property used to be a thoroughfare (and still is), yes, you'd be welcome.
UNLV | 9:06 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Putting up a sign does not mean that church is restricting access. It simply
means that it has the right to remove people who are there only to cause trouble
or controversy. If more people in the world stood up for their beliefs and
stopped allowing special interest groups from ruling our country, we would all
be better off. Personally I don't appreciate listening to teenagers use
profanity around me. When they do, I tell them that will not happen around me.
Every time the apologize for their behavior. Stand up for yourselfs and your
beliefs and stop allowing groups to rule your life. As for me, I have zero
problems with race or sexual preference. If a man wants to be with a man, I
don't think it is right but it's his free agency to do so. But making
a scene in front of my kids is another issue. Just like bad behavior or
language is not acceptable in front of my children. I am glad the church does
not change their standards for those who do not show respect to others and go
out of their way to demonstrate poor judgements in public.
To anonymous 6:28 and 6:42 | 9:22 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
and any others who constantly complain: No one's keeping you here. No
one's forcing you to stay either. Find a life elsewhere so that you can
finally be happy. You know, the grass is always greener on the other side of the
steet . . . . move. Salt Lake used to be enjoyable and safe but now folks like
you seem to want to drum up trouble. You have my support to leave today.
Anonymous | 9:39 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Anonymous | 8:46 a.m.
"How exactly does anyone establish a market value for a block of Main Street? There is no record of anyone else purchasing a block of Main Street."
A major street in Houston, Texas sold for $373,000 after being appraised as being worth $629,000. Now compare that to the $8.1 million the LDS Church was willing to pay for a similar piece of land.
You determine market value based on the value of the land and not the infrastructure on it. The street is not worth anything but the land is. No city would pay a landowner that much money to buy a piece of land to build a road on it because the land isn't worth that amount.
Roads are bought and sold on a fairly regular basis in this country and I have yet to hear of a case where $8.1 million exchanged hands.
"How exactly does anyone establish a market value for a block of Main Street? There is no record of anyone else purchasing a block of Main Street."
A major street in Houston, Texas sold for $373,000 after being appraised as being worth $629,000. Now compare that to the $8.1 million the LDS Church was willing to pay for a similar piece of land.
You determine market value based on the value of the land and not the infrastructure on it. The street is not worth anything but the land is. No city would pay a landowner that much money to buy a piece of land to build a road on it because the land isn't worth that amount.
Roads are bought and sold on a fairly regular basis in this country and I have yet to hear of a case where $8.1 million exchanged hands.
A little extreme! | 9:45 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
And I am not talking about the signs, I am talking about the people who are
acting like the church is rejecting all non members.
The church has always welcomed non members and are willing to share with those who want to learn more and willing to let people choose not to learn more.
As in any home, we have a right to establish standards, no smoking, no swearing, no behavior that is offensive to some.
So, the church has the right to ask gays or straights to not show extreme affection on their grounds.
I would not go into a gay bar and ask everyone to please refrain from holding hands, so don't go onto a church ground and hold hands if you are gay.
But to you people who feel that this is so terrible, you need to grow up and realize that you will be just fine if you don't get to kiss or hold hands for that brief five minutes while you are on someone else property.
The church has always welcomed non members and are willing to share with those who want to learn more and willing to let people choose not to learn more.
As in any home, we have a right to establish standards, no smoking, no swearing, no behavior that is offensive to some.
So, the church has the right to ask gays or straights to not show extreme affection on their grounds.
I would not go into a gay bar and ask everyone to please refrain from holding hands, so don't go onto a church ground and hold hands if you are gay.
But to you people who feel that this is so terrible, you need to grow up and realize that you will be just fine if you don't get to kiss or hold hands for that brief five minutes while you are on someone else property.
Roberta | 9:51 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
The church should do the right thing and return the property to the city where
it belongs.
What would Jesus do | 9:56 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Well, from the bible we knew that Christ threw out the money changers and others
from the Temple because it is a place of reverence. And the Church Plaza is a
part of Temple Square and is considered to be a place of reverence by its
owners. So I would say that Christ would support the signs and removal of those
in violation.
Also, Christ did forgive the sinner, but he also said "go and sin no more" he did not say "go and sin some more"
To the person that claim tithing money was being spent on this. The church stated that no tithing moneys have been spent on the Plaza. They have plenty of funds which come from nemerous investments which pay for projects like this. ANd why should you be concerned about tithing funds anyway? You have probably never paid tithing, to the lds church or any other for that matter, in your life.
Also, Christ did forgive the sinner, but he also said "go and sin no more" he did not say "go and sin some more"
To the person that claim tithing money was being spent on this. The church stated that no tithing moneys have been spent on the Plaza. They have plenty of funds which come from nemerous investments which pay for projects like this. ANd why should you be concerned about tithing funds anyway? You have probably never paid tithing, to the lds church or any other for that matter, in your life.
Church does what it wants. | 9:58 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
The Church abuses our state coonstitution.
Read the paragraph below, and aside from the OTHER obvious transgressions by the LDS Church, read the
Public Property" sentence.
Someone please explain this, and I DON"Y mean a church attorney Mike in Sandy
Sec. 4. [Religious liberty.] The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The State shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment. No property qualification shall be required of any person to vote, or hold office, except as provided in this Constitution.
Read the paragraph below, and aside from the OTHER obvious transgressions by the LDS Church, read the
Public Property" sentence.
Someone please explain this, and I DON"Y mean a church attorney Mike in Sandy
Sec. 4. [Religious liberty.] The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The State shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment. No property qualification shall be required of any person to vote, or hold office, except as provided in this Constitution.
ExMoWeHoMo | 10:01 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Fantastic! Now if I could only get the missionaries to respect my private
property.
Anonymous | 10:06 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Build a mote around it. The last thing I want to visit in SLC is Temple Square.
Linda | 10:07 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I agree with "hoodwinked" above, the church spent waaay to much for
the plaza which should have been theirs for free according to the '62
Plan.
And to all the anonymous writers above, use your real name or at least think of a clever pseudonym. If you aren't smart enough to do that, then I'm not going to waste my time reading what you have to say.
And to all the anonymous writers above, use your real name or at least think of a clever pseudonym. If you aren't smart enough to do that, then I'm not going to waste my time reading what you have to say.
Southern Utah | 10:11 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Tina seems a little bitter
@@3X | 10:15 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Please note that your opinion is your version of the history. The LDS church
assumed they could enjoy the same property right that any other entity enjoys
when it purchases property. Rocky alertly saw an opportunity to exploit the
church as he often did for his own purposes. How's that for a version of
history?
Here By Choice | 10:21 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
There are lots of places I can't go in Utah because they are private
property. I demand to be allowed into the Catholic confessional while someone
is confessing, not just while it's empty. I demand to be allowed into your
private home because the fancy takes me and engage in whatever conduct I choose
as long as it's not criminal. I came here by choice and am not LDS. Leave
the Mormons alone, stop complaining or move somewhere else and see if they will
allow you to violate private property or participate in conduct on private
property which is offensive to many people not such Mormons.
None too Hospitable, is it? | 10:26 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Is there any other Church in this country so unpopular and disliked that they
have to erect unwelcoming signs on their property?
Anonymous | 10:26 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
There is no legitimate debate here. Those who hate Mormons will make their
ridiculous arguments no matter the facts. In their hearts, they understand that
the church is doing what any property owner would do.
Do you suppose I could go to the headquarters of a gay activist organization and stand on their private property preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, including the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality? Would they "welcome" me? Or would they "discriminate" and have me thrown out on my ear?
How about if I went to the private campus of Google, Inc. in the Bay Area (a strong supporter of "gay rights") and protested loudly against homosexual immorality? Would they welcome me as a visitor, or would they "discriminate" and throw me out on my ear?
Why should the church as a private landowner be treated differently than other private landowners? Only because you disagree with, or hate, the church, right?
Do you suppose I could go to the headquarters of a gay activist organization and stand on their private property preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, including the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality? Would they "welcome" me? Or would they "discriminate" and have me thrown out on my ear?
How about if I went to the private campus of Google, Inc. in the Bay Area (a strong supporter of "gay rights") and protested loudly against homosexual immorality? Would they welcome me as a visitor, or would they "discriminate" and throw me out on my ear?
Why should the church as a private landowner be treated differently than other private landowners? Only because you disagree with, or hate, the church, right?
Richard | 10:28 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
As a family we have traveled extensively internationally. We love to visit
places of worship. Such places are usually the focus of history, the best art
and architecture, and great places to feel the deeply held values of the local
people.
The most significant religious sites that we have visited all have restrictions on the behavior of visitors to their sacred spaces. There are likewise frequently restrictions on dress. This has been true of places that are Hindu, Moslem, Buddhist, Catholic, Orthodox, and Native American. This has proven to be consistent in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, southern and eastern Asia, Latin America, as well as nearby places like New Mexico and Arizona.
Taking umbrage at dress and behavior restrictions by the LDS Church at their world headquarters is provincial. It also smacks of hubris and religious bigotry. The personal price paid for this mind set is a substitution of a narrow secularism that cuts people off from experiencing the religious foundations and that are central to understanding the living history of civilizations all over the planet.
The most significant religious sites that we have visited all have restrictions on the behavior of visitors to their sacred spaces. There are likewise frequently restrictions on dress. This has been true of places that are Hindu, Moslem, Buddhist, Catholic, Orthodox, and Native American. This has proven to be consistent in Europe, the Middle East, Africa, southern and eastern Asia, Latin America, as well as nearby places like New Mexico and Arizona.
Taking umbrage at dress and behavior restrictions by the LDS Church at their world headquarters is provincial. It also smacks of hubris and religious bigotry. The personal price paid for this mind set is a substitution of a narrow secularism that cuts people off from experiencing the religious foundations and that are central to understanding the living history of civilizations all over the planet.
Mike in Sandy | 10:30 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Somebody ANYBODY please explain how the LDS church can ignore EVERY sentence in
this brief section of our State Constitution:
I challenge you:
Sec. 4. [Religious liberty.] The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The State shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment. No property qualification shall be required of any person to vote, or hold office, except as provided in this Constitution.
I challenge you:
Sec. 4. [Religious liberty.] The rights of conscience shall never be infringed. The State shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office of public trust or for any vote at any election; nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror on account of religious belief or the absence thereof. There shall be no union of Church and State, nor shall any church dominate the State or interfere with its functions. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or for the support of any ecclesiastical establishment. No property qualification shall be required of any person to vote, or hold office, except as provided in this Constitution.
Kent | 10:41 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
I'm with the church. Keep the bums off church property. These people can go
somewhere else to be a nuisance. No one needs trouble makers hanging around
causing problem or making a scene continuously. The church did right thing by
putting up a sign.
@Tina 9:13 | 10:47 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
Your comment reveals poor understanding at least and most everyone else
recognizes your statement is false and therefore you have no creditability.
Personally I served in a community position for a number of years and not once did the LDS Church, The Catholic Church or the Baptist Church appear before our group asking for any "special" consideration. There were building permits etc., but the same rules applied to all. Members of various faiths served together to represent the community.
As far as the Plaza is concerned, I am sure you are just as welcome to enjoy the area just as much as I am. If either you or I have inappropriate behavior you will be asked to cease or leave.
My desk was paid for by public money and was on public property and if you came to my office and wanted to act inappropriately, security would have asked you to cease or they would have escorted you off the PUBLIC property. If you persisted, you might half to talk to a judge. Freedom of speech does not mean you can say anything you want anywhere you please whether it by my home, my office, private property or public property.
Personally I served in a community position for a number of years and not once did the LDS Church, The Catholic Church or the Baptist Church appear before our group asking for any "special" consideration. There were building permits etc., but the same rules applied to all. Members of various faiths served together to represent the community.
As far as the Plaza is concerned, I am sure you are just as welcome to enjoy the area just as much as I am. If either you or I have inappropriate behavior you will be asked to cease or leave.
My desk was paid for by public money and was on public property and if you came to my office and wanted to act inappropriately, security would have asked you to cease or they would have escorted you off the PUBLIC property. If you persisted, you might half to talk to a judge. Freedom of speech does not mean you can say anything you want anywhere you please whether it by my home, my office, private property or public property.
L. G. KIRKPATRICK | 10:52 a.m. Sept. 30, 2009
1. To "Janadele" ~~ Hello, there! Long time we haven't heard from
you! Thanks for your comment here; hope you're doing OK! (Grandson crashed
my PC, deleted Address Book, please e-mail me!)
2. To those of you who are using the "capital 2" sign (the "@") to indicate "To [someone]", please be advised that the "@" is meant as, and pronounced as, "To". For instance, "@Anon" actually means "To Anon", and "@@3x..." actually means "To To 3x...", (which, I assume, means "To To Three Times".
3. And, I would greatly appreciate it if a lot of you fine folks (including some newspaper reporters) would proofread your posts for spelling and grammar. It is extremely irritating to try to read posts where words are mis-used and misspelled, and makes it nearly impossible to determine your exact meaning.
4. And, for my vote from here in Tarpon Springs, Florida, "If you don't like the heat, get the heck out of the kitchen!" IOW, make your own rules (within the law) for your own property, and allow other property owners (i.e., in this case, the LDS Church) the same rights and privileges!
5. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED COOPERATION!
2. To those of you who are using the "capital 2" sign (the "@") to indicate "To [someone]", please be advised that the "@" is meant as, and pronounced as, "To". For instance, "@Anon" actually means "To Anon", and "@@3x..." actually means "To To 3x...", (which, I assume, means "To To Three Times".
3. And, I would greatly appreciate it if a lot of you fine folks (including some newspaper reporters) would proofread your posts for spelling and grammar. It is extremely irritating to try to read posts where words are mis-used and misspelled, and makes it nearly impossible to determine your exact meaning.
4. And, for my vote from here in Tarpon Springs, Florida, "If you don't like the heat, get the heck out of the kitchen!" IOW, make your own rules (within the law) for your own property, and allow other property owners (i.e., in this case, the LDS Church) the same rights and privileges!
5. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED COOPERATION!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Jeffrey D. Allred, Deseret News
Signs posted by the LDS Church on its Main Street Plaza in Salt Lake give notice that the area is private property.
- Death penalty possible in Roy slayings 8:54 a.m.
- U.N. to probe climate e-mail leak 8:51 a.m.
- GM Chairman names new head 8:47 a.m.
- Factory orders rise unexpectedly 8:41 a.m.
- Crash snarls I-15 near 10300 South 8:37 a.m.
- Southwest traffic rose 11.7% 8:33 a.m.
- Stocks surge after jobs report 8:25 a.m.
- Iran to limit cooperation with IAEA 8:17 a.m.
- Ft. Hood unit deploys 8:11 a.m.
- Clinton: allies can help turn tide 8:00 a.m.
- Hate not limited to 1 in-state rivalry
- Mr. Football 2009: Tuni Kanuch
- Phoenix signs off on LDS temple
- Harpring's NBA career is over
- Aggies shoot past Cougars
- Toddler dies trapped under mattress
- Crews to seal Nutty Putty Cave
- Doctor deems Mitchell competent
- MVPs wrap up stellar prep careers
- Felt's Facts season recap
- Hall reprimanded by MWC
406 - Max Hall issues apology393
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal361
- Why is Y. ignoring spew of hatred?287
- Utes won't respond to Hall278
- BYU says Hall incident resolved247
- Letters: Liberal because LDS222
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game188
- Aggies shoot past Cougars175
- Hate not limited to 1 in-state rivalry164
If you want to learn what it's like to be an astronaut on the...
First, a big thank you to all who posted questions here for me to ask...
Latest comments
Thank you Matt for great years of playing the game you love. I am a life long...
Why all the BYU fans (designated haters?) on an article about the Utes?...
everyone talks about Sloan successor Hornacek or Stock. What about Matt?...
I will be fine if there are no more journalist. Reporters are what we...
Perhaps its because many parents under the age of 50 have likely done it...
"Pretty Sure" is absolutely correct. Feinga, out of Hunter, was the first...
The Pac 10 wants to expand and include Utah and Colorado. TCU could...
I watched the statement made by Senator Bunning to and about Bernanke. He was...
oh chill out bob & phil... sorry for your loss mr. bone, she was obviously...
Going to be a very enjoyable lunch for coach B. The great win over Illinois...
Advertisements