Comments about ‘Text from LDS church regarding Salt Lake City's non-discrimination ordinance’

Mike Otterson said "Our language will always be respectful and acknowledge those who differ, but will also be clear on matters that we feel are of great consequence to our society".

I agree. Truth is more important than political correctness. The goal is to promote what is best for our society, not to try to please everybody.

This is a great story. All of these media sites try to pigeon whole the Church with a label of hate and yet here the Church is supporting right, dignity, and civility even as it stand by it position on marriage. Well done. Well done. The Church has it right.

What a terrific approach for the LDS Church to take. Great news!

Very well said. The Church has made clear it's viewpoint while showing respect for the views of others. Love it! And remember, there will be those who will be angry and say uncommonly hateful things about the church simply because they disagree and have no real leg to stand on. When the critics of the church run out of logical reasoned thought to go on, they turn to spewing garbage and hate. When the church disagrees with a person or group of peoples viewpoints about certain issues they are kind and respectful.

"I represent a church that believes in human dignity, in treating others with respect even when we disagree — in fact, especially when we disagree.

What a crock of BS...

The Church continues to try and distance itself from the redicals like Senator Buttars, and that is admirable. They could do more, but they are always cautions on such things, and this is at least as good as we could hope for. For this gesture, I say "thanks".

The point that was also made, which seems to be missed in these comments, is that they are respectful of others and their views and when they disagree they do it with respect. That is something that is good to remember as we add comments.

The fact remains that from the governments perspective marriage is simply a contract. Denying two consenting adults from entering into this contract while allowing others is wrong. It is supporting inequality. All men are created equal.

I don't see what's shocking about this. It's the stance that the Church has always taken and always will. It's not like the Church has moved in its position on any issue in any way. No one has ever been taught to be hateful or discriminate in any meeting I have heard of.

The teachings have anyways been to love your neighbor and treat others with Christlike love and dignity, and at the same time sticking up for your values.

"while safeguarding the crucial rights of religious organizations, for example, in their hiring of people whose lives are in harmony with their tenets"

Sounds like discrimination of faith

"Our language will always be respectful and acknowledge those who differ, but will also be clear on matters that we feel are of great consequence to our society"

Sounds like discrimination "Just shut up" Matt

I am very happy that the church leaders are supporting the non-discrimination ordinance. I still disagree with their stance against marriage equality (my gay brother and his partner of 10 years have just as much of a right to obtain a CIVIL marriage as my wife and I do!), but the fact that the church came out in support of this ordinance instead of remaining silent is a positive sign. I hope they are doing this because it is the right thing to do and not because they just want to stem the criticism due to Proposition 8 and the kissing incident in the Plaza.

we have freedom make the right chose with it,this life is a test also,the saviour is our only guide.

Great statement and position - I can only hope that people who disagree will be equally respectful when defending their beliefs.

The LDS church and others were perfectly within their rights to get involved with Prop 8 and the "kissing/groping/vulgarity incident" was on LDS church property. They have dealt fairly with people who come onto their property and people need to respect the rights of religions as well.

The church has always had the stance of defence of traditional marriage, so there actions here are of no surprise. What is shocking though is some people raction to this, for instance, fox13now article on this shows the attitude towards the LDS, appluading the action while still insulting them with assuptions and implied accusation. This is not a first step, this is merely one of many that have always fell in line with the churches beliefs and teachings. People just fail to acknowledge what the church believes and make up their own assumptions and distortions.

The church has already shown it is willing to compromise, too bad none of their opponents have shown the same gestures of kindness that the LDS have embraced, as shown in their disrespect for the churches private property rights and the need to blame them for prop 8 which decided through a democratic system which the members have every right to participate in.

Sorry for missing the bandwagon, but I think whoever made this decision may have acted rashly.

If churches have a crucial right to see that the lives of those constituting their corporate entities are "harmonious" with church opinions, then any business-owner or residence-owner anywhere has an identical right. And it's true; only in socialized nations are such rights withheld from "private sector" participants.

My political view is that I hope this ordinance is defeated, despite its backing. I don't see how it would change things anyway unless its scope were expanded; it seems more a goodwill gesture. If it is expanded, it will be yet another disservice to business owners. Think about it: the ones who already hire without regard to personal morality wouldn't need the ordinance, and those who adhere to certain moral standards would have their choices overridden and their work-place religious freedom marginalized.

Well, whatever. If Church spokesmen care for the Church's interests, then let us private citizens care for our own interests. I don't support this ordinance.

Anything that promotes homosexuality in our community is wrong, including this ordinance. I'm sorry to hear it passed and sorry the church didn't take a stronger stand on the issue.

I suppose my over all feeling (being an out LDS gay male) is that I find it positive that the church is ok with the new law, but at the same time why do they have to throw in their statements about the foundations between a man and woman. Why can't they just say "we support the bill, and what it stands for" and just sit down. They still have to throw in the personal view point.

More than anything I still can't fathom how as a society people can be so hateful towards gays. It doesn't matter though. Whether it's in 5 minutes or 20 years gays will be able to marry, it's only a matter of time and on that day I'm sure the LDS church will be calling its members to Jackson county LOL ;)

As an ex member of the church and CURRENT homosexual, i believe that heavenly father will "forgive" me if I am wrong in this life. I will have sex, drink and be proud of my sexuality! If God and jesuschrist are so forgiven as we preach they are, then they will forgive me when I stand before them. I will use my freedom to choose, and will not care about what the church and hypocretical members believe to be right or wrong.

It's a little nauseating to see all these presumably LDS folks patting their church on the back and congratulating themselves for how loving they all are towards gays. I'd like to remind you all that up until now the LDS church has either directly opposed nondiscrimination policies or has been silent at best on the issue.

I'm significantly more interested in how gays and lesbians themselves would assess their treatment by the LDS church. This gay Mormon is not impressed. On the contrary -- why is it that the church, which claims to follow Christ's teachings, is always the very last to stand up for a dis-favorable minority? Well, congratulations. You were last on racial equality, last on women's rights, -- surprise surprise -- you're last again.

I support the churches stand on this issue, I don't agree with the gay lifestyle and agenda but when it comes to being able to live the lifestyle of their own choosinng without being harrassed that I support 100%.