Comments about ‘Mormon church supports Salt Lake City's protections for gay rights’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Nov. 11 2009 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
mark

@Re;Bryce T.

thanks for the laugh

Pagan

This is evidence:

Choosing to discriminate does not make you a protected class.

Now enter the government

and establishes a new protected class of citizen "the homosexual class". And, on Veteran's Day, the freedom to chose who you employ and who you rent to is taken away by a dictatorial town government with the support of its largest institution. Shame on Salt Lake, and shame on the LDS Church, and pity the man who laid down his life to defend "freedom and liberty"

LDS in Washington

I was disappointed in the church when it spent so much effort on Prop 8 and ignored an opportunity to oppose Physician Assisted Suicide in this state. Not that I was against Prop 8, but I thought standing against killing yourself was a greater moral imperative.

That said, I was curious as to how it would respond to referendum 71, an effort by the Christian Right to reverse a domestic partners act that lends all civil rights to unmarried registered civil unions, the so called "Anything but Marriage Act."

The Church made no official pronouncements, and I saw no unofficial organization in my Ward or Stake to support referendum 71. This seems very consistant with the Churches pronouncement about the SLC statute, and in that context, it shouldn't have surprised those aware of the world outside of Utah and California.

I'm still disappointed that the Church let "Death with Dignity" slide right by without a peep, but I see no hypocrisy in their approach to gay rights and marriage.

Anonymous

@mark

I'm not surprised that you laugh whenever you the truth doesn't match your fantasy world.

samw

This is good news, but the choice of the word "violence" by Otterson is disturbing. They want credit for opposing discrimination (and for the record this is new for the LDS leaders who have opposed anti-discrimination laws in areas of race and gender in the past). They did serious violence to marriage in California's Prop 8 campaign and now have the gall to declare this legal change as "non-violent" to marriage. This amazes me!

Soldier

I believe that the Obamalosi(tm) government healthcare bill is likely to be the foot in the door of solving the problems with "domestic partners" not receiving coverage from employers of either (or more) who share the same domicile completely bypassing the institution of marriage. It's not hard to add these things up and see where the "bubbleheads" passing such legislation are taking these things regardless of how political correctness is figuratively and literally killing us as seen by the affirmative action problems that hindered full investigation of our own people for fear of hurting someone's feelings.

It's high time we stopped tiptoeing around everything and grew our backbones back (no pun intended). This is not about hate, but rather admitting that when you try so hard not to categorize people, that is exactly what you end up doing. As far as what the Church did here, I am still baking on it but do not see the need to have even had a spokesperson make a statement about it. I am not all seeing or knowing either but seek out enlightenment whenever I can.

BTW, don't ask don't tell "goes both ways".

Don

I look forward to seeing transvestites working at Deseret Book.

Camel's head is in the tent

Wow. I never thought I'd see the church do the politically expedient thing.

Anonymous

Funny how the chruch cowers when the almighty tax exempt status is threatened.

Stand for Something!

I am troubled by this decision. It indeed seems we are becoming 'in the world.' This is not the church nor the church leadership I grew up with!

OC

I'm confused. Why does the LDS Church feel the need to proclaim support(or vice versa) for a government position? I thought they did not believe in using their influence in political arenas?

Why does the government need the opinion of the LDS Church in order to make a decision? I'm glad I don't live in SLC.

Sheesh

The argument that gays will sue to get married in the temple is almost as stupid as the argumnebt that the church did this to protect its tax exempt status. Sometimes I can't tell which side is dumber.

Anonymous

Now enter the government and establishes a new protected class of citizen "the homosexual class". And, on Veteran's Day, the freedom to chose who you employ and who you rent to is taken away by a dictatorial town government with the support of its largest institution. Shame on Salt Lake, and shame on the LDS Church, and pity the man who laid down his life to defend "freedom and liberty"

-----------

As a mother of a marine, I did not allow my son to defend your "right" to discriminate! He fought for ALL Americans, not just those that you judge to be righteous and like you.

Who is the "least among us?" Would you do this to Christ? Why do it to any of God's Children?

Pagan

'This is not the church nor the church leadership I grew up with!'

Stand for Something! | 8:33 a.m -

Times change. The LDS church supports non-discrimination in SLC.

Granted, the LDS church actively worked to deny marriage to americans in California.

This token support in SLC does not erase that. I will never forget that. But rather than focus on the bad, let's focus on the good.

To imply that you did not 'grow up' with this leadership is to imply you did not grow up at all.

Perhaps it is time you did.

Different Light

This isn't really a change in stance for the Mormon Church. In 1995 President Hinckley said "Now we have gays in the church. Good people." Even President Kimball said gay people were "basically good people". When I read those as a faithful gay member of the church, I felt loved and included in the church.

I think the way the media typically portrays Mormonism distorts the actual teachings of the church. Th Church has always taught to teach us LGBT people with love and respect. It is only extreme activists who think the only way to treat us with respect is to change your position on same-sex marriage, which the Church will never do.

BTW, to all those who think the church will never ordain gay bishops, I hate to break it to you, but they have been doing that for years. They do require gay bishops to remain faithful to their wives, just like straight ones, but there are gay bishops who are able to accomplish that.

Anonymous

to --- Now enter the government | 12:12 a.m

["and establishes a new protected class of citizen "the homosexual class". "]

how is that? i don't get it. the new law covers sexual orientation. everyone has one. no one is protected any more than anyone else...

did you even know you have a sexual orientation? or do you just take it for granted?

["the freedom to chose who you employ and who you rent to is taken away by a dictatorial town government with the support of its largest institution"]

you haven't been free to chose who you employ or rent to since the 70s. or have you forgotten EEO and the other non-discriminatory laws?

if you want to pick who to hire and rent to based on your bigotry, don't rent or hire anyone.

Loss of Freedom

As a member of the LDS church, if a private citizen or business chooses not to associate with me because of my "Mormonism" then that is their right and, although I think they are jerks because of their bigotry, I will defend their right to choose how they live their lives and conduct their business.

Living outside of Utah I ran into bigoted people who, upon discovery of my religious association, treated me and my children with contempt and discrimination. Our response? Deal with it. Life is full of people who are jerks including homosexual business owners and renters who will not hire Mormons, Republicans, Catholics, etc. They have the freedom to do so, just as I have the freedom to not spend my money at their business or rent from them.

Utahns are way too apologetic for their conservative leanings. Live in a liberal state for a year and you will understand just how hypocritical the leftist special interest groups are when they are in the majority.

I would have ZERO hesitation renting to a homosexual. But why should I tell my neighbor who to rent to? Continued erosion of freedom for all involved.

to -- Soldier | 5:02 a.m

["I am still baking on it but do not see the need to have even had a spokesperson make a statement about it. I am not all seeing or knowing either but seek out enlightenment whenever I can. "]

you don't understand why they did this? really? give it some thought, soldierboy. it is so they can say "look - see - we don't hate gays. we want good things for them - see how we look out for their well-being? we just don't want them to have the same things we have, such as marriage. They're just too... different". so now you understand why the church spoke out on this? they're looking for brownie-points.

but you as a soldier should know the basic tenet of the military... one "aw shoot" wipes out 100 "attaboys". (cleaned it up a bit but you get my meaning....) so if they think this buys them much they are probably wrong.

Thomas Ubouroff, Glendale

I hope that people in the church stand up and show there concern about this. People make up the church, and I for one will make my disgust for this decision known. Who is with me, brothers and sisters, who is with me??????????????

to comment

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