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

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended

All this is going to do is reinforce contention. It's like feeding the stray dog. He'll quit threatening you for while until he gets hungry again.

It won't be very long before the homosexual lifestyle supporters will be whining and complaining about something else.

terra forma

So Michael, if the corner drug store won't sell candy to your kids because they're Mormon, but they'll sell candy to the Catholic kids in the same moment, you're okay with that?

@will anyone reciprocate?

your church should be free teach whatever they choose and I should be allowed to teach why i think they are wrong further when our paths cross on public debate and you choose to make your religion central to your argument I have right to question the religious tenants you base your arguments on.


First off it wasn't a representative of the Republican Party who stood up and made the endorsement, it was an LDS representative.

If this hadn't been such an immediate "out of the blue" COMPLETE flip flop by Mormons to gays/lesbians it wouldn't be newsworthy. Other cities made these non discrimination laws DECADES ago.
A year ago we couldn't get hospital visitations for our partners, and your LDS mall goons were knocking a same sex couple to the ground and handcuffing them for being arm in arm.
So we are suspicious, and that suspicion you brought on yourselves...OWN THAT.


"That is interesting, it seems that it has changed before, the matter of Black Men holding the priesthood."

There is a difference here in our doctrine. God can restrict who has the priesthood, but he has eternally set the outer bounds of who can hold it. There was a time when no one out of the tribe of Levi could hold the priesthood. That was lifted. Certain groups will never be allowed (Women, Gays*, Non-members). The issue with the blacks was very political, but mostly doctrinal. If the church were to allow blacks to hold the priesthood too early, then there would have been bigger problems in the Civil Rights era. It was an effective way for the church to stay somewhat neutral in the whole argument.

how may I ask have it's doctrines been assailed?

The church is based on the current foundation of marriage. If the definition changes, it effects all the other doctrines built on it. Why can't they just support traditional marriage and end it there? There is already enough confusion about LDS doctrine among non-members. It would hurt the church mission to add more confusion.

To Christa Jeanne

What if, just WHAT IF, my daughter who is gay, WAS born that way?? And what of all our young LDS gay members who take their own lives?? Watching the agony my daughter experienced, seeing gay members end their lives, watching gays marry heterosexually, then divorce time after time?? Does that sound like a CHOICE??

Just WHAT IF that IS who they are, not just what they DO??


to explain my * on gay.

The word gay is ambiguous.

It can mean.

1. A person with homosexual tendencies may or may not act on those tendencies.

2. A person who is sexually active with another member of the same gender.

3. A person who is sexually attracted to the same gender but is in a heterosexual relationship.

Gays of the first type may hold the priesthood as long as they are celebate.

Gays of the third type may hold the priesthood and even be bishop.

Gays of the second type are the type that will never hold the priesthood because those Gays (if unrepentant) will be excommunicated from the church and thus group them with non-members.

@Gregg 10:07

"help not compassion"? You must be the new Shakespeare of English language!


For all those who wanted to deny Utah was a theocracy. Notice when the LDS church backed the ordinance, it could change in a nano second.

Utah is totally controlled by Mormons.

The Deuce

Again, instead of resolving the issue we continue to fight about the meaning of a word. When will we get on with fixing the real issue and quit fighting about nothing. In this world we have so many more important issues than this. This is easy to fix. Yes, gays/lesbian couples need Federal rights for civil unions/domestic partnerships that provide them the same legal rights to protect them as everyone else. Fix this and quit fighting about the word marriage. All of these words define the type of individuals that make up the union. No one is better or worse than the other. It simply defines who we are talking about. Can someone explain to me why we cannot or will not resolve this issue. My proposal is simple, straight forward and addresses all of the issues. If the agenda of the gay/lesbian group is something other than this then clarify this so that we can address it. I am sick of this issue. Either fix it or get out of town.

To Lawyer

I don't care if your a lawyer or not. The government does not have the right to tell me who I can hire and fire but the forcefully do so anyway. How can you regulate this ordinance? If I fired a gay person because he is a bad employee how can I prove I didn't fire him because he is gay? If a gay person owned a business I would totally support him if he didn't hire straight people because he doesn't like them. It would be his right since is his company. All this does is make it next to impossible to fire a bad employee.


There are 7 Countries in the World that Same-Sex Marriage is Legal, there a dozens that Civil Union or Domestic Partnership is Legal, there are a lot of Cities and Communities that have protection for Gays, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender People..... and you know what, those numbers are Growing and Growing and Growing.....EQUALITY IS HERE TO STAY!


I never thought the church would cower to political pressure. Another decline of the church in these latter days.

Kirk R.

This is great news! To all of the nay sayers. Accept this at face value. The LDS church is supporting fairness and kindness.


This just stinks of self protection. The Church is obviously bracing for the finding that will be published with the Prop. 8 proposition. I can believe members would think anything otherwise. Nieve to say the least.

To Dear "Stunned"

I specifically referred to the paid employees of the Boy Scouts, so your comments about it being a volunteer organization are irrelevant. Why should it get to discriminate against homosexuals in the hiring of its paid employees if SLC businesses can't?

And, again, where does this put the Church on the military's hiring policy? If the military is allowed to decide that open homosexuality is detrimental to its mission and therefore should be a disqualifier for hiring, why shouldn't SLC businesses be given the same privilege?

Re Greg 10:07

"A big step back for the church. I can not sit back and have this spoon fed to me as revelation. We should have stuck to our guns. These people need help not compassion! "

Good bye then, be seeing ya. Most Church members will accept this.

(Most of us who live outside Utah always suspected that the hard-core right-wing members of the Church would eventually find their way out of the Church when they became too conservative for the Church.)

Food for Thought

I wonder if the LDS Church Public Relations Department will, in hindsight, wished they would have remained silent in supporting this city ordinance when they find that their church built-condos in their own backyard across from Temple Square later become a predominantly gay enclave?


A sad day in Utah. The Church should have stuck to thier guns. It certainly shows a weakness that we are becoming 'in the world.'

small step, giant leap

OVer 20 years ago my husband and I left the Church because of the way my gay brother was treated at BYU: my brother was beaten and left to bleed on the street and BYU said it was his own fault and kicked him out. I understood then that LDS "Family values" are not what they claim to be, and have raised my children in the Unitarian Church, where all are welcome and loved.

Too bad my brother had to wait 20 years for the Church to slowly and timidly come to it's senses.

to comment

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