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
Nat Whilk

Midwest Member wrote: "When you open a business that serves the public, the public is who you must serve."

Tell that to the screeners at fancy discotheques. You're permitted to discriminate against customers and job candidates for all sorts of reasons including (Justice Scalia's favorite example) if you don't like the way they comb their hair. The exceptions are the specially-protected classes the government chooses to designate.


So, the toddler has taken a first step. Perhaps someday he will be able to run, or even ride a bike.


Oh good! I am a gay male and I am going right downtown to apply at temple square!


How come the gay and lesbian community welcomes the church getting involved in politics when it benefits them, but vandalized their churches and screams it's wrong for the church to get involved in issues that oppose them? You can't have it both ways.


When Utah has statewide non discrimination policy in employment and housing, then you will have joined most other states...in THIS century. Midwest and Eastern states passed statewide ENDAs in the eighties.

So while this is a baby step, don't pat yourselves on the back too hard, as if you just ran the MARATHON.

To The Facts

Why did the law of Moses end if there weren't supposed to be any changes? In fact, some people still live as if there was no change from the Law of Moses. Doesn't every prophet back to Adam receive what the Lord wants the poeople at the time to do? Read those revelations and you will know that they did not change until instructed by the Lord. Look at those that did not change from polygamy or even King David who went beyond what he was instructed and how have they turned out. If you don't believe in modern day prophets, then it wouldn't matter to you anyways. The main problem in society today is promiscuousness. If people cannot keep themselves chaste-especially those that are not gay, then why wouldn't others w/o an understanding or belief in chastity think otherwise?

Defender of Words

To "True@10:41 a.m. You ask who cares if Gay couples get married. I care. It is not an issue of rights, it is an issue of definitions. Give gay couples all the rights of "Married" couples, but dont call it marriage. Make up a new word, like "Egairrm" and give all rights and prilages as hetrosexual "married" couples get. If we change definitions, what is to stop us from calling a Liberal a Conservative just because we don't like the liberal or conservative label. Better yet, I like "dogs" better than "cats" so I think I will start calling cats dogs then maybe I will like them better. Also, the word "Gay" has already been destroyed from its original definition.


Every human being has the right to choose to obey the laws of God or not obey them. Also you must understand that God cannot break the laws of justice and mercy. Repentance would be meaningless unless there were an eternal punishment in place for the unrepentant. If there were no law, then men would be free to sin without consequences. God's can not forgive unless one repents. It would go against His eternal laws to do so. With every law given a punishment is affixed and repentance granted. The law of mercy can claim the sinner (we all sin)who repents because Christ paid the penalty for sin required by the law of justice. Otherwise justice would claim the sinner and execute the law of punishment. Without punishment for breaking God's laws, God would cease to be God. God is only forgiving if one repent or God would be breaking His own laws.


The best thing the LDS Church has done in my lifetime. Single best. Thank you


I'm glad that the church is openly supporting non-discrimination in housing and employment. When society is unwilling to treat people fairly because of a difference of opinion, those people should be protected by law. I am also glad for Elder Oaks talk several weeks ago about religious freedoms being threatened. I felt like that helped clarified why the LDS church supports only marriage between a man and a woman. The problem is not about decaying values or morality: it is when the law forces religious institutions to recognize those values or morality as acceptable. Right now, catholic church priests can choose whether or not to marry a couple based on if they live up to certain standards, just the same way the LDS church can. Legally sanctioning gay marriage, in combination with discrimination legislation forcing everyone to bow to the same standard with regard to beliefs, it is only a matter of time before a civil suit against an LDS bishop, a catholic priest or a a pastor forces them to legally marry and recognize a couple who does not live by the standards they believe. We have to protect human rights and religious beliefs together.

As an LGBT rights activist

I am thrilled to be standing shoulder to shoulder with the LDS church on this issue. There are so many areas such as this where we agree! Let's work on those and leave the others to rest for a while, Let's make sure all God's children are respected and protected from discrimination and have the rights they need to manage their affairs. Sure We'll disagree on the boarderlands of our ideologies, but in the center, there is much we can cooperate on. Thanks to the LDS Church for speaking up for what is right, even when (as is obvious from comments here) it may not be popular or advisable or may be misconstrued as being solely for PR. This allows the LGBT community their first glimpse of the compassion of the LDS church as opposed to their view of it as a frightening institution that wants to strip their rights.

re: @Corey

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

People with homosexual tendencies don't have to be celibate to participate in the church or live a sexually fulfilling life. They CAN be married to people of the opposite sex and fully enjoy sexuality and church membership. It's up to them.


"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 you are an employer, you had better document all reviews, warnings and citations. As an employer myself, my philosophy is: An employee should NEVER be shocked that they have been fired.

If they are not gay, they surely have a gender, religion, age, or race. All could be used against you IF you do not document!

To: MikeD

So, it's ok to you if churches choose who they associate with? I'm so glad I don't go to your church.

And employers and landlords are not restricted in who they associate with.

Pull. Your. Head. Out.


This is not fair to Landlords or employers. If I own an apartment complex I should not be forced to accept homosexuals any more than I should be forced to accept Skin Head Nazi's. Homosexuals usually bring with them all sorts of baggage such as drug abuse and sexual debauchery. I guess I could say "LDS Members ONLY" but that would probably bring a law suit as well. Employers also are getting jacked around here being forced to consider gays for employment. I have worked with gays and other sex-change type folks and they create a very hostile and unwelcome work environment for sure. I guess Employers will have to ask other probing questions regarding the persons family to determine if they are gay or not. Very touchy subject to dance around without getting sued.

@Nat Whilk

If you're TBM, you have no business trying to get into "fancy discotheques," even as your use of the term 'discotheque' suggests you must be pretty old and old-fashioned (my college-aged kids have gay friends and all are welcome in our home, including openly gay Mormons who had to run away from home, right here in SLC!).

Being gay is like being left-handed, it is a natural difference that has existed throughout human history. Nobody chooses to go through life mocked, teased, and often beaten the way my brother was at BYU in the 80s. Gay Mormons struggle mightily with the rejection by the family and Church.

I applaud the LDS for coming to its senses and abandoning hate in favor of love.


I have to totally disagree with the church on this. It makes no sense to me. The only thing I can think is that they caved under the enormous pressure or something else we don't even know about is coming down the road.


"And, again, where does this put the Church on the military's hiring policy?"

Why would the church have an opinion about who the military hires?

"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?"

There is no open sexuality of any kind allowed in the military.

Gays are still under the DADT policy and cannot admit to their orientation without discharge. But that will change. Too many people in the military (excepting the top brass) know gay service members who are outstanding soldiers and team members.

They used to segregate the blacks from the whites in the military because it would hurt morale. They learned that it was not a problem.

Britian and Australia have openly gay service members and have no problem with it. I think that America needs to rise to the challenge.

@anonymous 12:11

Repeating a lie does make it true, no matter how often you repeat the lie. The Constitution guarantees that the LDS will never have to officiate gay marriage if it doesn't want to. In Canada where gay marriage has been legal for years nobody has every sued the LDS. Maybe you don't like gay people, perhaps for your own psychological complications, but that's no excuse for lying on a Church-owned website.

re awesome!!!

even better than all the food and clothing they give to those that would die without it? Good call, selfish thinking on your part.

to comment

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