Comments about ‘Protections for gays face tough fight at Utah Legislature’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 12 2009 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended

"And for the record, marriage is defined as the unifying of elements. It's origin is Maritus, Latin for conjugal - To unite. No where is there reference to the sex of the elements being united."

1. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of marriage: conjugal vows.
2. pertaining to the relation of husband and wife.
1535—45; < L conjugālis, equiv. to con- con- + jug(um) yoke + -ālis -al 1

hate the sin?

do you like this: hate Mormonism, love Mormons? Save them and heal them from their folly, etc.


Gayle Ruzicka is worse than Gladys Kravitz. She's like Wilma Flintstone's annoying, bigoted neighbor that tested poorly to audiences.

Who defined it?

To Re:CloseMinded-- where did you get the definition from? Man-yes, man defined it. Who ultimately defined the "sex of the elements united"-- God. I love how everyone today changes man's laws to fit their needs and to make them feel better about their incorrect actions and the immoral consequences. At the end of the day, homosexuality is wrong- God said so. But someone shouldn't be discriminated against when renting. Some Utahans are a little dumb and close minded.


It's ok for guys to "sleep" around and father many childern, it legal. Just don't marry more that one woman at a time and care for those cildern, you will go to jail.

Segregation laws.

Talk about discrimination, segregating and writing laws to protect gays is just as bad as writing a law to protect and promote an individual religion.

The homosexuals already have the same rights as every other american and there is no need to alter our Constitution and rights just to protect the choices these misfits have created.

The only reason the LDS and minority groups like such a law is as ammunition to stop americans from telling illegals to go home and get out of this country. It's a protectionist law where we cannot protect our rights and freedoms and our country.

We americans do have the right to discriminate and voice that discrimination from any and all individuals or nationalities. Government or individuals do not have the right to infringe upon these rights, especially in our thoughts and ideas.

We don't need anti-discrimination laws, we need laws reinforcing our god given and constitutional rights. What Utah needs is its own labor laws that address the issues, not constitutional laws that deprive us of our rights of free speech and choices. Utah has gone long enough without its own labor laws, federal laws are too vague.

Protection laws are needed

I was listening to Bob Lonsbery this morning, he said there should be no protected classes. I wish I could send him back to the days when LDS were persecuted, or I wish I could turn him into a black or hispanic person.

Then when opportunities were denied to him or when he suffered discrimination, he would either have the choice of availing himself of the laws that specifically protect classes of people or he would have to suffer the loss of opportunity.

My parents back in the late 1950's were denied to rent several apartments, based on race. My dad tells of how when he went to resturants they refused to serve him.

It should not be up to the business owner or the renter of the apartment to make their own decisions in such matters. It unjustly impacts the life of people too severely. Laws that target classes for protection are needed.

If you don't like such laws, act in a manner so that these laws are un-necessary.

Amazing Ingorance of Facts

Please follow the example of your church and learn a little compassion for your fellow human beings.

It is shocking, the level of ignorance around the facts found here concerning civil rights for Heterosexuals and Homosexuals as well as our Gay & Lesbians family members.

It is a waste of time trying to educate some, who just want to believe lies and wallow in their self-pity and personal prejudice.

If this is in fact true, the LDS Church has its work cut out for it, trying to convince many of its members to actually treat our Gay & Lesbian friends and family members with respect.


TO: TO MARK: Would you point out to me when women were given the priesthood? It must have happened due to political pressure. I just can't figure out when it was.

Giving blacks the priesthood was always prophesied. We all knew it would happen at some time. No such prophesy exists for women or gays.


I hear that Senator Chris Buttars is thinking of being a co-sponsor of the bill. That should give it some credence.


As a property owner I should have the right to control my property. If I want to discriminate against anyone, it is my right. As an employer I should be able to choose what employees I want.


to the comment of Nothing change...we as gay people are sick and tired of it too...when rights are given then this would be over. Nothing change it sounds like you got some problems with life.


It now seems clear that the Church approved of the SLC ordinance because it explicitly exempted corporate religion from its effects. The Church apparently felt that those who also want to protect the personal religion of individuals could fend for themselves. While protecting the latter wasn't a top priority for SLC lawmakers, I think it will be a priority for state lawmakers.

Dixie Dan

Wrong, property owners can not protest their property! The Conservative Supreme Court took care of that when they ruled that local government can take your property through eminent domain. Too bad the Conservatives gave away this valuable principle of owning property.

Get with the times Mister

re Bob | 8:03 a.m. Nov. 12, 2009

"As a property owner I should have the right to control my property. If I want to discriminate against anyone, it is my right".

So says who? Not the law. Don't believe this? Try owning a resturant or an apartment and discriminating on the basis of race? You will likely find that the person you discriminated against will become the new owner of your resturant or apartment, either that our your retirement nest egg will be depleted to pay for the judgement that will be levied against you.

And rightfully so. Such practices are from a bygone era, society no longer tolerates such dispicable behavior.

Kevin in Nevada

Evolution must be real, because I'm seeing a lot of it right here on this thread.

From this straight guy, married (to one fine woman) over 25 years, here's my take. So far as I can tell we are either born straight or gay or somewhere in between. Our orientations are not something we choose, it's something innate within each one of us. Many people hold views on this which are contrary to fact, believing that sexual orientation is a 'lifestyle choice'. It is not.

I also know - and everyone reading this knows such cases - that people who live in denial of this central fact in their lives wallow in guilt, confusion and pain. The only happy gay people I know are thoroughly out of the closet, to themselves, their family and the world at large.

Good luck dealing with this issue. Social attitudes - especially when backed by religious prescriptions - can be the very devil to deal with, when they conflict with reality.

From outside the LDS, I add one thing: yours is a church designed to evolve, superior in this regard to any other I've seen. So good luck to you.


Homosexuality is defined as a BEHAVIOR, not a genetic trait. The Church, in supporting legislation protecting homosexuals, is actually supporting an immoral behavior, as defined in the Bible.

Church policy does not discriminate against those that are attracted to members of the same sex. These men and women can attend church, hold callings, and get temple recommends. It is acting on those behaviors that is offensive.

I am truly disappointed in the Church's stand on this issue.


What is "flaunting the gay lifestyle?"

Are ya kiddin'

Civil Union=Marriage?
Ha, I don't believe so.

Yes you do have the right to control your property but not discriminate. The way some of you people sound makes it seem like you also probably think everyone is crazy for not having black slaves and that everyone is so weird because we have women voting.

Haha. It's all a matter of time. Read your history books.

Thomas K.

Slight correction to the article, Representative Jackie Biskupski ran a common ground bill for about half a second. The first and only bill ever run by her for the benefit of homosexuals. She is more vested in the protections of the insurance industry than the homosexual community. She was not in attendance at the City Council meeting and I for one, cannot estimate why she continues to hold office.

to comment

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