Comments about ‘Prop 8 trial witness: Being gay not a choice’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 22 2010 12:03 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Vince

Trowe,

Churches can and do follow ecclesiastical protocol as to whom they will marry. Churches have had this tradition for right and it is in effect theirs.

The churches that do effect same-sex marriages do so on their own accord - no one compels them to do so.

There is no spin here, there are a great number of examples where churches do deny people the right to marry.

Example:

In the Church, bishops can deny a temple marriage is one or both of the partners is not temple recommend holder.

Bishops can and do deny a civil right marriage in a church building.

There are other examples with other churches and how they follow their protocol, but you see my point....

No one can turn around and sue a church because a marriage was denied therein.

Vince

"Homosexuality is unnatural"

Heterosexuality is unnatural to those people that are gay and who are, through social, political, family, and religious pressure are made to conform to something that they are not.

I am not saying it is bad.

Heterosexuality is good, wholesome and great for heterosexuals.

But for gays.... if it is not meant to be it is not meant to be.

Christy

"anyone that wants a ceremony in church, go ahead. do your thing!! just don't call it marriage. have a nice "religious union" at your church. just stop calling it marriage."

I don't understand this. WHY NOT call it marriage? I don't understand what the big deal is. How does it negatively affect your life, your marriage, if a committed gay couple marries for life? Marriage isn't about replenishing the earth, because people can and do have children whether they're married or not. Rather, it's about making a life long commitment to the one you love, in front of everyone you love, and society recognizes this commitment.
Where's the uproar over people who get married and divorced, married and divorced, married and divorced, leaving disaster in their wake? Is that ok, simply because they are 'replenishing' the earth as they go??

And no, no one's trying to 'stop the reproduction of man'.

And can someone tell me what is a 'petifile'??

Oregon

France has removed the legal term 'marriage' and issues 'civil union licenses' to any two consenting adults. People are then free to take this license and have a civil union ceremony or a marriage, whatever there own beliefs are. Churches are free to dictate who qualifies to be married in their religion.
Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me.

Actually Oregon

All marriages in France are civil marriages and must be performed by a civil authority.

Religious ceremonies are not valid in and of themselves but are optional for those who want one.

Religious ceremonies must be performed after the civil ceremony. They can be on the same day, but do not need to be.

re: southern baptist grandmother

"God made all people, therefore he made homosexuals". God does NOT make homosexuals and if you believe this way then you must accept the notion that God is setting people up for failure. Why would God make people gay and then make homosexuality a sin? Not a very merciful and loving God if you ask me. People are most likely born gay due to whatever genetic or dna explanations. God loves all people gay and straight and he has asked us to do the same, "As i have loved you, love one another". Maybe loving one another and not judging is the only way we as a society will ever coexist in peace.

Pagan

'Marriage is about creating a family by bringing together a man and a woman.' (or a 'family') - 5:22 p.m.

NY, I'm going to disagree with you. Half of marriages end in divorce. Of those, 40% of all children in the US are being raised by a single-parent. Also, children are never a requirement for marriage. Where is that on yours or anyone else's marraige certificate? I'd like to see it.

'Let's legalize civil unions and be done with it.'

Civil unions are already leagal in the US. However, the onese that exist do not offer the same or EQUAL rights of regular marriage. My example? CA domestic partners.

Rights with CA domestic partners - 1100.
Rights with CA marriage - 1138

So this is less than, not equal too marriage. Also segragation failed in America. (Black and white schools, etc) Why would civil unions only be ok for gay people and not straight people?

However, some think only gay people should settle for less. And that it's ok to ask something for someone else you wouldn't do yourself.

Laughable

I just don't see how anyone capable of rational thought can buy into the idea that leading a gay lifestyle is not a choice. The notion is so absurd that I can't believe there is a discussion on the subject. Deep down I think most people can see the lie but just want some way to validate their immoral choices.

Christy

Hey laughable - explain to me what you mean by 'gay lifestyle'.

re --- Laughable | 8:40 a.m

["I just don't see how anyone capable of rational thought can buy into the idea that leading a gay lifestyle is not a choice."]

and I don't see how any one with rational thought can think it IS a choice. tell me, laughing-boy - why would anyone want to purposely put themselves in the position of ridicule and abuse on purpose?

and it doesn't matter if it is a choice or not. explain why that matters?

["Deep down I think most people can see the lie but just want some way to validate their immoral choices."]

"immoral choices"? oh, come on, laughing-boy - did you really say "immoral"? so you're on of those religious zealots that thinks because you read it in a book that it is "immoral"? where's your indignation with the 3%-4% of the entire animal kingdom that is gay?

you crack me up that you would think that it is "immoral" when it harms absolutely NO ONE. have you ever noticed that truly "immoral" things (and ilegal things) always have a victim?

who is the victim in gay marriage, laughing-boy? there isn't one. it's only "immoral" to you.

Pagan

'Deep down I think most people can see the lie but just want some way to validate their immoral choices.' - 8:40 a.m.

Few problems with this statement.

1) It is based on zero facts. All opinion. 'I think', 'immoral choices', etc.
2) Laughable, what makes you morally superior to another? What makes you, or any religion for that matter, superior to others? Are we all not Gods children?

If I followed this logic, it would sound something like:

'Laughable is immoral. As such, he/she should have less rights than myself. Everyone with the letter 'p' in their name are an abomination under god. If we left Laughable on an island he/she could no pro-create. Therefore it is against nature and against God. It says so in a book of fiction called Harry Potter.'

All faulty logic and opinion. And your opinion is not enough to deny a person's right to happiness in this country.

If you have the ability to marry, why would you work to deny that to others?

Do not covet something that was given to you freely.

gay people can and do marry

What this is about is forcing others to accept deviancy.

If a guy wants to have the same benefits as a man that marries a woman, he has to marry a woman. If he marries a man and throws a tantrum that it's "the same" no reasonable person is going to listen to that any more than someone that claims that Darwinian theories are hateful because they indicate that heterosexual behavior is superior to homosexual behavior, therefore hate science! It's absolutely ridiculous.

A compassionate society would provide counseling for people that struggle with same-sex attraction, not condone and promote homosexual lifestyles.

Anonymous

re -- gay people can and do marry | 10:10 a.m

["What this is about is forcing others to accept deviancy."]

but we DO accept you. even though you're a deviant religious zealot, we totally accept you. So why wouldn't you accept non-deviant behavior (like same-sex marriage)?

["If a guy wants to have the same benefits as a man that marries a woman, he has to marry a woman"]

wow. so now you make the rules? are you being even more deviant by telling everyone what to do?

["A compassionate society would provide counseling for people that struggle with same-sex attraction, not condone and promote homosexual lifestyles."]

and a compassionate society will counsel people that believe in fairy tales, rather than let them make a fool of themselves. We certainly will provide you counseling to help you with your deviant lifestyle. it's ok, religion-boy

["If he marries a man and throws a tantrum that it's "the same" no reasonable person is going to listen to that"]

and if a religious zealot throws a tantrum because he doesn't understand that it IS the same, then no reasonable person is going to listen.

Anonymous

re -- gay people can and do marry | 10:10 a.m.

"What this is about is forcing others to accept deviancy."

did you know that more people in the world think being mormon is "deviant" than people think gay is "deviant"?

Pagan

'A compassionate society would provide counseling for people that struggle with same-sex attraction...' - 10:10 a.m.

You are so blind.

Brigham Young University attempted aversion therapy in the 1970's. They concluded that attempts at re-orientation are harmful. As such the LDS church no longer encourages people to try and change their orientation.

And yet gay people 'should' marry a straight person to get the rights of marriage?

How is allowing gay marraige promoting homosexuals? I thought they couldn't pro-create? Your idea of 'compassion' and love is skewed, if you cannot see that a long-term monogomys commitment to one person should be the end result of a relationship.

Not to the person of YOUR choice, ignoring they're own.

If I am a gay man and I ONLY have an option to marry a straight woman...

then for it to be comparable...

if your a straight man you should only be able to marry a gay man.

If it is your mission to remove a persons sexuality from their own marriage begin with your own.

Not someone else's.

Anonymous

10:10 a.m. - What this is about is forcing others to accept deviancy.

I always find it entertaining when people talk about deviancy or imorallity while talking about a marriage that they are NOT a part of.

Facts

The American Psychological Association has over 15,000 members. A study they released declared that attempts at ‘re-orientation’ are ‘harmful’ and less than 1% effective. (08/10/09)

BYU 'Aversion Therapy' programs (we won't go into specifics) done in the 1970's coincides with this report.

One of these participants was Don Harryman, who shared his experience in 'Peculiar People: Mormons and Same-Sex Orientation.'

As such, the LDS church's official stance is to NO LONGER encourage those who are gay to marry a person of the opposite gender in hopes that it will 'go away.'

Aversion therapy fell out of popularity and in 1994, the American Medical Association issued a report that stated "aversion therapy is no longer recommended for gay men and lesbians."

The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from it's list's of mental disorders in 1978. Even communist China removed it in 2001.

Bottom line, if being gay is a 'choice' it is still a better alternative than to marry someone and ruin both your lives based on the lie that is another person's idea of what is 'normal.'

Deviance in eye of beholder

"did you know that more people in the world think being mormon is "deviant" than people think gay is "deviant"?"

This reminds me of the line by Harper in Angels in America:

Harper (a Mormon married to a homosexual) says: "In my church we don't believe in homosexuals.

Person to whom she is talking replies: "In my church we don't believe in Mormons."

Anonymous

"In my church we don't believe in homosexuals." - 12:33 p.m.

I realize this is a quote from Angels in America but did anyone else notice how creepily this is similar to this quote:

'There are no homosexuals in my country.' - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - leader of Iran.

Trowe

Vince | 12:57 p.m. Jan. 24, 2010

This is the second time I posted this, the first time it didn't go through.

Vince, my point was not that people would sue the churches, but that they would sue the goverment to overthrow the law which prohibits their church from performing marriages in the way they want to. Certainly churches will continue to practice their religion however they want, but the state will not be allowed to pick and choose which beliefs are valid. As I've said, let the churches be in the marriage business for religious purposes, but have the legal ceremony be performed by the state.

to comment

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