Quantcast

Comments about ‘Calif. gay marriage argument heard, compared to interracial marriage ban’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 26 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Every child has the right to a father and a mother.

morpunkt
Glendora, CA

This subject defines the media's obsession.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ Tekakaromatagi

"Every child has the right to a father and a mother."

Every child is conceived by the intervention of a male and a female. Yet, I can assure you that gays are not kidnapping children.

Most LGBT parents become parents of children who were conceived but have "no parents". May be because the conceivers, were dead, not able or not willing to take care of the children.

LGBT people some time conceive babies with the help of surrogate.

Today I read an article in the Washington Post. This lesbian mother who has teen children made the observation, that her children really don't care about their parents being gay. They just fume that gay parents are as uncool as straight parents, demanding homeworks done on time, chores, and other bothersome things that parents demand.

My dear Tekakamoratagi, perhaps you could lead a research and qwuestion a large number of children being raised by LGBT. You may ask them about their feelings about their parents.

You could also be cruel and ask them, what would be of them if they were not had been adopted by their parents. No! forget that! You may continue living in your bubble

DanO
Mission Viejo, CA

And Tekakaromatagi, the falseness of that assertion is that keeping marriage benefits away from gay and lesbians does nothing to further that goal. Procreation isn't hindered by lack of marriage. Children deserve to be raised in families where they have the protection and their parents the rights, responsibilities, and benefits of marriage.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Tekakaromatagi
So my sister and I should've been taken away from our parents because they divorced? We live in a state where a gay individual (or any individual) can adopt children if they're single but not a gay couple? Sure doesn't seem to put a lot of value on children needing a father and mother if that's how things are.

Plus... you all repeatedly say that two men or two women alone cannot physically make a child. So the point about children is completely irrelevent. You should be opposing gay adoption, not gay marriage if that's your concern (though of course I already noted how our adoption laws make that idea ridiculous as well).

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

@alt134,

"So my sister and I should've been taekn away from our parents because they divorced"

No.

You still had a father and a mother right?

I know you were attempting to trap Tekakaromatagi in his words, but you failed.

He says every kid should have the right to a father and a mother.

You still had those, after they divorced.

LOL!

patriot
Cedar Hills, UT

liberals are all about choice so long as your choice agrees with their choice... otherwise they use their activist judges to overturn the voice of the people... so much for democracy.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

@patriot

So the majority should run roughshod over the minority no matter what? The minority has no rights so long as they remain the minority?

Contrarius
Lebanon, TN

@Tekakaromatagi --

"Every child has the right to a father and a mother."

Are you going to ban divorce? Are you going to ban women having babies out of wedlock? Otherwise, your statement has no bearing on this case.

@Chris B --

"You still had those, after they divorced."

If you're going to look at it from the biological perspective -- as opposed to the perspective of family stability -- then EVERY child has a father and mother, whether they are raised by a gay couple or a straight one.

Gay marriages **encourage** family stability. Stability and love are the most important components for successfully raising children. Therefore, people who are concerned about children should be fighting FOR gay marriages, not against them.

GiuseppeG
Murray, Utah

Hmmmm....so the question I have for supporters of gay marriage is if you believe love is love and marriage shouldn't be constrained to what has been the traditional definition of marriage in the U.S. (1 man, 1 woman), how do you feel about other such relationships and barriers? Polygamy, Age limitations, familial relationships, etc. Are you okay with breaking down those types of barriers as well or are the barriers around those types of relationships different to you? And if so, why?

Contrarius
Lebanon, TN

@patriot --

" so much for democracy."

You seem to be forgetting that this country is a CONSTITUTIONAL democracy. That means that popular opinion is tempered by constitutional law. And that's exactly what the Supreme Court is there for -- to make sure that mob rule doesn't run roughshod over the rights of the citizens.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ Patriot
You wrote: "liberals are all about choice so long as your choice agrees with their choice... otherwise they use their activist judges to overturn the voice of the people..."

Judges Scalia and Thomas come to mind.

Tators
Hyrum, UT

This article states that more people in America are now "supporting" gay marriage. It would be more accurate to state that more people are tolerating it... not supporting it. And even then, the wording of any survey can effect the response received.

As it is, the majority of America is still made up of believing Christians. The Bible states very plainly that homosexuality is immoral, an abomination and against nature (see Leviticus 20:13, Roman 1:26-27). It also stated that in later times (as in now), people would often call bad good, and good bad. That seems to be exactly what is happening now.

Homosexual advocates like to say that the Bible says we should love everyone. However, that doesn't mean we should love and condone their conduct... especially when it goes against what God has so plainly stated. We can still love the sinner, but hate the sin.

Current advocators think they are so full of wisdom in trying to get society to change and accept their liberal ideas instead of traditional morality of every major religion on earth. Concerning that, the Bible also addresses that in stating that "The wisdom of man is foolishness unto God."

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

What church mistakenly got involved in this political mess?

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

GiuseppeG

Polygamy has traditionally been abusive to women and children, If it was between consenting adults, I have no problem with it. There are other laws that would have to be adjusted (ss benefits, inheritance, etc.) but not impossible.

Age limitations need not change. A child cannot consent to a contract (that is what marriage is, btw), but their parents can. It should remain the same with their parents guiding them.

Family relations has potential harm with the children of the relationship ending up with birth defects, etc. Look at the inbreeding in the polygamous communities to see what happens when families are too close.

Laws are put in place to protect. If you are going to limit someones freedom to do as they please, there better be a reason (harm) that you can show.

Can you show me the harm caused by allow gay couples to wed?

Vince here
San Diego, CA

Tators,

What Bible verse are you quoting from, exactly, when you say, "love the sinner, hate the sin?"

About the argument of "every child deserves a father and a mother."

The wording of Prop 8 is not about "having every child have a father and a mother." Where are you getting the background to make that argument?

Well, it comes from the way opponents of equality are fabricating the argument to suit into something that it is not. By lumping the fatherloss or motherless argument into the debate they miss the target and instead try to pin the argument into some vague notion of traditional values. Moreover, if traditional values were at stake, an amendment to guarantee that every child have a father and a mother would have been introduced decades ago, before children growing up today, half of them, in a household where their parents are divorced.

At that, thousands of children in foster care go unadopted and yet, they argue "every child deserves a mother and a father." So foster care is better?

With LGBT families, just for the record, every child is planned and wanted.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

"We can still love the sinner, but hate the sin."

Please, Tators, tell me how you do that. Are you in touch with gays and helping them to get rid of their "sins?" Or is showing love making them live the way that you believe by passing laws that will not affect you or your family, but definately affect these gay couples? How exactly do you show your love.

Everytime I hear someone say that they can love the sinner, I have yet to hear exactly how to do that. I think most just think that if they are not being mean it means they are being loving. It doesn't in my book. You really need to feel love for the most flamboyant gay - and not repulsion - to live that law. Pretty hard to do. Especially since one would then want that person that they feel this love for to have all the rights and privileges that every American citizen enjoys, per our constitution.

How do you do it, Tators?

Vince here
San Diego, CA

GiuseppeG

Heterosexual communities have traditionally endorsed plural marriages, marriages where the age has been lowered, marriages within families (i.e. second cousins, etc. - in fact, several states still allow for second-cousins to marry).

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

The worst conservatives were against interracial marriages as well.
Gay marriage will happen at some point and in another generation nobody will care. It's not going to ruin man-woman marriage any more than polygamy and polyandry did.

RAB
Bountiful, UT

What a laughable argument--as if racial marriage has anything to do with government-defined morality, as desired by all same sex marriage proponents.

Ask yourself a few questions. Should the government ban all blood transfusions in support of the moral beliefs of Jehovah’s witnesses? Should the government give tax money to Latter Day Saints to support their missionary work? Why not?

I’ll tell you why not. Because the government should NEVER be in the business of choosing sides on morality issues or personal beliefs. The government should never snub the beliefs of one segment of its people in favor of the moral beliefs of another.

It would be nice if gay marriage was just an act of tolerance and an extension rights to people. But tolerance is not what is being sought. Tolerance would be to allow gay marriage to occur without penalty. Legalizing gay marriage, on the other hand, is supporting the moral beliefs of gay couples over the moral beliefs of others. Every tax credit penny paid out to a married gay couple is a clear message that homosexual behavior is good government-approved behavior.

to comment

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