Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letters: DOMA ruling’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, July 2 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

"Such unions are not only unnatural, but always productive of deplorable results, such as increased effeminate behavior in the population. They are productive of evil, and evil only, without any corresponding good."

Ruling by the Supreme Court of Georgia upholding the law against interracial marriage.

LeftBehind
SAN FRANCISCO, CA

Many opponents of same-sex marriage say that their opposition isn't to homosexuals per se. They say that they are defending the God-Given institution of marriage, which they say God defines as being between a man and a woman.

Forget for a moment that we don't live in a theocracy. Forget for a moment that an increasing number of churches, temples and synagogues support gay marriage.

If marriage is a God-Given institution, isn't it logical to assume that only people who believe in God should be allowed to marry? A greater percentage of Americans don't believe in God than are homosexual. If people are concerned about preserving the 'sanctity' of marriage as a God-given institution, why is no one talking about prohibiting agnostics, atheists, Satan worshipers, Buddhists, et al from marrying?

So if you are truly concerned about defending marriage as a God-given institution, what legal remedies will you support to prohibit people who don't believe in God from marrying?

Owen
Heber City, UT

Everything in this letter may be true. But this is "divinely inspired" system at work. Amazing how it cuts both ways, sometimes in the same week.

Kent Buckner
West Valley City, UT

Extremely well said. Amen.

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

What? Pretty interesting from an group of activists bought and paid for by the Heritage Foundation and Koch Brothers, don't you think? Hopefully, gays will treat marriage with more respect than heterosexual have and by what has happened so far, they have. In 10 years you'll have wondered what all the fuss was about.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

"Five members of the U.S. Supreme Court upset our government's balance of powers last week..."

And right out of the gate, with the first sentence, Ms. Hallen reveals her total ignorance of how a constitutional republic works.

The process of Judicial Review _is_ the "balance of power." It hold legislation and executive action accountable to the constitution.

embarrassed Utahn!
Salt Lake City, UT

It must be really difficult for people who know more than anyone else, that their opinions are always more valid, that they're always the smartest person in the room....

In response to the letter I can only say: Thank Gosh for the Supreme Court. Liberty and Justice FOR ALL!!!

Sal
Provo, UT

35 states prohibit gay marriages. The will of the people was completely ignored in this unfortunate ruling. Great letter, Cynthia.

Sal
Provo, UT

We need a system where lower judges can remove higher judges if the judges do not uphold the Constitution in their rulings. There was no constitutional justification for taking this case since the litigants had agreed with the lower court ruling against Prop 8. The five Supreme Court justices ruling in this case should be removed for not upholding the Constitution.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

Sal, you're arguing in favor of mob rule - might makes right - three wolves and a goat voting on what to have for lunch.

Bad idea.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

It would appear the author sleep walked through the last twenty years if she thinks she has presented any arguments that have not been tried and failed a thousand times before. After circling around through the same old arguments for so long it stops becoming a meaningful discussion and becomes a time to move forward.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

But according to the gun debate people, making something illegal wont stop truly committed people from getting what they desire. If homosexuals desire to be together, what will making marriage illegal for them accomplish?

It's so interesting to see some people demand the government stay out of their lives on one hand and then demand the government intervene on another.

Where's the consistency?

Kent C. DeForrest
Provo, UT

Hmm. Cynthia is very upset about the Court upsetting the balance of power in government. And the Supreme Court she is criticizing is actually a conservative court, on average. Based on their political leanings, the nine justices actually favor conservative political views. So what are you complaining about, Cynthia? Do we need to have all nine of them be ultra-wacko-conservative?

But I suppose you do have cause for concern. With current Republican policies, which are unlikely to change anytime soon, there will be a Democrat in the White House for a long time, which will eventually skew the court leftward.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

If you don't want to choose to turn gay and subsequently get married, you should probably do that while you still have the chance to choose.

isrred
South Jordan, UT

How do you think Joseph Smith felt about Missouri asserting its "states rights" with the Extermination order that expelled Mormons from the state and took their property? Somehow I don't think the letter writer would support "States rights" in all cases, only when its a "morality" that they agree with.

wendell
provo, UT

Sal,
First off, I want to let you know that I respect your right to believe anything you want.
With that said, you wrote,
"The will of the people was completely ignored in this unfortunate ruling"

Since you seem to believe that the will of the people should determine whether or not each state will allow marriage equality, I assume you enthusiastically support those states wherein the people have voted in favor of it?

The fact is that the views of the American people regarding marriage equality have shifted greatly in recent years and all indications are that they will continue to do so. I feel very confident that one day, before too much longer, I will be allowed to marry the man I love. I'm glad we can count on your support.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

Cynthia, your beliefs are clouding your judgment and reasoning. First, the SC ruling simply affirmed that the Federal government has no business regulating a social contract the Constitution is silent on and should be left up to the People (i.e., States).

And how is allowing gays to marry promoting a “permissive” lifestyle? If anything, it is providing an avenue for gays to conform to the norms of society making it easier to call out the sort of lifestyle many in the gay community have indulged in the past (which in many ways is exactly what we would expect from people who have been systematically rejected and marginalized).

I know you’re scared Cynthia, but your marriage is not threatened and extending the benefits of society to those born different than you will make family values stronger.

@Sal – “35 states prohibit gay marriages. The will of the people was completely ignored in this unfortunate ruling. Great letter, Cynthia.”

Sal, please explain how the SC ruling strikes down the laws in 35 states?

wrz
Pheonix, AZ

@LeftBehind:
"... what legal remedies will you support to prohibit people who don't believe in God from marrying?"

You got it backwards, leftbehind. It's not that you have to believe in God to marry. It's that God (actually, Nature's God) designed marriage for one man and one women. For sure, She didn't design it for two (or more) of the same sex. That's just plain silly.

@Tyler D:
"I know you're scared Cynthia, but your marriage is not threatened and extending the benefits of society to those born different than you will make family values stronger."

There is little of no threat to individual's marriage. The threat is to the institution of marriage. If the line is not drawn at one man and one woman, it will not be drawn at all. Any combination of marriage will eventually result. Perhaps even groups will marry... so they can reap Federal benefits of marriage.

As to 'born different'... Almost everyone has some 'differences.' With some concentrated effort, the differences can be ameliorated.

embarrassed Utahn!
Salt Lake City, UT

So apparently there are still people so ignorant and uninformed that they think gays should just "ameliorate" themselves into being straight.

Knowledge is power. Myopic denial of facts is just silly. Thanks for the laughs!

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@wrz – “If the line is not drawn at one man and one woman, it will not be drawn at all.”

Your response is entirely fear based and simply has no basis in reality. Our entire legal system is based on drawing lines (e.g., OK to drive 65mph but not 105mph). We do it all the time. The fact that the line gets moved on occasion because our moral sensibilities evolve is something to be celebrated, not feared. If this didn’t happen, we would still be stoning people for “witchcraft” and worshipping other gods, not to mention children talking back to their parents.

@wrz – “As to 'born different'... Almost everyone has some 'differences.' With some concentrated effort, the differences can be ameliorated.”

You are aware that the largest “reparative therapy” clinic in the country recently shut down citing their virtually 100% failure rate. And they even issued an apology for their past efforts.

And why do you even care about “ameliorating” any non-criminal differences? What’s next… “ameliorating” those with blue eyes or who are left handed. Your “concentrated effort” sounds like what goes on in North Korea.

to comment

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