Comments about ‘Judge: Ky. must recognize same-sex marriages’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 12 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
St.George, Utah

It is extremely difficult to understand why Utah state government officials have chosen to spend such large amounts of money to fight SSM.
We all know that they have been advised otherwise, and have simply ignored the obvious.

Mcallen, TX

How has gay relations worked in Africa?

Now a judge wants it recognized in Kentucky?

Go figure.

Karen R.
Houston, TX

The Kentucky judge - Judge John Heyburn - did something pretty remarkable in his opinion. He addressed the questions and concerns he knew his ruling would raise in Kentucky citizens' minds. He offered information about how the judicial process works and how we got to this juncture with respect to LGBT rights. He explained why it isn't enough to be the overwhelming majority; why long-standing tradition is not sufficient. And he attempted to prepare the reader for the inevitable SCOTUS ruling that SSM bans are unconstitutional. His tone was kind, compassionate, and steady. I am so impressed.

I wish that religious and political leaders would show this kind of leadership on this issue. People against SSM are so upset and their leaders' failure to talk to them and explain the facts as Judge Heyburn did is only going to contribute to more hard feelings. I think the leaders are letting their people down.

Judge Heyburn's opinion can be found at scribd.com. Do a search using Heyburn AND "gay marriages."



Gay relations in Africa?

Bob A. Bohey
Marlborough, MA

Anti-constitutionalists across the nation are on notice that the federal government is poised strike down their anti-equal rights laws as unconstitutional. These anti's try and try to rationalize their position with religious dogma or out right false claims of how equal rights for all will some how harm families and children even though they have no evidence to support such an outrageous claim. Now they are attempting another tactic of softening their language to support their bigotry and discrimination. They just don't get that no matter how they rationalize it or how nice they try to make their position sound it just doesn't stand up in the bright light of true justice. The bright light shows all of the ugly flaws in their arguments and the majority of this nation can see them including the SCOTUS.

Salt Lake City, Utah

@ worf: You want to look at a continent where countries have some of the most brutal and repressive laws about homosexuality - laws which have been fostered by anti-LGBT religious groups in the US - and use that as a reason to violate the US Constitution and deny rights to LGBT Americans?

Your claim boils down to the premise that because some African countries have laws that punish adults for engaging in same-sex relationships (laws the US has found in the past to be unconstitutional), the US should not recognize legal same-sex marriages.

If we are going to base our following of the US Constitution on what is happening in other countries, why not look at countries that allow same-sex marriage? Countries that show how unrealistic the fears of same-sex marriage opponents are?

Of course, the reality doesn't further your agenda - which is why you have to look backwards instead of forward.

Mcallen, TX

@Kalindra--you totally missed the point.

Many African countries don't have brutal and repressive laws about homosexuality.

Mcallen, TX


Straight people just want to live together while gays want marriage.

Times have changed.

Salt Lake City, Utah

@ worf: If I missed the point, I apologize. Please enlighten me as to which African gay relationships we are supposed to be examining as a comparison for gay relationships in the US.

slc, UT


So what is your point worf? Why do I have a feeling you a being vague for a reason?

Leesburg, VA

@ Worf

I am also totally confused. Yes, times have changed. Have you changed as well? (very sincere question)

Liberty For All
Cedar, UT

Not to worry, the district courts ruling will be overturned on appeal. His ruling threatens ordered liberty as provided by the 14th amendment. Marriage is about family structures that maintain ordered liberty, peacefully and in a prosperous manner that helps civilization and futurity. Comprehensive and complimentary unions are in the interest of the state.

to comment

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