Quantcast

Comments about ‘Judge strikes down Idaho's same-sex marriage ban’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, May 13 2014 11:06 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
RedShirtCalTech
Pasedena, CA

To "Bob K" actually, I don't want you to shut up and go along. What I want you to do is the opposite. I want you to read the Book of Mormon, Read the Doctrine and Covenants, read the Proclamation on the Family. After you become informed, think about what you have read, is it good is it bad, would you be a better person following the doctine or not. Then, honestly and scincerly pray to God and ask him if the things you have read are true.

If you do decide that it is good, keep thinking and asking questions. The more I read and think about what I know the more patterns I see in history both scriptural and secular.

As for disgarded children, that does not happen. My nices and nephews have told me about all of the gay kids that are in their mostly LDS schools few, if any, have been disgarded. In actuality, when a child declares themselves to be gay, there are even more resources and support within the LDS church than ever before.

Samson01
S. Jordan, UT

Re: Understands Math

I used the term not with any "animus" as you claim. Common sense, biology, and evolution simply indicate that homosexuality is an abnormal state that differs from the norm. There are many disorders that we all may or may not have that differ from the ideal. It is my opinion that homosexuality is a disorder.

The number 1.9% is a number that was given on a NPR segment and I quoted it. If it is wrong I suspect that it is no more inaccurate than the numbers you quote. Doesn't really matter. If you read my original post you would clearly see that I do not advocate withholding any rights from anyone. My point was that the SCOTUS needs to put this issue to rest and that I would personally abide by whatever decision was arrived at. I think you are lumping your response to my posts with what you would like to say to many others.

Redefining marriage is exactly what is being done. You may call it updating or any other euphemism, but it is being redefined. That is the word used by many SSM advocates.

Understands Math
Lacey, WA

@Samson01 wrote: "I used the term not with any "animus" as you claim." Then, "It is my opinion that homosexuality is a disorder."

"Disorder" is a word used by medical and psychological professionals, and the professionals do not use it to describe homosexuality.

So what does it say about you that you use the word?

"The number 1.9% is a number that was given on a NPR segment and I quoted it. If it is wrong I suspect that it is no more inaccurate than the numbers you quote."

After doing some searches, I see that in a Gallup poll from October 2012, 1.9% of people 65 or older identified as LGBT. Among the total population it is 3.4%, and among people 18-29, it is 6.4%. That may have been the source of the number that you passed on without context.

Context is important.

"You may call it updating or any other euphemism, but it is being redefined. That is the word used by many SSM advocates."

Name them.

Samson01
S. Jordan, UT

Re: Understands Math

Again you get caught up in the words and miss the point.

"So what does it say about you that you use the word?" It probably means that my opinion is different from the public words of the "professionals" you seem to speak for. I clearly stated that it is my opinion that homosexuality is a disorder. Get over it.

The numbers are irrelevant. I am advocating that the SCOTUS put the issue to rest.

If I could give you individual quotes, which I can't because I do not collect them, you would dismiss them anyway. Again you mince words.

My original point still stands. The issue needs to be put to rest so we as a society can move on and stop wasting our efforts on it.

Do you have anything to say about my original point or do you want to continue to pick at the minutia?

This is a silly conversation...

SlopJ30
St Louis, MO

Serious:

I applaud you standing up for the biological brothers of the world who want to get married. All four of them are planning a parade in which you personally will appear in effigy on a float.

Let's at least try to keep our answers close to sane and our "slippery slope" fallacies at least plausible. Frankly, if two brothers want to get married, have at it. Somehow I fail to see that as one of society's pressing issues.

The weird tangents, mental gymnastics and spiritual fevers people go through to oppose SSM rights is a sight to behold . . though it is getting old. The arguments are always the same, and never stand on firm legal ground. You're losing. Just accept it, clutch your "Proclomation to the Family" firmly to your chest, and breathe.

It'll be OK. I bet you that 35% of the world turns gay after SSM is legalized across the US. Tops.

to comment

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