Comments about ‘BYU law professors sign letter declaring Obama compromise 'unacceptable'’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 14 2012 12:00 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
John Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT

Like the rest of the left wing extremists, Obama is determined to erradicate any religious influence in the public sphere. This forced providing of contraception is the latest in a long line of leftist attacks on religion.

Obamacare's mandate that religious schools and hospitals provide abortion pills is perhaps the most devious attack yet. If forces religious institutions to violate both their believe that life is sacred, and that sexual activity should should take place only in a marriage relationship.

The left believes that the so-called right to engage in indiscriminate sexuality at anytime with any person is more important than the protection of human life. It is apparently not enough for the left to have this belief; the left must now force religious institutions to act in accordance with that belief.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Are there only two professor at BYU who believe that life is sacred? Are there only two?

Where are the others?

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

BO cares more about the demands of the radical feminists than the protections contained in the 1st amendment.

American Fork, UT

I wish these guys were around when we were being told to accept the Iraq war and shut up.

metamora, IL

happy Vally:

Defending religion is a citizens right . . . just sayin'.

Salt Lake City, UT

'Defending religion is a citizens right . . . just saying'.' - metamoracoug | 6:44 p.m. Feb. 14, 2012

It is YOUR right.

Like, it is your right to not use birth control.

When you actively work to DENY that option of choice to anyone else...?

You become a tyrant.

i.e. If I felt that no one should be Mormon due to being 'Christian'...?

Should I then LEGISLATE you to only be Christian?

Same logic.

Because my belief's tell me something, I can factually work to DENY it, to you.

Or is this only 'acceptable' discrimination, when it happens to someone, else?

FYI, while all this is going on...

Republican create ZERO jobs.


What is interesting is the lack of women in this discourse. Nearly all the articles and media discussions of this issue has featured mostly men. Imagine if women were discussing contraceptive policy for men?

Furthermore, I'm surprised to see the oft repeated false claim that abortion inducing drugs are part of the mandate. It proves the point that conservatives, whether law school professors or not, are relying on the same incorrect propaganda.

across the sea
Topeno, Finland

America is taken on a ride, a spiral down to extremist haven ...

What is wrong here is that these costs are not for treating human sickness - just a sick society.

Taylorsville, UT

This presidential demand is not even a compromise, its the power of socialism and dictatorships. The government has no right to force any business with federal welfare policy. Federal policy must not be allowed in the free market of capitalism.

There are no federal laws empowering government to make demands of or force business to comply with laws of socialism that don't even exist. Next thing you know business will not be allowed to shut their doors or go out of business without presidential approval.

Charlotte, NC

Happy valley Heretic,

A citizen does not have the "right" to purchase something at someone else's expense. This is not about the right to purchase contraceptives. Everyone currently has the right to make these purchases. This is about the right to NOT purchase them.

Iowa City, IA

Hi Pagan,

Let's assume that you object to reading the Bible on moral grounds (you could pick any other practice that you morally object to...this is merely for illustrative purposes). Would it be fair for the government to REQUIRE you to provide others with Bibles, even if you object to doing so?

Springville, Ut

The religious freedom of a Catholic hospital should not override the religious freedom and quality of care for the patient. The law has been written. A woman can have an abortion. If we disagree with that, we can encourage our lawmakers to do something about it. Is there a reason why no Republican legislator is proposing a constitutional amendment to ban abortion? They seem to want an amendment for everything else under the sun, why not this? Could it be because they know they would lose re-election? Sounds like they want it both ways, they want to speak "religious-ese" but don't want to actually do anything to prove their conviction.

I'm personally not in favor of abortions. I am however in favor of the law, and this has been law for nearly 40 years now. There is a procedure for changing the law. Screaming religious freedom at a rape victim in distress is not one of them. It is akin to camping in a park and screaming "my park."

Springville, UT

As an LDS graduate of BYU, I am vehemently opposed to these BYU professors taking this position and I hope they do not represent the positions of either BYU or the Church. The Obama Administration's actions actually is pro-life, reducing the potential of abortions and providing preventative health care. Having BYU people so closely identify with a politicized religious stance with which it can be argued is actually counter to official Church positions is troubling. I realize that BYU and the Church are de facto Republican institutions, but there should at least be some effort not to appear partisan. And on top of this is the logical inconsistency of their position with other practices based on religious views which are banned by the government and of which they are wholly supportive. Take polygamy or even gay marriage, for example. If these guys are consistent, then they should be supportive of these activities as long as they are based on a religious belief. We can save the equality under the law argument for later. Effectively, we have a group arguing for government protection for stuff they like, but are happy to deny protection for things they don't like.

Salt Lake City, UT

Deseret News. When did IUD's and the pill become abortions? This article makes the claim people are being forced to pay for abortions drugs, and that's simply not true. How about telling the truth instead of just printing lies that a BYU professor writes.

Bountiful, UT

I have to disagree with the BYU professors. Religion has no business making life inconvenient for people who don't voluntarily follow their unique dictates.

For example, suppose there was a hospital, a major employer in community who said, you can work here, but if you do, you must exercise leadership in your family and ensure your wife and daughters wear a burka when ever they go out into the community and that your daughters don't go to school or get an education.

The typical conservative response what I have just said is if you don't like the restrictions that employer puts on you, find a job somewhere else. ... Yea right, its just so easy to find jobs. People shouldn't have to choose between employment and living their life free of arbitrary dictates of religions that have a lot of non-sensible rules.

Most religions do stand up for good, the problem is they also have a lot of arbitrary rules that have nothing to do with good, but are very controlling. Not using birth control is one of those arbitrary non sensible rules.

Thank goodness we have national leaders who see this and are willing to stand up against this kind of soft tyranny.

Remember it was as recent at the 1960's that courts ruled that laws in the southern United States forbiding the use of birth control were unconstitutional. There was religious feeling then too that this was somehow wrong. Thank goodness for the courts. Thank goodness for Obama.

Salt Lake City, UT

I went through that link at the top of the article and there are roughly 200 male signees to 40 female ones. You know there are uses for hormonal birth control other than pregnancy prevention.

Ogden, UT

I wish we could just declare Obama unacceptable!

salt lake city, utah

You as an individual have the right to have your actions influenced by any source you choose. However, your actions once they enter society must adhere to exsisting laws, regardless of their influence. cjb put it well "Most religions do stand up for good, the problem is they also have a lot of arbitrary rules that have nothing to do with good, but are very controlling. Not using birth control is one of those arbitrary non sensible rules.

The problem is the catholic rule about not using birth control, is not just non sensible but is illegal when the rule is forced on anyone in the work place. While it may offend your conscious you still have the religious freedom to believe as you choose, and you have the feedom to act as you choose (live your conscience) but you don't have the right to force others to act as you believe outside the confines of your religion. Religions..you don't have the right to act as you please anywhere and anytime you want.

Religions discriminate against women all day every day in their religious practices and it's perfectly legal (although why any women would put up with it is a mystery), but yes there is an effort to limit that discrimination to the confines of your religious practices.

BTW, the Rasmussen poll is always wrong..always.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

Boo on Obama!

Highland, Utah

It is not the right of one citizen to force another to pay for his or her own contraception. Nobody is saying that people can't buy it; the question is whether I have to pay for you to use it.

to comment

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