Quantcast

Comments about ‘How one man is fighting for traditional marriage in four states’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Oct. 11 2012 10:24 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hutterite
American Fork, UT

If you can convince yourself you're not a bigot, or if someone else can convince you, then it's ok. And you can definitely lawyer religion into helping.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

Solid marriages definitely improve society - this is true regardless of the genders of the parties involved. Anyone truly interested in a strong society would be promoting marriage for all couples - not just some couples.

Children do better when raised by married parents. Even the much maligned Regnerus study supports the fact that even children being raised by same-sex parents do better when those parents are in a committed relationship, preferably marriage. Anyone who truly has the best interest of children at heart, will admit that children are going to be raised by same-sex couples, prohibiting marriage does nothing to change that, and those children deserve the best chance and deserve parents who are married to each other.

Marriage is about joining things - herbs and spices, wine and cheese, two properties. This last joining is the one that "traditional" marriage is based on - the joining of a woman into a man's property. Anyone whose wedding vows said "husband and wife" instead of "man and wife" has already personally, directly contributed to the ongoing change of the definition of marriage.

GZE
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Fighting against marriage equality is not at all the same thing as fighting for "traditional marriage." Gays and lesbians who want to marry want a traditional marriage. They want to marry the person they love and have a life together.

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

I am homosexual: I will never be the same as a heterosexual. Therefore mimicking heterosexual traditions will not make me complete and I think it is silly that activists seek validity by co-opting institutions that they previously decried, instead of creating their own to meet their own unique needs.

A cat is not a dog. Up is not down. In is not out and my homosexual relationships are not heterosexual and I don't need them to be.

I would be more sympathetic to the gay marriage movement if I could see that it were actually motivated by a concern for civil rights as opposed to merely tool to bludgeon the non-complaint. As evidence by "the anyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot" posts.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Self loathing doesn't solve anything ...

"Therefore mimicking heterosexual traditions will not make me complete..."

Others feel it would. Why should they find there own? as if they are from another world and should never mix with heterosexual traditions now that's silly we are a society it time to get used to it.

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

Ah
If I don't tow the party line I am self loathing

Actually what I loath is pathetic guilt trips and arrogant "if you were tolerant you would think like me" attitudes.

How dare anyone point out that a gay marriage is NOT like a straight marriage any more than a polygamous marriage is not like a traditional one, etc. Red is NOT blue; Seven is NOT twelve; Tuna is NOT Canary; Men are NOT women; lies are NOT truth and gay relationships are NOT the same as a straight relationships; regardless of how much anyone screams they are.

Less than 20 percent of gay COUPLES (not merely gays and lesbians) participate in unions where they are legal - so obviously %80 of gay COUPLES must be self loathing too.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ CI: I am a heterosexual woman, and I resent your implication that all heterosexual relationships are exactly the same.

All relationships are different. To assume that homosexual relations would mimic heterosexual relationships or be homogenous within the category of marriages shows a clear lack of understanding of relationship dynamics specifically and human nature in general.

No one is trying to claim that dogs are cats. The fact that dogs are not cats does not negate the fact that lions and Russian Blues are both cats in spite of many differences. Nor does it negate the fact that cats and dogs are both animals.

Diversity exists in all aspects of life - including marriage. Same-sex marriages are just another aspect of that diversity. Lions are cats, same-sex marriages are marriages. Calling either one of them a different name would not change the facts - so why create an unnecessary complication?

Counter Intelligence
Salt Lake City, UT

Kalindra
"I resent your implication that all heterosexual relationships are exactly the same."

Didn't say they were - merely said they were not the same as a homosexual relationship, which they are not, so don't expect me to buy into your feigned victimhood melodrama. Poison yourself with resentment on your own time - not my problem

You may find gender to be of no consequence - I find efforts to blind one self to reality in the name of ideological purity to be self-delusional (and I find attempts to shame others who refuse to participate in the delusion to be manipulative and dishonest)

You state that "Calling either one of them a different name would not change the facts" and the fact is; they are not the same

No amount of guilt trips, drama, victimhoowd, condescension, screaming, allegations of bigotry, claims of martyrdom, etc. really alter that fact

Self-delusion to the facts does not make one tolerant either.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Please explain why it is alright for a person to blantently misrepesent themselves from one thread to the next and use this misreporesentation as a bases for their argument yet people are not allowed to challenge their claims?

George
Bronx, NY

I have been asking the same question why a certain person has been allowed to misrepresent himself across many threads and yet no one is allowed to respond.

to comment

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