Quantcast

Comments about ‘Same-sex marriage votes Tuesday night turn conversations back to family’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 8 2012 6:27 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
justme001
Salt Lake, UT

Good for Washington, Maine and Maryland, lets hope more states will follow.

higv
Dietrich, ID

Too bad a constitutional amendment didn't pass a few years ago. Most states voted against it. They have not been allowed to marry for millenai before why should it change? They can't bring people to earth why get same priveleges. Why do we have laws on what age to get married? Should someone marry his horse, his kid what next. It is redefining marriage. Anyone can marry any other person of the opposite sex. Same gender marriage is a mock of something sacred. Too bad Maryland, Washington, and Maine were on the wrong, As was Colorado in the drug law. Mosiah said does not happen too much too bad it did in those states and bad things happen when it does. Keep marriage traditional.

Embarcadero
SAN FRANCISCO, CA

This is great news, not least because it may finally signal the moment when homophobia is no longer an effective lever to get the right wing masses riled up. It may be different in Utah and other more bigoted states, but it's heartening to see this happening in the four states we saw on Tuesday.

Phranc
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

since we allow people to drive should we not also allow people to run down pedestrians. Again please stop with the erroneous comparisons. the reason you are losing the conversation is because you keep attempting the same failed logic. Every argument you just made has been made thousands of time before and been refuted a thousand and one.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

I believe a better analogy might be interracial marriage rather than abortion. Up until 1967, most states prohibited such marriages. The arguments against interracial marriage were very similar to those advanced against Gay Marriage. Today, even those who feel strongly about marrying only someone of their own race would never think of denying others to make a different decision or suggest that it would disadvantage children. I think we are seeing the same thing happening with Gay Marriage. Its just a matter of time.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@red covervette
your right, thats the point, erroneously comparing gay marriage to allowing people to marry their dog is just as stupid.

Wee One
Santa Monica, CA

As a child and a teen we never would have thought of someone marrying another person of the same sex. That was not just because it wasn't an option but because how the world was back then. Now look at how things have become. Even though there are those that think that it is just ridiculous that someone would want to marry their (fill in the blank) down the road, I really wonder what will come down the road since this door has been opened. I am not for same sex marriage and I am concerned what will be coming down the road!

1aggie
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

"Young people are more pro life than their parents" is one of the most ridiculous things I've read in a while. I don't know a single kid who is more pro life than his parents.

The real change here is that the spread of falsehoods and scare tactics regarding all the bad things that would happen is same-sex marriage were allowed worked for a while (as scare tactics will), but eventually people have awakened, looked around, used their brains, and realized that there are plenty of places in the world where same-sex marriage exists, and virtually nothing has changed.

Knowledge and enlightenment always prevails over ignorance and darkness.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@wee one

The world did not end when we allowed interracial marriage and people used the same failed plea you are making now. There likely will be changes to our world that our kids would have never imagined that is how the world works so try not to worry so much.

ClarkHippo
Tooele, UT

I hope I can say something here that won't be instantly shot down as ignorant or homophobic, but I do want to ask something which I would like to get some positive feedback on.

My wife and I have been unable to have a child. We hope one day to adopt. If same-sex couples are permitted to legally marry like straight couples, will that give them special minority status and thereby give them special consideration on matter such as adoption, foster care and school choice?

I would be much more in support of recognition for same-sex couples except that I am not totally buying the whole "equality" argument. Equality means everyone is treated the same. No special consideration. A gay or lesbian couple would have to go through the same procedures and waiting time to adopt or be foster parents as a straight couple would.

Is that something gay and lesbian couples truly want, or are they hoping for something a little extra? And if so, does that mean straight couples will at some point be legally considered unfit?

JSB
Sugar City, ID

Once same sex marriages get legalized, the inevitable next step will be polyamorus families (miltiple adults of both sexes) wanting and getting legal recognition. Then what's next? Social chaos with children being the primary victims. The human species evolved as heterosexual, pair-bonding species. Would it be wise to mess with hundreds of generations of human evolution in order to accomplish some kind of social, feel-good, politically correct goal?

christoph
Brigham City, UT

Places with lots of youth have better economies (Utah, Brazil, Indonesia, China, etc) Places with few youth and lots of elderly people have dying economies. This is a matter of national security. Traditional marriage and child rearing brings wealth. Anti-family theories bring poverty. Wealthy nations like those in North America and Europe have fewer kids and slowly become impoverished. If you can't say no to gay marriage, you will never say no to anything the rest of your life, and you would then have to support polygamy by the same logic and then we just keep pushing the envelope out of boredom.

TimBehrend
Auckland NZ, 00

@ClarkHippo

You are inventing a straw man, then using that invention to justify denying equality to fellow citizens. LGBT activists want to become anonymous in society, to escape the stigma and disadvantage in culture, society and the law that they currently endure because their inborn sexual attraction is different to yours. As a group they don't demand special privileges or special status. They just want what you already have. Marriage, which in the United States is a civil matter (religious ceremonies have no legal status, they don't make a marriage in the eyes of the law), does not constitute a special right reserved only for a portion of the citizenry. Adoption is likewise a civil matter; no matter how long the queue grows, the state should not make special regulations based on the prejudices, preferences or private beliefs of some of those standing on line.

RG
Buena Vista, VA

When prop 8 was on the ballot in CA, it was widely reported in the news, even before the vote, and the LDS Church definitely had a say in the matter. Yet, for these other states, I had heard nothing about it until a couple of days after the vote. And I do read/watch news often. Why wasn't this reported more in the national news in the days leading up to the election? And why did the Church not have their 2 cents in the matter like it did in CA - or did they, but I just haven't heard?

Igualmente
Mesa, AZ

Slouching towards Gomorrah indeed when a society seeks to assuage guilt in the name of political correctness. These are the times when men call good evil and evil good.

Third try screen name
Mapleton, UT

Between gay marraige and abortion liberals will no longer be a political factor in 30 years.

PolishBear
Charleston, WV

The victories for marriage equality in Maine, Minnesota, Washington, and Maryland tell me one thing: Americans are learning to make better value judgments.

Why is it that Straight couples are encouraged to date, get engaged, marry and build lives together in the context of monogamy and commitment, and that this is a GOOD thing … yet for Gay couples to do exactly the same is somehow a BAD thing? To me this seems like a very poor value judgment.

Ask any Straight couple why they choose to marry. Their answer will not be, “We want to get married so that we can have sex and make babies!” That would be absurd, since couples do not need to marry to make babies, nor is the ability of even desire to make babies a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.

(continued)

PolishBear
Charleston, WV

(continued)

No, the reason couples choose to marry is to make a solemn declaration before friends and family members that they wish to make a commitment to one another’s happiness, health, and well-being, to the exclusion of all others. Those friends and family members will subsequently act as a force of encouragement for that couple to hold fast to their vows.

THAT’S what makes marriage a good thing, whether the couple in question is Straight OR Gay. It looks like American voters are starting to accept that.

ClarkHippo
Tooele, UT

@TimBehrend

I really wish I was as certain as you are. I really wish I could believe that those demanding equality are willing to accept both the good and the bad that come with being truly equal.

Sadly, we live in a society in which people are always looking for a leg up on everyone else. We live in a society in which certain people thrive on being the perpetual victim and can't wait to shout "discrimination" any chance they get.

Would I support same-sex marriage if I could be assured that gays and lesbian couples won't use their new found minority status as a way of gaining special recognition in matters of adoption, foster care, school choice, housing or similar issues? 100% Yes, I would support it.

But as I see the media continue to vilify those who attend church and live conservative lifestyles, I can easily see a time when being "equal" for some people won't be good enough. Or rather, being equal means, "What I want, I get, no matter who else is affected."

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@RG
The church did not nearly get involved as much as they had with Prop 8. Basically the liberals were right, the church did internally assess prop 8 as a PR mess not a benefit.

to comment

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