Comments about ‘Religious unity: Los Angeles gathers faith leaders to make peace over Prop 8, other volatile issues’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, March 16 2013 12:50 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

Mr. Brown,
Thank you for bringing to our attention this interesting conversation.

I particularly interesting found the position of the 7th Day Adventist Church Pastor (video). Who basically stated that he may disagree on religious principles with SSM. However, he feels his religious conviction shouldn't affect the political outcome in society. It seems to me that that stand is the most respectful and spiritual of positions.

Raised was the issue of "what if in the future these LGBT people attempts to force churches into performing marriage ceremonies against the churches convictions". Well, we cannot legislate thinking the worst of human beings. Besides, even if that where to happen, "the churches who would be the oppressed in that case", would have the opportunity to go through the process of politically defending their rights.

As of now churches behind Proposition 8, are acting as the oppressors. Attempting to force political decisions limiting the rights of law abiding citizens on religious grounds and irrational fears.

I sincerely hope we can all understand that difference of opinions doesn't make us enemies. However, we should understand that human dignity compels us to defend and demand to be recognized as equal citizen under the law.

JSB
Sugar City, ID

Once again, Mr. Brown's fair and balanced articles are enlightening. Everyone should read this.

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

I'm not Mormon, but I stand with Mormon prophet Monson and Pope Francis on this one.

They both claim to speak for God, and they both think it should be illegal for a man a woman to marry.

Yay Prophet Monson and Pope Francis!

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

correction: Pope Francis and Mormon Monson think it should be illegal for a man and a man to marry. My bad!

I stand with Mormon Monson and Pope Francis!

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

Chris B:
[They both claim to speak for God, and they both think it should be illegal for a man a woman to marry.]

[correction: Pope Francis and Mormon Monson think it should be illegal for a man and a man to marry. My bad!]

Don't sweat it. A lot of us are having a hard time keeping track of this arbitrary and capricious distinction between who should and shouldn't be allowed to marry. It wasn't all that long ago that the Mormons allowed marriage between a man and several women.

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

Kumakke,

and it would only be fair to allow the Mormons to begin marrying several people again, if gay marriage is allowed. If we're going to open up marriage for anything, why not stop all "discrimination"

2 brother should be allowed to marry too.

A person should be allowed to marry an inanimate object if they want(Yes, these people exist, and why discriminate against them if they were born that way?)

And any form of polygmamy between adults should also be allowed.

If gay marriage becomes legal, a man should be able to marry his brother, 4 women, and a fence if that is what he wants.

After all, he was born that way.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ Chris B.

Congratulations!!! I don't know how you were able to pass that through the DN monitors. I have been stopped for things I thought made sense.

Marriage requires maturity concern.

Is poligamy socially and economically benefitial for all parts involved?

No, you cannot marry somebody or something that does not have the maturity or rational ability to make a proper decision.

Egyptians used to marry between siblings to preserve the divinity of the line. Genetically speaking it didn't work very well.

But you know all that.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Chris B

Still sounds like an argument used by those who opposed interracial marriage.

BigLebowski
Mesa, AZ

@Baccus0902 said, "Raised was the issue of "what if in the future these LGBT people attempts to force churches into performing marriage ceremonies against the churches convictions". Well, we cannot legislate thinking the worst of human beings. Besides, even if that where to happen, "the churches who would be the oppressed in that case", would have the opportunity to go through the process of politically defending their rights."

I applaud your comments. I too would love for there to be a separation of political and religious beliefs. I would love for religions to practice what they see are important beliefs. I would also love for everyone to be able to be married. But currently the legal side of this equation slants toward not allowing religions their rights, if there is no definition of marriage as being one man and one woman. Churches and religious individuals have already tried to go through the process of politically (and legally) defending their rights. Those court cases have not been favorable to the religions in the past.

I hope that we can find a solution that benefits both sides in this.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

The Prop 8 campaign was ugly and divisive. I expected better from religious organizations--and in fact, as a religious person the ugliness and disrespectful campaign caused me to switch sides. The ads and some of the campaign material demonized LGBT people and relied on fear-mongering tactics. Some of the campaign material was less than truthful or worse. I've never been more ashamed of my church. I hope lessons have been learned. Churches should never, ever turn their support of issues over to campaign professionals. Political campaigns are soul-destroying. Religious organizations should always represent their views in repectful and loving ways. The ends do not justify the means.

I do not condone the violence or bad behavior by those who opposed Prop 8. Such behavior is counterproductive. But i hold my fellow "religiously-active" folks to a higher standard.

I lived in Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots. It was an unsettling experience.
Let's hope we don't repeat that event.

Stay the Course
Salt Lake City, utah

Chris with time I am becoming your fan
who would have thought

The Scientist
Provo, UT

Why does the article ignore (hide?) the fact that Randall (Randy) Paul, President of the Foundation for Religious Diplomacy, is a Mormon? Or that Daniel Peterson is on the Board of Directors? Or that the Mormon Church is one of the largest donors?

This is the deceptive approach the LDS Church took to Proposition 8 in the first place (as well as a number of other attempts to manipulate legislation, cultivate government offices, and otherwise hide their attempts to be a lobbying group).

In the face of all that, and in light of the LDS Church "purchasing" scholars and academics as well as expensive Public Relations firms, can anyone trust what is going on here?

L
Central, Utah

Someone posted an idea a while back that marriage be a religios thing that you participate in at Church and should do that according to the rules of their church. Likewise, now which is call marriage and is governed by law and preformed by judges be call a civil union. For those to benefit in the privilidges all now legal marriages would be converted to civil unions and any joined in the future would get a civil union licence and whatever ceremony or papers the law required. They could be made open to all.

The word marriage would be defined as a religious ceremony preformed by a Church authority under the rules established for the Sacrament of Marriage. Other words such as sacrament that have religous meanings would also be reserved for Churches.

The problem with that idea is the defination of "Church" , what it takes to establish one and how you resolve any sure beliefs of that congretation that differs from mainlain society from pologamy to blood sacrifce like in the Old Testament. Must I permit the sacrafice of my grandaughter because her parents choice of Church believes in that idea? How about a Gay Church?

george of the jungle
goshen, UT

Holy Matrimony, would mean that it's sacred. Life is the thing that is sacred. the preservation of life is the purpose of mirage. For any thing to be sacred should serve that purpose. Family's forever and ever.

to comment

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