Comments about ‘Competing crowds fill Capitol for marriage rallies’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 26 2013 10:32 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

I was there.

And I will be there at the celebration party when all Americans can marry.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'Poll: New High Of 58 Percent Support Same-Sex Marriage' – By TOM KLUDT – By Talking Points Memo – 03/18/13

'At a time when the Supreme Court prepares to take up same-sex marriage and the Republican Party determines the best approach to the issue going forward, an ABC News/Washington Post poll released Monday showed a new high-water mark in support for the right of gay and lesbian couples to tie the knot. 
The poll found 58 percent of Americans now believe marriage should be legal for same-sex couples, while just 36 percent said it should be illegal.'

''Poll: Support for gay marriage up among Catholics' – By Jillian Rayfield – Salon – 03/08/13

'Gallup Poll: Majority of Americans support gay marriage' - By Elizabeth Stuart - DSNews - 05/20/2011

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

"It takes a mom and a dad to create a child, so it takes a mom and a dad to raise one."

Having children is not a requirement for marriage. Otherwise, infertile and elderly couples should not be allowed to marry either.

I don't know why there is even an issue here. If you don't support gay marriage, don't get gay married. What gives anybody else the audacity to think they can tell people who they can (or can't) marry?

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

Wouldn't it have been great if the organizers of this event called it "A Celebration of Marriage" rather than of "traditional" marriage? And invited everyone who loved their partner enough to marry (or want to marry) them, to participate?

Of course they couldn't do that because they believe only opposite gender marriage is "right."

But they shouldn't have been surprised that gay activists turned out. Because the traditionalists were saying to gays, "You shouldn't get to have what we have."

The comment that got "the loudest applause" doesn't make sense. Children do *not* have "an inalienable right to be raised by a mother and father" for the simple reason that if no mother-and-father are available to raise a child, then by that logic, the child shouldn't be raised at all.

There are countless stories (you can find some online)_of gays who are raising happy and healthy kids--some of which kids wouldn't have had any parents at all if not for them.

Children *do* have an inalienable right to be raised by loving parents. And gays qualify for that every bit as much as straights.

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

I'd like to make one more comment on "Children have an inalienable right to be raised by a mother and father."

The orthodox rabbi Shmuley Boteach (who I'm sure many Mormons in Utah know of, and admire) endorsed gay adoptions, despite what orthodox Judaism teaches.

In an article in the Jerusalem Post (Nov. 27, 2010) called "The Morality of Gay Adoption," Rabbi Boteach relates how he once interviewed a gay couple on his radio show. The couple had been fighting their home state of Florida for the right to adopt a mentally-handicapped African-American boy of five who they'd been picking up every Sunday for a year from his orphanage.

One of the gay men said to Rabbi Boteach, "Nobody wants him. But we want him."

Rabbi Boteach choked up, unable to speak.

Rabbi Boteach's conclusion: "Leaving orphans to drown without love is deeply immoral, but to stop others from rescuing them is an abomination."

You can google the article--it's worth reading.

So much for some people's insistence that a child can, and should, only be raised by a mother and father.

EDM
Castle Valley, Utah

Good grief, "traditional marriage" supporters! How long do we have to continue to bear the false claim that prohibition of gay marriage guarantees that all children will be raised by a mother and a father?

Sneaky Jimmy
Bay Area, CA

The proponents of so called "traditional marriage" are now harping on every child's right to a mother and a father. Perhaps they don't see the hypocrisy in the road they are traveling. If they really do support traditional marriage then they should be lobbying to make divorce illegal and to force people into marrying if they have conceived a child out of wedlock. It seems they are more worried about preventing marriage for people that want to live chaste, virtuous lives and raise a family just like everyone else.

Voice of Reason
Layton, UT

I was there. It was a celebration of traditional marriage. It was not a condemnation of gay relationships of any type - I don't believe anybody even used the word gay or even peripherally referenced them.

Recognizing that government has a compelling interest in ensuring children have a claim on their biological parents for support, and that a man and a woman are literally the only biologically possible way to create a new, genetically distinct person, has nothing to do with one's opinion on gay relationships or religion at all. You can be a committed atheist and recognize that. You can be a supporter of gay marriage, or even gay yourself, and recognize that heterosexual marriage is, in fact, different. Many do. And they don't have to resort to irrelevant and frankly lazy comparisons to race, which clearly has nothing to do with marriage in the obvious way that gender does.

And by the way, I personally support the right of gays to adopt children, for the same reason I support single-parent adoption: the more we empty orphanages with loving parents, the better. That doesn't change that children do best with a mother and father.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

Congratulations to the state of Utah!!

Just the fact that a considerable proggressive crowd was able to congregate at this event is a victory in itself.

Darkelf
Taylorsville, UT

oh i watched this on the news. more comical then anything else. the Governor side stepped support like every other politician does. kids dont need to be raised with both parents. that is plain foolish talk. Only thing kids need is a loving environment with a firm set of rules. same sex couples can and do raise well rounded kids. i know a bunch of kids who are raised by same sex couples. you know what i would trust them raising my daughter if it came down to it.

so if by the logic i have seen on this whole traditional marriage thing. so a couple who cant conceive should have their marriage annulled because they cant conceive and raise children? should they do a fertility test when handing out marriage licenses? so if they failed it. you can say nope cant conceive so no marriage for you.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

Article: "Amelia Summerhays, the 13-year-old... spoke of the 'inalienable rights of children' to be raised by a mother and a father. 'It takes a mom and a dad to create a child, so it takes a mom and a dad to raise one,' she said."

Ms. Summerhays can be allowed some latitude for not thinking things through completely due to her youth, but the other event organizers should have a better grasp of logic. Her conclusion does not necessarily follow from her premise.

If children really do have an inalienable right to be raised by a mother and a father, then the gay marriage opponents are barking up the wrong tree. They should be attacking divorce and pre-/extramarital pregnancy. Yet Prop 8 and Amendment 3 are completely silent about these topics.

One one hand, gay marriage opponents argue marriage is entirely about society promoting procreation and gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because same-sex couples are incapable of producing children. On the other hand, they argue that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because their children would not have parents of both sexes. Well, which is it? You can't have it both ways.

ImaUteFan
West Jordan, UT

I was there, too, as a supporter of marriage between 1 man and 1 woman.

The only comment I will make here is to say that is was very disheartening. I fear that those of us on the side of traditional marriage are in a losing battle.

SLC gal
Salt Lake City, UT

A real bridal couple walking through the same sex crowd?? LOL!!! You CANT make this stuff up!!!

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

Voice of Reason:
[I personally support the right of gays to adopt children, for the same reason I support single-parent adoption: the more we empty orphanages with loving parents, the better.]

How can you support gay adoption without supporting gay marriage? When you say "loving parents" you mean more than one. How else does the state recognize dual custody of a child other than marriage? Does only one parent have custody of the child? How does that work with insurance coverage and inheritance rights?

In fact, its often more difficult to adopt a child if you're a "single adult", and if you're found to be in a gay relationship, then it is near impossible in many areas. State-recognized gay marriage would prevent discrimination of gay couples from adopting.

You can't honestly support gay adoption by loving parents if you don't support the legal recognition that would allow them to be parents, otherwise its just 1 adopted parent and their boyfriend/girlfriend (Even though they may have stayed together, raised the child/children together, and may even have grand children now).

That is why denying gay marriage is untenable: because of the children.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

Yes, a bridal couple walked through a same sex crowd.

Dosen't that mean we support marriage for everyone?

Now, can a gay couple walk through a court house and actually get married, like that bridal couple?

Apparently, not.

Meet, the double-standard.

Admiring Gentile
Salt Lake City, UT

@ Voice of Reason

You say that the event was a celebration of traditional marriage. But I say that the clear implication was that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry.

Of course heterosexual marriage is different from gay marriage, for one very obvious reason. Just as blacks are different from whites for one very obvious reason. But I would argue that those differences are surface ones.

Go deeper into the person involved, see what's in their heart, and you'll find that the commonalities between these "different" groups is much stronger than the differences.

I'm totally against "gay" marriage, just as I'm totally against "interracial" marriage. But I'm completely *for* marriage between two humans who happen to be gay, and two humans who happen to be of different races. Because I go deeper than those surface things when I look at people: again, what's in their heart?

I hope you'll also be able to do that one day.

Mukkake
Salt Lake City, UT

ImaUteFan:
[The only comment I will make here is to say that is was very disheartening. I fear that those of us on the side of traditional marriage are in a losing battle.]

So you admit it is inevitable. Does that mean you have no hope for a future in which gay marriage is legal? Or do you still believe that society will continue, technology will advance, and that people will continue to make their lives better with their loved ones?

Because we're told daily that society will collapse if gay-marriage is allowed, and this is why it needs to be prevented.

People who oppose gay marriage really need to ask themselves if their predictions of doom and gloom are based on any reality at all, or, if the Supreme Court goes all the way and strikes down all laws against gay marriage, do they expect to still be participating in a functioning society in 20 years, once this "social experiment" has run its course?

There are several states/countries that have made gay marriage legal. I have yet to see Canada (2005) or Massachusetts (2004) experience societal collapse.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

Marriage is about children?

Then allow, marriage.

*’Catholic charities ends Illinois adoption civil unions dispute’ – By Sophia Tareen – AP – Published by the DSNews – 11/15/11

‘The group had wished to continue its state contracts, while also referring unmarried couples who want to be adoptive or foster parents to other agencies, citing principles of religious liberty and freedom of conscience.
The state of Illinois had said that longstanding practice is discriminatory, a violation of the new law, which allows unmarried couples — gay or straight — to legally enter into civil unions.’

**i.e. the catholic ‘charity’ advocated ONLY for civil unions and THEN cited gay couples were not ‘married’ to deny adoption AFTER they had advocated AGAINST gay marriage!

Doug10
Roosevelt, UT

Just because you dress up a cow and run it in a horse race does not make it a horse.

Who invented marriage?

It was not a gay person.

As a married male I think gays should not be allowed to "marry".

Marriage is putting up with a woman who is mad, happy, sweet, and often times forgiving all in a few minutes.

Having worked with gay men for decades I can tell you it is not even remotely similar.

If they want to be "joined" or "forged" and have benefits I am fine with that.

Being married is much different and harder (look at divorce courts) and does not truly represent their lifestyle.

They think and act differently, so why try to make them like the rest of society?

In the time of Christopher Columbus the majority of people thought the earth was flat, it did not change the truth, nor does opinion change what is right or wrong now.

JClements
Lehi, UT

I love how deseret news made is sound like they kissed in support of traditional marriage,when IN FACT they weren't there for that cause. We thanked them for the support, and the groom replied "thank you for being you".

to comment

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