Quantcast

Comments about ‘Conservative icons disagree on gay marriage in Utah speeches’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, April 12 2013 9:50 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
IMAPatriot2
PLEASANT GROVE, UT

Leavitt is a bought and paid for politician. His views reflect those who think you can compromise with principle and morality. Very disappointed.

jasonlivy
Orem, UT

From what I see from this article is one man who has political courage and one that does not. I personally don't care if the gay marriage issue is a "political certainty" or not. I can't in good conscience support gay marriage.

I believe that we as a people need to be free to make our own choices and accept the consequences to those choices. I believe those who actively practice homosexuality, like any major choice in our life, has consequences. I do not put homosexuality in the same 'civl rights' category as race and gender. I do not believe that being black or white, male and female is the same as who we choose to have sex with.

I also believe that a traditional family (a Mother and Father) is the most essential ingredient to the foundation of any civilization. True many heterosexual marriages fail, but that does not justify marginalizing them or make this an argument for gay marriage. Traditional marriage is eternal and was established from the beginning of time. We are fools to think we can simply change it's definition. We do so at our own peril.

New to Utah
PAYSON, UT

Robert George is correct the fight must go on or religious liberty will cease. The effort to punish and silence the LDS church for its efforts on Prop 8 is continuing. Hollywood and billionaire leftists have created documentaries that have been cruel and slanted.Obama has
Gay Marriage as a cornerstone of his second term. The family will disenengrate at an even
faster pace if those supporting marriage give up.

Florien Wineriter
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Gov Leavitt, as always, expresses the res;ponsible, thoughtful response to the question of same-sex ,marriage. We owe respect to all humans. Our gay borthers and sisters deserve the happiness and fulfillments we desire for ourselves.

Albert Maslar CPA (Retired)
Absecon, NJ

Princeton professor Robert P. George is right in saying the family is the foundation of just about everything good in the country including the economy, culture, and health, and welfare. Gays have a human right to make choices, right or wrong, but their same-sex unions cannot arbitrarily be raised to the same level as traditional marriage. Gays have the right of free choice for their lifestyles in the same way that Adam and Eve were given the free choice not to eat of the forbidden tree. Mankind was given the right to free choice, but not necessarily without price especially when that choice goes against nature itself. Humans are free to disobey God-given precepts but at their own peril. Gays choose to live lifestyles contrary to God's command to increase and multiply and that is the ultimate test. Gay unions can no more be called marriage anymore than soda and other beverages can be called water. Once flavors have been added to water, the resulting beverage is no longer water.

Esquire
Springville, UT

The reality is that George has confused government support for religion with freedom of religion. The only way this gets resolved is to leave the contract to the government and the sacrament to the churches, instead of combining the two as we now do. Ironically, that is the only way to truly advance the cause of freedom of religion in a diverse society.

Eagles63
Provo, UT

I would submit that the ultimate outcome in the same-marriage game is the effort to destroy organized religion. How often have we seen in history a group attacking one entity when the ultimate prize was something completely different? Yes, where this is headed is a high-noon showdown with organized religion. The pathway is logical. With the passage of same-sex marriage, the inevitable focus of certain elements within that movement will set their sights on the ultimate prize: challenging the legitimacy of religious organizations that refuse to sanction same-sex marriage. It makes absolute sense then to attack religions that will not accept same-sex marriage. The bully club that the federal government has at its disposal is tax status. As non-profit entities, they will find themselves in the cross-hairs of the leaders of the current same-sex movement, who will brand such religions as bigoted and illegal entities. Once sufficient judicial strength is established, inevitably the organizations' non-profit tax status will be lost. Too far-fetched, impossible you say? Hardly, see today's attacks on the BSA. Without doubt, the ultimate prize is not same sex marriage. It's our religion.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

'Religious liberty' needs to be contained in the context of religion, not the larger society. Otherwise, we are all prisoners of religion, and that's not how it's supposed to work.

frugalfly
PULLMAN, WA

The marriage equality/sexual orientation civil rights groups end goals are not marriage equality nor sexual orientation civil rights. Their end goal is to marginalize religion. Their end goal is to destroy religious liberty which was the founding liberty of our nation. It was liberty #1! Now it will be gone. Their goal is to change the 4000 year old Judeo-Christian marriage ethic of male and female. I am surprised at how naive many good intentioned christians are of the marriage equality/sexual orientation civil rights groups line of "our same sex marriage doesn't effect your rights". They are using this line to get in the door and those sucker enough to accept that line at the door will find out when they get in the house that they will take a sledge hammer to the house. But by then it will be too late.

amazondoc
USA, TN

Anyone who is concerned about families and children should SUPPORT gay marriage, not fight it.

More than 100,000 gay couples in the US are *already* raising children, with or without marriage. These gay-led families won't be going away. Giving these couples the right to marry will increase the stability of their households, and help their children. How is that a bad thing?

Many groups of child-development experts -- including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Psychiatric Association, AND the American Psychological Association -- officially **support** gay marriage.

The AAP's position statement declares, in part: “There is an emerging consensus, based on extensive review of the scientific literature, that children growing up in households headed by gay men or lesbians are not disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents" and "Marriage strengthens families and benefits child development".

You will not find ANY groups of child-development experts who oppose gay marriage.

People who think children are important should ENCOURAGE gay marriages, because marriage encourages stable families -- and THAT is what helps kids.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Gay marriage is not about love, but are acts we all know to be being wrong. Rationalization does not justify.

Society thrives on a strong family unit of a man, and women, and we need leaders who'll step up to the plate and leads us in a positive direction.

followerofChrist
Crawford County, PA

If followers of Jesus get involved in political agendas, might they lose in the end no matter which position they take?

EDM
Castle Valley, Utah

Good grief, Professor George. Anyone who passionately advocates for including gays in marriage rights is also a passionate advocate of family and marriage, period.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

The movement to silence those who support traditional marriage is the McCarthyism of our time. History does not repeat itself but it rhymes and right now it is rhyming like McCarthyism.

Jonathan Eddy
Payson, UT

The true argument here has really nothing to do with marriage. It has everything to do with equality. Monetary equality, not human rights equality. At some point in the past, marriage lost its sanctity and became secular, more of a business contract between two people. When marriage transformed, local and federal government butted in, seeing marriage as a taxable event. Marriage is now nothing more than a government benefits, corporate benefits and IRS consideration.

Gays. Straights. Forget about it. Who cares anymore. Everyone just wants benefits, not safe, secure happy families. The real losers in this political, money driven game are single people. No marriage. No tax breaks. As long as marriage is a government run and controlled contractual event, it will be nothing sacred, or important or meaningful.

If marriage continues to be monitored by the government, marriage will continue to be a joke; a mockery before God. That is of course if God exists and I'm not so sure if the majority of humanity really believes one does anymore because the art and beauty of procreation seems to be in a state of devolution.

JBQ
Saint Louis, MO

Tough issue but the family is the stable unit of society. This means a mother and a father and the special love of a mother. Love is lacking in a sexual relationship. Alfred Adler equated sex with power. Selfless love is seen as giving and not taking. We are a sex obsessed and self fulfilling society. It would appear that our society is going the way of the great Roman civilization. The barbarians (translation Germania) overcame and overthrew the vaunted Roman discipline. The phalanx was replaced by the mob. The National Socialism of Nazi Germany was one long range result. The Egyptian pharohs evolved into Islam. The orthodoxy of the czars was obliterated by Communism. Now, we have forces at work to unite all of these forces together into a one world church-state. Religion is the target and not the accomodation whether it be that of the pharohs, Mohammed, Moses, or Christ. All are seen as male dominated and not gay friendly.

BrentBot
Salt Lake City, UT

The US Supreme Court declared in 1885 that states' marriage laws must be based on "the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization, the best guaranty of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement."

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Re:jasonlivy

"Accept the consequences of those choices"

The question is--who will act as "judge" and impose the "consequences?"

You or God?

God commanded us to love one another as ourselves above all other commandments except to love Him. He also commanded us to not judge.

I know if i were homosexual i would not/could not live my entire life without a companion and marriage partner, or without hope of ever having a companion and marriage partner.

BrentBot
Salt Lake City, UT

Why does the public discourse not discuss the impact of SSM on our civilization? The omens are clear from the fall of the Roman (and earlier) Empires.

Marriage reflects the natural moral and social law evidenced the world over. As the late British social anthropologist Joseph Daniel Unwin noted in his study of world civilizations, any society that devalued the nuclear family soon lost what he called "expansive energy," which might best be summarized as society's will to make things better for the next generation. In fact, no society that has loosened sexual morality outside of man-woman marriage has survived.

Analyzing studies of cultures spanning several thousands of years on several continents, Chairman of Harvard University’s sociology department, Pitirim Sorokin. found that virtually all political revolutions that brought about societal collapse were preceded by a sexual revolution in which marriage and family were devalued by the culture’s acceptance of homosexuality.

Giving same-sex relationships the same special status and benefits as the marital bond would not be the expansion of a right but the destruction of a bedrock foundation of civilization.

Lagomorph
Salt Lake City, UT

Many churches have no problem with same-sex marriage and are glad to solemnize them. Yet Mr. George apparently has no qualms about using the power of the state to infringe on their religious liberty. For him, it seems, liberty is only for those who agree with him. He will have to resolve this conflict for his argument to have any merit and be taken seriously.

to comment

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