Quantcast

Comments about ‘Attention now turns to Utah's Amendment 3’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, June 27 2013 6:45 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "amazondoc" that is in the FLDS culture. Again, outside of the FLDS culture, you don't have the child bride issue or the hyper male dominance problems so the abuse, violence, and neglect problems don't exist.

Justice Bauman doesn't know much about polygamy or people that have lived in it. His comments, like yours, show that you only know the FLDS and similar sects use of polygamy.

Read Psychology Today's article "The paradox of polygamy II: Why most women benefit from polygamy and most men benefit from monogamy" There are also many other first person histories written about women in polygamy, and they report non of the problems that the judge claims.

The biggest question is this. With nearly 50% of gay relationships experiencing violence and abuse, why were those legalized when the violence rate is less in plural marriages?

carabaoU
Moab, UT

Majority Citizens of Utah have said marriage is between man and woman. If you want same benefits as married couples, get those benefits by passing laws to update the current laws to include your group into them. But marriage is between man and woman in this state.

If you somehow magically changed our laws to allow you to "marry", then you will see an exodus from this state to another state that still has marriage only between man and woman. Then you will know He is coming. If you aren't religious, sorry, I can't save you.

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

@midvale guy;

It is absolutely bigotry when you use your personal "dislike" to discriminate against others. You are welcome to "dislike the behavior" (personally, I loathe religious behavior); nobody is going to make you participate in same-sex behavior if you dislike it so much.
That said, you do NOT have the right to deny the benefits to same sex couples that you, yourself enjoy, simply because you "dislike" their behavior.
That is why the courts are going to rule against Amendment 3. Equal protection applies to ALL Americans, not just those you approve of.

The majority of these comments are just dripping with hate. So much for the religious being "good".

@Redshirt;

I've always believed that "god" was a fool for choosing one of his children over the others. Especially when he ordered that "child" to kill all the others and steal their land from them.

@phillyfanatic;

Waaaah.

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

@carabaoU;

Fortunately, Utah is a part of the United States of America and subject to the Constitution of the United States of America.

I am a citizen of the United States of America (as are you, I presume). We are residents of Utah.

You don't get to write your laws such that they violate the rights of citizens of the United States of America, even if they happen to be residents of Utah.

carabaoU
Moab, UT

@RanchHand

Did you not read the court case? They left it up to the States to determine their own definition of marriage. They also said the federal benefits should be applied to all. That's why I said to update Utah laws so these benefits can be added for these people. But Utah law says marriage is between man and woman.

bandersen
Saint George, UT

Moderate: I loved your comment. The record of fidelity to 'wedding' vows would make any other form of 'marriage' an undeniable improvement. In all this talk, I have heard very little about the voices of children. Gay marriage is just an extension of the abortion debate. Selfishness is a never ending cesspool. Where were the fathers when these 'choices' were being considered? A study of that element would be worth a good solid look, exceptions noted.

Contrarius
Lebanon, TN

@RedShirt --

"outside of the FLDS culture..."

Sorry, Red, but your personal beliefs are not what matter in Constitutional issues. Facts, expertise, and law are the things that matter.

Supreme Court justices -- whether American or Canadian -- do a heckuva lot of legal and factual research on these issues before they make their court decisions. If you disagree with them, take it up in court.

"With nearly 50% of gay relationships experiencing violence and abuse"

This simply isn't true, Red. Please stop misrepresenting the facts.

From a National Violence Against Women Prevention Research Center paper, "Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships":
-- "In a study asking about whether a same-sex relationships had suffered from physical abuse, 7% of 706 lesbian couples and 11% of 560 gay men couples indicated physical abuse had occurred."
-- "Sexual abuse by a woman partner was reported by 1% of lesbians, but 20% of lesbians indicated having been sexually abused by a male partner. "
-- "Design flaws in many studies also may exaggerate prevalence rates, e.g., when asking lesbians about abuse in previous relationships, some fail to distinguish between same- sex violence and previous violence by a male partner."

Keep trying, Red.

carabaoU
Moab, UT

@RanchHand,

"You don't get to write your laws such that they violate the rights of citizens of the United States of America, even if they happen to be residents of Utah."

How come I can carry a loaded gun in my car here in Utah, but California won't let me? Isn't that a violation of the rights of citizens of the USA?

Anything not regulated by Fed Gov't is left to the States to regulate. Defining marriage is not regulated by Fed Gov't, so it is regulated by the States.

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

@carabaoU;

Please go read the Constitution. It says that you can't deny rights to some people that you give to others. Utah's Amendment 3 does just that and is therefore unconstitutional.

QuercusQate
Wasatch Co., UT

@carabao

Utah can only have its own marriage law (or any other laws) only when those laws do not abridge the fundamental rights of others. If states could legislate willy-nilly we'd still have anti-miscegenation laws in the South.

QuercusQate
Wasatch Co., UT

@phillyfanatic

This struggle for marriage equality is uniquely American. The more we embrace our neighbors as our equals, the more we bocome better Americans.

Coach Biff
Lehi, UT

Ummm, yeah, homosexual sex does pose certain health risks. You are just being purposefully obtuse on the subject. I will refer you to the CDC if you want proof. I will also refer you to the UT study on adaptability of children raised in same sex households. Traditional morality doesn't require cosmic support. It stands on its own merits.

4word thinker
Murray, UT

When they cross state lines and become single again, does that change how they behave?

carabaoU
Moab, UT

@RanchHand and @QuercusQate

Here is the amendment 3:

The amendment reads:

Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.
No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

I don't see any rights given to one and denied to another. All men can marry. All women can marry. Like I've said before, you want the same legal benefits afforded to those who marry, such as hospital visits, tax filing status, etc. Those are separate laws, of which you should get changed.

Contrarius
Lebanon, TN

@Coach Biff --

"Ummm, yeah, homosexual sex does pose certain health risks. "

Ummm, yeah, what you call "homosexual" sex is just as easily enjoyed by heterosexual couples as by homosexual couples.

"I will also refer you to the UT study on adaptability of children raised in same sex households."

Oh heavens, not Regnerus again!

Regnerus' "study" (and I use the term VERY loosely) has been very widely and very thoroughly debunked, many times.

Regnerus compared UNSTABLE homosexual homes to STABLE heterosexual homes. Naturally, he found that the kids in the stable homes did better than those in the unstable homes.

His findings had everything to do with **stability**, and absolutely NOTHING to do with homosexuality.

@carabaoU --

"All men can marry. All women can marry. "

This very same argument was used back in the day when people were trying to block interracial marriages.

They said:

"Everyone has the same rights. Everyone has the right to marry someone of their own race."

That argument didn't work then, and it won't work now. The Supreme Court saw right through it in Loving v. Virginia, and they'll see right through it again when the "gay" version comes before them in the future.

midvale guy
MIDVALE, UT

@ RanchHand CC: CarabaoU- And there it is. the things that the LGBT community think are RIGHTS covered under the Constitution are really PRIVILEGES that are granted on a state by state basis. This is also why the Supreme Court's decision is still a non-decision an Utah's amendment 3 is not unconstitutional. Until the federal government is very clear in their decisions and implementations or by directly amending the Constitution this issue will go around and around and cause havoc. You ask for everyone to look at the Constitution, please be more precise because at best all you have provided is a generalization. As for your disdain for anything Godly or religious (by the way God is spelled with a Capital G). Please be aware that all law in the United States and most of the world is based on Mosaic law, The 10 Commandments. Please extend the same respect to others that you expect.

midvale guy
MIDVALE, UT

@ RanchHand - as I tried to say an earlier post but did not state as well as I could Have. There are no bad people only bad behaviors. If you would like to turn this statement back on itself, it could also be there are no good people only good behaviors. This also takes into account that all goodness comes from God and all evil comes from Satan. This includes each and every one of us (Including Charles Manson). If all of this legislation does get passed effectively and properly in an enforceable decision, it will be God's will as far as I'm concerned. He will give us everything we ask for. All of the resulting implications and events whether positive or negative will be ours to bear together in this world and individually in eternity.

zoar63
Mesa, AZ

Amazondoc,

There is a problem with your argument. Polygamy is illegal in the United States yet the government for the most part does not enforce it except in the most extreme circumstances. So if polygamy is illegal why do they not arrest all those who are practicing it? For all intents and purposes they might as well legalize it. Who is going to be hurt? The husband already has one legal wife why can’t the others be legal?
So you are saying that judges in Canada reaffirmed the constitutionality of their polygamy ban yet they allow polygamy to continue even with the abuses that you have mentioned. How can something be ruled constitutional but violations not be punished. What kind of system of government is that. why hasn’t the government stepped in to put an end to it. It sort of reminds me of the immigration problem. The government does not strictly enforce the laws they make.

If same sex marriage as you predict will one day become the law of the land then you cannot withhold those rights from polygamists. Or will the victim now become the oppressor?

Mom Johnson
West Jordan, UT

The LGBT agenda is upon us. I can see it now...........more and more LGBT couples will move to Utah so that their voting voices will be heard. They will move because of that soul reason. Citizens of Utah need to prepare themselves for a battle from here on out. Not only will they sway the vote in their direction over legalizing marriage, but they will sway the vote in all the elections to go their way. They are a united group with lots and lots of money behind them.

This is not a scare tactic, and it is not out of disrespect, it is very real. This is what is happening all over the country. Don't be blind to what is inevitable. We have lived somewhat complacently here in Utah for decades. It's time that we wake up and get involved and know what is happening around us.

ulvegaard
Medical Lake, Washington

We are bombarded with words such as 'fair' 'discrimination' and 'equality', And yet, not matter how much society tries to achieve these goals through legislation, the truth is, freedoms are trampled on and those who feel strongly about traditional values find themselves labeled as haters and discriminators. Many social upheavals have been waged in this country and each has only brought additional confusion and disillusionment. I still remember the new morality push of the sixties which did little to make life better for the masses, but instead promoted the ideals of anarchy and irresponsibility.

I am now waiting for the soon to come day when my children, who cherish the ideals of growing up in a traditional family unit of a mother and a father, legally married and devoted to each other - and who seek no malice against anyone, will be labeled by their peers as ignorant, hate filled products of a more traditional and reserved life style.

to comment

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