Quantcast

Comments about ‘Joseph Cramer, M.D.: We all should obey a new DOMA’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Sept. 2 2013 4:45 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

"I will court and woo the person I live with and ask them to marry me if I violated the first act."

That's not a good reason to marry someone...

The Scientist
Provo, UT

Despite the fact that Dr. Cramer's writing is typically awkward, I agree with the general sentiment of this article.

As each couple defends their own marriages, including dedicated same sex couples, the world will be a better place.

My wife and I have been happily married thirty years...and no god or religious ceremony has been needed.

Brave Sir Robin
San Diego, CA

The bullet points are a bit overbearing, but the premise of the article is valid. If we truly want to defend traditional marriage we should spend less time attacking gay marriages and spend more time preserving straight marriages (which are still the vast majority of relationships in this country). Heterosexual divorce, single parenthood, etc. are a far greater threat to society than gay marriage. Gay relationships are a tiny minority when compared to the total number of heterosexual divorces.

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

Now THIS is the sort of DOMA that people should be striving for.

I don't agree with every point on the list, but I'll stand firmly behind the principle of the thing.

If you want to encourage "traditional" marriage, then work to strengthen YOUR OWN marriage. Leave other people alone!

trekker
Salt Lake, UT

People should not be having sex with someone they don't love, If you love someone why would you not marry them?

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Geez Dnews, get over it. Gay people should have the same rights as straight people. This has nothing to do with the predominate religion of this state. It has to do with doing the right thing.
If two people, regardless of sexual orientation want to get married it has absolutely no bearing on anybody's life but their own.
Time to grow up and move on. Perhaps you could spend more column space on articles about how we can help the poor.

andrew h
Twin Falls, ID

While I support the idea that sex should be saved for marriage I think that giving someone the advice that hey should "court and woo the person I live with and ask them to marry me if I violated the first act" is very bad advice and would lead to a lot of bad, short term marriages.

Also the whole part about "I will love my female wife or my male husband" really awkward, nobody talks that way.

But otherwise, a lot of good advice.

NorthboundZax
Makanda, IL

Mostly reasonable, but the attempt to exclude homosexual marriage is clumsy and does not help the effort this list should be supporting.
"I will love my female wife or my male husband by waking up every day and thinking what I can do to make her or his life better"
would be far better all around as:
"I will love my spouse by waking up every day and thinking what I can do to make her or his life better."

StudentofReason
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

This article completely ignores the means through which many people outside strict social and sexual guidelines find happiness. It includes a single viewpoint for singular gender roles. Those who believe God has a single plan for every person may be comfortable with it, but outside several of the truisms it repeats, so many good people will find it useless for their own lives.

cjb
Bountiful, UT

by all means let's do what we can to defend marriage. to defend my marriage I will treat my spouse with love and kindness and consideration. I won't waste my time trying to fight homosexual marriage. whether or not homosexual marriage exists has no bearing on mine or any other heterosexual marriage its a red herring.

those that fight it would be better off being better husbands and wives. this is the way to defend traditional marriage.

truth be told the fact that homosexual relationships get respect now as opposed to yesterday year actually benefits many heterosexual marriages.

no longer do gay people Marry unsuspecting heterosexuals. such marriages don't have much of a chance because the attraction just isn't there.

EternalPerspective
Eldersburg, MD

The following statement by Brad Wilcox is applicable:

"Think of your friends and family members who have chosen to live without faith and without repentance. They don’t want to change. They are not trying to abandon sin and become comfortable with God. Rather, they are trying to abandon God and become comfortable with sin"

Why do Christians and other religious folks so adamently defend tradtional marriage between a man and woman? Why do those for gay marriage apply equality and civil rights logic to a spiritual issue? Why can't they come together and find a mutual consensus?

Marriage to those who believe it to be ordained of God between a man and a woman is the basis for family and life. It is a foundation for the purpose of existence. It is quite simply far more than an equality issue.

Look at the trends today such as the breakdown of the family with single mothers, contention between men and women from hyper sexuality + emotional fallout from failed relationships, STDs from promiscuity, children having sex, and many other examples.

There has never been a greater need for sexual exclusivity within those bounds God has set in traditional marriage.

postaledith
Freeland, WA

I disagree. I support the LBGT community and their right to marry who they love. If two people love each other, they SHOULD have the right to be happy and marry each other and have the same legal rights. And it's happening and this movement is growing. So whether people like it or not, it's going to happen. Fifty years ago, marrying someone of a different race was taboo. Now it's commonplace. Same sex marriage is headed that way.

kolob1
sandy, UT

I remember watching a debate between Rev. Jerry Falwell, the deceased pastor and founder of the "Moral majority" and a guy who represented a gay organization. The topic was the "sanctity of marriage". Falwell had espoused for several intense moments about how a marriage between and man and a woman was sanctified by God. After his fevered dialogue the gay guy asked Falwell one question " Which marriage are you trying to sanctify? Your first marriage, your second marriage or your third? That was the effective end of that debate!!

george of the jungle
goshen, UT

Have one rule. Make good memories. Who wants to think about regrets.

heidi ho
Fort Collins, CO

Read the Bible. Follow it, be happy.

louie
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I like this article

Contrariuser
mid-state, TN

@NorthboundZax --

"Mostly reasonable, but the attempt to exclude homosexual marriage is clumsy and does not help the effort this list should be supporting.
"I will love my female wife or my male husband by waking up every day and thinking what I can do to make her or his life better" "

This statement is not actually anti-gay-marriage at all.

I know women with female wives, and I know men with male husbands.

:-)

Iancook
Nevada, MO

The crux of the Article is, mind your own business. Do what you can to be the best spouse/parent you can and let others be who they are.

Tyler D
Meridian, ID

@heidi ho – “Read the Bible. Follow it, be happy.”

Or…

Read the Bible - be dismayed by the brutality, superstitions, inconsistencies, moral relativism and all the other prescriptions for creating a society that would look remarkably close to Afghanistan under the Taliban. Pull out what you can to be a better person (Jesus’ moral teachings are good) and then move on to anything else that promotes the golden rule, virtue and good character – follow all that, be happy.

EternalPerspective
Eldersburg, MD

My previous comments could easily be viewed as one-sided by only conveying the laws (justice) of God I know to be personally true. These laws exist for the protection of societies, families, and invididuals to maximize happiness here and hereafter.

But, if I were to take true religion out of the equation in a perspective, than I understand the civil rights comparison. Of course, I don't separate my faith from my identity, but I am also not without compassion and truly cannot judge anyone. Also, affirmation of conviction is an important freedom.

This issue cannot really be argued without bias from either side because it is personal. For both have vested interests. There is also no legal argument to stop the momentum of legislation changes across America. But, there is certainly a danger that religious institutions could be forced by future laws to honor gay marriages, which violates freedom.

We've seen the case of the wedding cake company that is essentially out of business now because they refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding. What's to stop churches from being next? Freedom should cover all people, but rarely goes that way from history examples.

to comment

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