Comments about ‘Bill would protect gay marriage opponents from discrimination claims’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Sept. 24 2013 9:35 p.m. MDT

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

This is needed.

I will never condone wrong choices and I will never hide how I feel about wrong choices.

Those who do not support these life choices are victims more of discrimination than the people who try to claim discrimination themselves.

oragami
St. George, UT

"I will never condone wrong choices and I will never hide how I feel about wrong choices."

“Let each man learn to know himself;
To gain that knowledge let him labor,
Improve those failings in himself
Which he condemns so in his neighbor.
How lenient our own faults we view,
And conscience’s voice adeptly smother;
Yet, oh, how harshly we review
The selfsame failings in another! …
So first improve yourself today
And then improve your friends tomorrow.”
—Hymns, no. 91

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Those who oppose gay marriage should not face discrimination claims. They should experience ridicule, marginalization, and isolation, but not claims of discrimination. That's just obvious.

bw00ds
Tucson, AZ

"But supporters of same-sex marriage say religious beliefs and exercise are already protected under First Amendment"

It may be protected under the First Amendment, but in practice it isn't. And the reason for the bill is that there are many who fear that the protection that we now have will further erode. These days, just because something is constitutional, doesn't mean that there are those who will ignore the constitution. You can see that from the President on down.

Mainly Me
Werribee, 00

This is an excellent idea and definitely needed. However, the Dear Leader will veto this bill if it passes.

ClarkHippo
Tooele, UT

"Labrador...said there aren't any cases of religious groups or nonprofits being subject to federal penalties based on their views or actions against a same-sex marriage."

Not yet, but it's coming. Gays will stop at nothing in order to force every public school, university, non-profit group and yes, every church to fall in line with their demands 100% without flexibility and without debate.

And using the IRS as a weapon against churches and non-profits is only the start.

I easily see a time in which the gay and lesbian lobby will be so powerful, any disagreement with them will lead to people having handcuffs put on them. If you think I'm being paranoid, just keep in mind that this past week a man in Maryland was arrested at a school board meeting simply because he openly opposed the school's new Common Core curriculum.

The fact is simply this. The left loves freedom of speech and freedom of religion and will fight hard to support both. Unless of course, you disagree with them.

Schwa
South Jordan, UT

Your views on what are and are not wrong choices are not the binding rules by which we, in the land of the free, are subject to. Should I, as a business owner or landlord be allowed to deny service or housing to Mormons if I felt like they were making poor life choices?

LiberalEastCoastMember
Parkesburg, PA

A Conservative using big government to protect us in our ignorance and arrogance. Priceless.

We're all Republicans until we want something. Then we all turn into Democrats.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

It is so shameful that an LDS legislator would sponsor such a bill; particularly given the way members of our own faith were treated just a few generations ago for our Church's stance on marriage.

The admirable thing for LDS elected officials to do would be admit that while not every form of civil marriage is akin to the LDS standard for religious marriage, we recognize that each person should be permitted to marry the one they love and that we speak from experience in saying that state-sanctioned discrimination is never right.

TA1
Alexandria, VA

Its simple folks - don't discriminate in the public square - period. You really want people to believe this is needed - I think not - learn to treat others as you would want to be treated and don't throw up religion as an excuse for legitimizing discrimination again. History is replete with examples of what a bad idea this is.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

In other words, this Congressman wants to legislate in favor of discrimination, bigotry and the ability to break the law. Sad.

Susan in VA
Alexandria, VA

Since this article says little about what is actually IN this bill.... I would find it hard to comment on it. I do, however feel this article was written specifically to incite those who feel strongly one way or the other. I'm disappointed that the Deseret News would run this article with no actual facts in it.

grip
Meridian, ID

It is a sad day when a law is needed to protect the United States Constitution. The first amendment is clear and easy to understand. The confusion arises when desire supersedes reason. Protection should apply to all people, not just a small minority whose distinction is a result of choice and seeks reverse discrimination to justify their behavior.

Springvillepoet
Springville, UT

So basically when the KKK claims they can discriminate against Blacks thanks to this bill, because their religious views do not allow for the equal treatment of African-Americans, you will be okay with that.

When somebody wants to discriminate in their business against Mormons because they feel the LDS Church is an abomination, that will be okay, too.

* * *

It really isn't surprising how myopic some people are. There are approximately 314,000 Christian congregations in the U.S., but because Gay people want equal rights, there must be some kind of war against Christianity. Having so few places to meet must make it very difficult for people with theological arguments against everyone enjoying basic rights as guaranteed in The Constitution (and various Supreme Court Decisions) to express their views. My heart goes out to those who find it necessary to seek protection for being bigoted. It's a rough life living in a nation which is so weakly represented in Christian ethics.

wazzup
Cottonwood Heights, UT

If it's already a protected right, under the constitution, just codify it so there is no question about being sued for discrimination.

FWIW...........that is the ultimate goal of the gays.........to force the performance of gay marriages and if not, take away your tax exempt status. don't fall for the ruse. Pass the legislation!

davidmpark
Salt Lake City, UT

So, the courts gave the LGBT folks special protections while we all already has equality under the law. Gay marriage became proponents gained protected speech (I thought we had a first amendment) to be protected while harming opponents when we already had equality under the law. Now, gay marriage opponents need special protections... and I'm sure we already had equality under the law.

From what I can tell; the people involved in both sides were not disabled (who do need extra protections under the law). The law making marriage between one man, one woman was ratified in a general election... I'm not seeing why special protections are necessary other than people are breaking existing law and it's not being properly enforced.

There's a lot of people who owe us an explanation as to their inability to govern.

Riccar
Moses Lake, WA

"Treat others as you would want to be treated." The trouble with that is, it is always so one sided and it is sure true in the gay issue. As with the photographer, the bakery, the Boy Scouts and others that I have read about, the LGBT wishes to take their rights away, even though they said that with gay marriage passing, that would be all they wanted. However, as we see, they keep pushing their agenda. And it will not stop. Mark my word, there will be the day when religions will be threatened to lose their tax status over this. They have no regard for how they treat others as long as they get their way. Don't make it sound like they are innocent and the rest of us are the sinners.

trekker
Salt Lake, UT

The 1st amendment didn't protect the LDS Church when they wanted to practice their belief of plural marriage, even though it should have been protected under freedom of religion. I suspect the court would ignore the 1st amendment when those whose religious and moral beliefs do not want to accept gays. So I do think this bill is needed.

bandersen
Saint George, UT

DOMA should never have been passed, just as a host of other legislation over the past 150 years. States should decide the issues, as our constitution originally intended. Instead of getting involved in all these partisan federal issues, people that really believe in self-government need to to just support God and the Constitution. Let the Gays falter along as they want; just stay clear and support States' rights. If California wants to allow people to marry plants, then let them do it! Eventually the best ideas come to the fore, including the definition of marriage. If people get uncomfortable with States' Rights, it is because they want control, instead of choice and freedom, which is what this country, and God always intended. Let go!

FDRfan
Sugar City, ID

Where is the Utah GOP on this bill?

to comment

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