Quantcast

Comments about ‘Utah defends marriage law against challenge, saying it promotes better parenting’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Oct. 21 2013 12:59 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Contrariusier
mid-state, TN

@Badgerbadger --

"Please quit flaunting your sexuality to the world. "

Every time some guy talks about his girlfriend or his wife, he is "flaunting" his heterosexuality. Every time some woman kisses her boyfriend or her husband in public, every time she holds his hand while they're walking down the street, she is "flaunting" her heterosexuality.

Why shouldn't a gay man or woman have the right to do the same?

"You will gain nothing by forcing that people endorse your sexual behavior."

Nobody cares whether you "endorse" gay marriage or not -- just as nobody cares whether you endorse the consumption of alcohol or R-rated movies or, heck, cars made in Japan.

What we DO care about is obeying the US Constitution, and especially giving equal rights to ALL US citizens. It doesn't matter whether you like or approve of those citizens -- they deserve the same rights, regardless.

@gmlewis --

"states can define marriage according to the will of the people within that state"

Not if those states violate the US Constitution.

Multiple SCOTUS courts have affirmed that marriage is a basic civil right and protected by the US Constitution. And the Constitution guarantees equal rights for ALL citizens.

RedWings
CLEARFIELD, UT

Children need a dad and a mom. This has been supported by study after study. I find it humorous that the same commenters who so worship "science" are so quick to deny it when studies do not support their personal opinion or political belief.

Homosexuality will not destroy our society by itself. What does destroy societies is rampant selfishness and a denial of the values that make societies great. What happened to Rome and Greece is happening in Europe and the US today.

And yes, I am saying that homosexual behavior is a choice. As one who has overcome same-sex attraction, and no longer feels attraction for the same sex, I can say that with the conviction of truth. Thousands and thousands have left homosexual behavior behind for a happy and fulfilling heterosexual life. This is the truth that the media and the left work so hard to hide.

Kevin J. Kirkham
Salt Lake City, UT

gmlewis
@Kalinda - The stipulations that the state law has to be based on reality with no animus are not in the U. S. Constitution.
KJK
The Supreme Court has ruled several times regarding "scrutiny" and groups "similarly situated". Look those terms up. States don't have free reign to do as they wish.

Badgerbadger
You will gain nothing by forcing that people endorse your sexual behavior. If you are okay with what you do, fine, and you shouldn't need endorsing.
KJK
"endorsing", through marriage, provides legal rights and protections and tax advantages. gays need those things as much as you and your spouse do. Would you be willing to divorce your spouse and live together as roommates? that is what you are asking gay couples to do.

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

I don't advocate for the state requiring permission to get married or divorced. I think the state should just plain butt out.

I think all death taxes should be eliminated and that everyone should be able to designate who or what gets their belongings when they die. They earned it, the state has no right to it.

Filing for taxes jointly and separately were equalized a couple of decades ago, so it is non-discriminatory. The claiming of dependents is also non-discriminatory.

I think everyone should be able to designate who is their chosen "next of kin" to make life and death decisions for them. That person need not be kin at all, if a non-related person is the one designated.

I talk fondly of any of my friends, including those of my same sex, with no repercussions so those in SS relationships can do the same. I never discuss sex in public. It is private. I would appreciate if everyone else would do likewise, both homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Total fairness, respect, and freedom of religion, without government interference in marriage.

Still got a problem with it?

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@RedWings --

"This has been supported by study after study. "

No, it hasn't.

"Study after study" has supported the fact that children do best in stable, two-parent homes.

Studies have NEVER supported the claim that the genders or orientations of those parents make any difference.

"commenters who so worship "science" are so quick to deny it when studies do not support their personal opinion..."

Good scientists laugh at bad studies. Bad studies deserve to be laughed at and dismissed.

"What happened to Rome and Greece is happening in Europe and the US.... "

The falls of Rome and Greece had nothing to do with homosexuality or gay marriage. In fact, Rome didn't fall until a couple of hundred years AFTER gay marriage had been banned there.

"I am saying that homosexual behavior is a choice."

I am lefthanded. I could learn to write with my right hand -- but that wouldn't mean that lefthandedness is a choice.

"Thousands have left homosexual behavior behind "

Where?? Where are all these supposed ex-gays?

Even the last president of Exodus International -- the premiere "conversion therapy" organization in the nation -- finally apologized publicly for all the harm his organization had done, remember?

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ gmlewis: Perhaps you should reread the Constitution.

Article IV, Section 2: "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

Amendment IX: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Amendment XIV, Section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Prior to 1954, the Constitutionality of laws challenged under Equal Protection was based on a "reasonableness" standard. Even under that very weak assessment, which initially allowed segregation, there had to be a reason, beyond animus, for the law. Since 1954, additional levels of scrutiny have been added. State laws cannot violate the Federal Constitution and cannot be based on animus.

Contrarius
mid-state, TN

@Badgerbadger --

"I think all death taxes should be eliminated and that everyone should be able to designate who or what gets their belongings when they die."

There are roughly 1100 legal rights/benefits associated with marriage -- ranging from legal guardianship of children to estate taxes to health insurance. I seriously doubt that you'd really be willing to give up all of them.

" I never discuss sex in public."

If you ever say something like "I'm going to church with my wife tomorrow" or ever hold her hand while walking down the street, then you have indeed "discussed" your sexual orientation in public. In fact, I'd bet you've done it many times.

Gay people should be able to do the same.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ Badgerbadger: So, it is not that you oppose same-sex marriage, per se, it is more that you oppose marriage in general. Of course, you think churches should be able to perform some kind of ceremony for godly recognition of unions with no limits or restrictions placed by government or society - but marriage in general not so much.

You do realize that requiring wills and medical power of attorney and such - all those benefits the government automatically gives with the purchase and completion of a marriage license (available for around $45 for the license and a couple hundred for the Justice of the Peace) - would cost thousands of dollars, right?

"I never discuss sex in public." Do you have children? If so, I can tell you the minimum number of times you have had sex and the months in which said activity occurred. I cannot say the same about the same-sex couple down the street. Their children are adopted and as far as I know, they may have never had sex.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

@Kalindra 10:15 p.m. Oct. 23, 2013

Those are all pertinent, appropriate and effective constitutional provisions for this discussion. There is one more that should be added to your list (dealing with the fact that each state must recognize marriages established in other states):

Article IV - The States

Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

@Badgerbadger 9:08 a.m. Oct. 23, 2013

Yes! Please quit flaunting your sexuality to the world.

------------------

My husband (of 44 years) and I are in the 65-70 age group, and are heterosexual.

When we walk down the street holding hands, we are "flaunting" our sexuality.

When we put a picture of ourselves as a couple on our desks at work, we are 'flaunting" our sexuality at work.

There are many more examples of the way we "flaunt" our sexuality, but I don't have enough words in this response to set them all out.

When we talk about what we and are children and our grandchild are going to do, we are "flaunting" our sexuality.

When we discuss the fact that we have children, we are 'flaunting" the fact that we have had sex.

There are many more examples of the way we "flaunt" our sexuality, but I don't have enough words in this response to set them all out.

Gay people and couples should be able to "flaunt" their sexuality in the same ways my husband and I do, without criticism from anyone.

to comment

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