Comments about ‘Ad campaign targets proposed Utah nondiscrimination law’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Dec. 18 2013 7:50 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Kings Court
Alpine, UT

"Even though nondiscrimination laws sound reasonable, they're not. They give special rights to some at the expense of others, and they'll harm our first freedoms," Bunker said.

If we extend this logic to its "logical conclusion" then we shouldn't have any nondiscrimination laws on the books at all. Laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, sex, religion, etc is giving special rights to some at the expense of others. These groups that are against "nondiscrimination laws" are basically saying that discrimination does not exist, so there is no need to define the various forms of discrimination and codify them into law.

Mapleton, UT

Three words: Camel. Nose. Tent.

If you don't get it, Google it.

spring street

Everyone has a race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Nondiscrimination laws protect everyone.

And if you think there is no need for nondiscrimination laws, let's remove religion and see how that goes.

Provo, UT

@Kings: it's not that discrimination doesn't exist, it's that the government should not be overriding our freedom of association to force one group's social opinions on everyone else.

Laws that force people to associate against their will are no better than Jim Crow laws that force people not to associate in such ways.

"Discrimination" just means recognizing a distinction; all social decisions involve recognizing and acting upon distinctions, whether that's "no shirt no shoes no service" or "who will we allow to join our bowling team."

Absent laws that override people's freedom of association, in the long run the distinctions that people base their actions on will be ones that make sense for society. For instance, generally, without Jim Crow laws, a business which refuses to cater to people of one race loses business to its competitors.

The government has no business meddling in these decisions or trying to come up with a list of which distinctions people may or may not take into account in choosing who they will give their money to, who they will make a contract with, who they will befriend, or who they will spend their lives with.

St. George, UT

Religious conservatives so often deride racial and sexual minorities as playing the "victim". It is becoming obvious to me that such labeling represents a classic example of Freudian projection.

Santiago, 00

Despite its pious appearance, no civilization has ever been built or sustained under the sterile principle of "non-discrimination".

The game with these laws is to confuse basic human respect with public acceptance of conducts and demands minority groups push against the structure that conforms, and has made a community viable in the first place. This is were the left meets the big economic interests, as we now see in the whole Western world, where these non-discrimination laws serve primarily two functions: silence dissent from the ongoing reativistic deconstruction of moral norms, and prevent opposition to the liberalization of the labor market (mass immigration), both under the threat of legal prosecution and/or media vilification.

Sadly, one sees well intended people adhering to these initiatives that corrode the social fabric, because they are well trained by the media in the religion of feelgoodism.

Tooele, UT

To AZKID: I get it! I have known about that for quite awhile and we always tell our children that story. Camel, Nose, Tent! And you're slowly out! And that say's it all.

La Verkin, UT

I hope they find a real Conservative to run against Steve next election. The man has sold out his constituents.

Auckland NZ, 00

AZKID is right with his camel's nose allusion. In this case the camel is greater fairness, a slightly closer step towards equality, than some prefer not to allow into their tent of privilege.

Florien Wineriter
Cottonwood Heights, UT

reg comment by Kings Court, question what 'special rights' to to whom? Are the Bill of Rights applicable to only some citizens?

Sandy, UT

It is all about freedom and the willingness to take it away from other people. The examples in numerous states of people being forced to participate in gay weddings or artificially inseminating lesbian couples should be a warning to all. What you do is not my business and what I do is not yours. If I do not like what you do, I have the right to not be invovled in it in any way. Otherwise I am not really free.

Moreover, the loss of freedom is one way. Look at the guy from Duck Dynasty, he expresses his opinion and he is off his show. He is being discriminated against based on expressing his belief. Do you think an antidiscrimination law will be used against A&E? Nope. It will be illegal not to rent or employ gays and transgender folks, but if you express your religious beliefs you will get fired or boycotted. When was the last time you heard of someone getting fired for making anti-christian comments.

Non-discrimination law take away freedom and become a tool of the left to go after those they do not like. This change is a bad idea.

Bountiful, UT

If someone could show me how being fair to gay couples in housing hurts peoples traditional marriages, I would consider not supporting this bill, on the condition that other accomidations are made for gay couples, such as special housing.

Stansbury Park, Ut

After all Utah has such a proud history of inclusion as was told last week in all the media. I am amazed that people who have been subject to massive amounts of discrimination are against protections for others. It is high time that we followed the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth and practiced loving all of our brothers and sisters on this planet. Because some are different is the reason some folks here in Utah feel the need to treat them badly. If a law can help protect these children of God then the law should be passed. Those that wantonly treat these people are badly are the problem, not the law.

Clearfield, UT

Democracy cuts both ways. On the one hand it may give us certain rights but simultaneously it can also take rights away. For instance if you choose not to marry or have kids, as a working adult you will pay more taxes over your life time than someone who is married with dependants. Discriminatory? While there may be a rational for this decision it benefits one group at the expense of another.

However, the nondiscrimination act as layed out in this legislation is a universal protection as we all have virtually the same set of classifications - it will enhance freedom for all. Moe specifically, it will help groups like refugees, women, Hispanics, gays, and disabled individuals, who are frequently discriminated against find, housing and employment opportunities. People that don't like this legislation are disingenuous in saying they shouldn't be forced to "associate" with others - immplying that they will somehoe lose their ability to form individualized social relationships. Landlords, businesses, and employers do not form the same social relations as do individuals but rather are driven by profit. Therefore anyone with green money, or appropriate work skill set, should be given equal opportunity to access housing, commerce, or emloyment.

mid-state, TN

As pointed out in the article, the LDS church itself supported SLC's anti-gay-discrimination ordinance.

If anti-gay-discrimination laws are good enough for the church, then who are y'all to oppose them??

It's been said before, but it's worth saying again: anti-discrimination laws protect EVERYONE. Everyone has a gender; everyone has a sexual orientation; everyone has a gender identity.

These laws protect YOU against discrimination just as much as they protect anyone else.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

@ AZKID -"Three words: Camel. Nose. Tent."

Not to worry, the GOP's incredible shrinking tent is so small now, there's only room for his "Nose."

Dirty Hippee
Bountiful, UT

“I think Utahns are very hospitable. In a lot of ways we bend over backwards to be kind and accepting and caring of everyone, so for that reason, a lot of Utahns think a nondiscrimination law would be a good idea.”

Yep, Utahns are hospitable and bend over backwards to be kind even in rush hour traffic.

clearfield, UT

The trouble with these kinds of laws is that to prove discrimination against anyone is like trying to read peoples minds. Rarely will an employer or apartment owner put out a sign that says no (fill in the blank) allowed. The laws of this country already cover these issues. Bottom line, this is nothing more than ammo for LAWYERS IN UTAH, to make more money. Stinks.

Salt Lake City, UT

Article: "The 'First Freedoms Compact' includes tolerance, fairness, mutual respect and working toward the common good."

Then they should be first in line to support the legislation.

Prodicus: "For instance, generally, without Jim Crow laws, a business which refuses to cater to people of one race loses business to its competitors."

Your example fails in places like the pre-Civil Rights Act South where racial prejudice was deeply ingrained in the culture. In that case, the business that opened its doors to blacks would lose market share because the white majority would go elsewhere. Sometimes government intervention in the marketplace is justified to correct a structural imbalance.

Salem, Utah

In a perfect world, nondiscrimination laws would be a waste of time. Laws don't need to be made where there are no problems. If we are so inclusive, why would we need to make a law enforcing it? We don't have "no punching people" rules in my house because it has never been a problem. The bill of rights would have effectively covered everyone, except the country had some problems applying them to everyone. Are the laws we have with regard to fairness in employment and housing enough as they are? That is the significant question.

to comment

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