Comments about ‘Court ruling has created 'chaotic situation,' Utah Gov. Gary Herbert says’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Dec. 21 2013 6:25 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Potsdam, 00

They say, it does not effect anyone.

Now you see, it did.


I believe what the governor is trying to say is that the State's lack of preparation has caused a chaotic situation. Surely losing the case was a contingency that could've been prepared for. And since the State did not put up cogent arguments in the case, losing the case was likely. Blaming your own incompetence upon a judge is not becoming.

Mom of Six
Northern Utah, UT

I think the real issue here is two fold. The first issue is the fact that those who are religious such as myself see this path to be a very dark one. Where do the rights end? Will those who believe in traditional marriage, such as myself, be FORCED to perform these marriages? Will people be labeled hateful and bigoted for believing in "old fashioned" marriage? Those who are for gay marriage, will tell you "no". However in my lifetime of 40 years, I would have never thought gay marriage would be an issue, ever. I can see a long path ahead of force and coercion. The second issue here is a matter of a federal judge ignoring the will of the majority of Utah voters. The leaders of our country have let the states decide the fate of gay marriage. This is unjust and unfair to throw the will of the people out! Why not have a happy medium and give those who live an alternative lifestyle an alternative form to marriage that would give the same rights without compromising those who have religious values.

utah chick
cedar city, UT

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't God supposed to love everyone? If God doesn't love everyone equally, I'm pretty sure God is not someone I care to associate with.

Liberty For All
Cedar, UT

If I understand correctly the 5th and 14th Amendments (Due Process and Equal Protection) were all ratified by the states and voters. The US constitution takes precedence over state laws and constitutional amendments. Now, can someone explain to me how Judge Shelby's understanding of Equal Protection is wrong? Please someone, explain it to me as a simple layperson.

equal protection
Cedar, UT

I applaud Governor Herbert for supporting Utah values. "Traditional Marriage Today! Traditional Marriage Tomorrow!
Just like another great Governor, George Wallace while supporting similar traditional values said "Segregation Today! Segregation Tomorrow! The only thing Governor Herbert still needs to do is call in the national guard to help defend traditional marriage.

Salt Lake City, UT

@Mom of Six
"Will those who believe in traditional marriage, such as myself, be FORCED to perform these marriages?"

No. Think of it this way. The LDS church is free to restrict temple marriages to those who aren't part of the church (for mixed-faith marriages) even though we have protections against religious discrimination. They'll keep the option to not marry same-sex couples (something asserted in the court ruling though it would be the case even if it weren't) because of the 1st Amendment.

"Will people be labeled hateful and bigoted for believing in "old fashioned" marriage?"

Same-sex marriage doesn't have to be law for that to happen.

"Why not have a happy medium and give those who live an alternative lifestyle an alternative form to marriage that would give the same rights without compromising those who have religious values."

Separate but equal is inherently unequal. Plus, for someone worried about your church being restricted in who they can/can't/have to marry, you sure have no problems indirectly going after other churches who do want to marry same-sex couples. They have religious values too you know.


@Mom of Six

Wow six kids? I am just finishing paying for my third college education; I can't imagine having three more to go!

As to your first issue, same-sex marriage has been widely discussed and debated for decades and in fact has been in existence for many, many years (a decade in Massachusetts for instance) so to not have anticipated it or be blindsided in any way means that you have not been paying attention to reality. You can simply look to Massachusetts, Iowa, or many other places where same-sex marriage has been legal for many years to answer your questions.

Regarding your second question, I assume you are serious so I'll answer it. Many laws passed by majorities of peoples, or by their elected representatives, are not just. Slavery, is the most simple example. It was the will of the people in the southern states. The majority does not always rule (particularly when the rights of the minority are being trampled).

Potsdam, 00

@ utah chick

Your comment is well to be noticed.
The Equality in loving all men is a love that includes knowledge god has about each one of us. That knowldege is not derived from a far away time.
There was a time when we used to live with him, as daughters and sons of god in heaven.

Loving his daughters is forward hope for their final state of being, this includes all of their gifts and talents inherite to being a female. There you see, god can never love man
and women despite their gender but because of their gender. Women have more rights than man(plural) due to her special kind gifts of being a girl and mother. The same goes for man in other terms.

I do understand that gay and lesb. do have love for each other, but this love is a brotherly and sisterly love, it is misplaced at some time and cannot fit into a bond called marriage. That is why the church wants to help, not judge.

" Man was also in the beginning with god, intelligence, or the light of truth, was not reated or made, neither indeed can be." DC 93

Moab, UT

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal".

It's a shame that some people don't believe in the Constitution.

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Why is something an unalienable right? God declared it to be so. But if we want to suppress the views of people anyone who isn't an atheist, then we can decide inalienable rights based on a majority vote. How did the people in Utah on the inalienable right that two people of the same gender can marry? They voted against it. 66%. So it isn't a right based on a majority vote.

Herbert is on the right side of history. Fascist movements always fade away.

Tom Johnson
Spanish Fork, UT

Many who are attracted to the same sex call for gay marriage on the basis that they should just be allowed to do what they want since it doesn't concern the rest of us. Recently, I heard a faithful Mormon say he didn't mind if gays could marry because they should have their free agency. On that basis we should repeal the murder, theft, rape, and many other laws since these all interfere with people's free agency. If homosexual behavior is a sin, which the Bible says it is in 18 different passages and the Church Handbook of Instructions says it is, our responsibility as Church members and citizens is to seek to enact laws that prohibit sin and to preserve laws that enable righteousness.

San Antonia, TX

I'm politically incorrect to say that our whole nation is trending downward in almost every way.

Provo, UT

Separation of church and state. All arguments based on faith of any kind are totally invalid. The proclamation to the family is NOT an argument and cannot be considered.
The constitution of the United States was created to protect the natural, inalienable (in-a-lien-able) right of each individual against tyranny. This means that no matter how great a majority want something, they cannot impose it if it violates the rights of any individual.
The US is NOT a democracy. We are a constitutional democratic REPUBLIC. We elect representatives who we entrust to vote and legislate on our behalf. Utah elected Senators Hatch and Lee, and they recommended judge Shelby. The purpose of the Judicial branch is to provide a 'check and balance' to ensure legislation is within the bounds of the US constitution. The state of Utah, via our elected representatives, CHOSE Judge Shelby. Judge Shelby ruled correctly.
Defining marriage, based upon religious belief, is a form of religious tyranny. The same tyranny that this country was founded to avoid.

Mormons, are so quick to forget that a short time ago YOU were the oppressed minority? How can you now do the same to others?

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

Once the politicians step aside and let the clerks do their job, the chaos will end.

Once the politicians step aside and cease feeding people's fears, reconciliation will begin.

Once the politicians step aside, the good people of Utah will treat their Gay neighbors generously just as they did with the Black Community after the difficult Civil Rights struggle.

Once the politicians step aside, people will realize granting equal rights to others isn't an attack on their own rights - marital or otherwise.

Delay is pointless and petty. Whether its a year from now or tomorrow morning at 8:00 AM, Gays will enjoy the same rights as everyone else and the State of Utah will be better for it.

This is a time for leaders to appeal to the Better Angels of Our Nature. If you can't do that - then please step aside.

Cedar City, UT

I do not believe that it was an accident that this ruling was released on a week-end.

Potsdam, 00

@ desert

Sorry this has to be .....that knowledge is derived from a far away time !

and....." Man was also in the beginning with god, intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be." DC 93

Provo, UT

Stop gay marriage before this place is going to be burnt like Sodom of old.

St.George, Utah

This situation must be quite scary for those who have led a sheltered life.
I am sixty-five year old individual. As a young child, I recall our wonderful neighbors, who consisted of moms, dads and kids; mom and kids: lady couples living together, gentlemen couples living together.
Our neighborhood was a safe place full of people who could be counted on for support and life long friendships.
This wonderful place, however, was not in Utah.
Could this account for the fear many feel?

Springville, UT

New to Utah posted:

=Utah has spoken and they support traditional
=Marriage 66% vs 34.%, One activist judge should
=not over rule this.

The problem with this is that the states of the United States chose unanimously, 100% to 0%, to ratify the US Constitution, and it looks to me like that Constitution gave that one "activist judge" the power to have the last word on what is legal and what is not. Well, not quite the last word; as the article said, the case is being appealed to a higher court. But if you want to keep activist judges from overturning cases voted in by a majority of the population, then that's going to involve revising the US Constitution. That's certainly possible, but I'm not sure you have the patience for that.

to comment

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