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
Salt Lake, UT

Speaking of chaos (and I'm against same-sex marriage), did you see the news?

North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem filed a legal opinion last week confirming that the state does not recognize out-of-state same-sex marriages, allowing a man married to another man to come to North Dakota and marry a woman without divorcing his husband.

Combine that with the Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause... "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state,"

and the Comity Clause... "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States,"

And what have we got? It serves us right.

PA Gardener
Towanda, PA

I know I'm an outsider looking in but here's my two cents. It has been many years since The Family proclamation was given. That was prophetic counsel foreseeing this kind of event. It is time to pull it out, dust it off, read and follow it ! The risk by not following it is to repeat history and perish.


Baby steps, baby steps but Utah is starting to grow up. You never know, we someday may even have a lottery.

Mesa, Az

As someone recently said, the most important word in the constitution is Secure. The government has to secure the rights of the people. Gov Herbert is trying to secure the rights of the majority.

Honeyvale, CA

It is no coincidence that Judge Shelby's narcissistic, publicity-seeking ruling was released the Friday before Christmas, when many had already left on holiday.

Surely, as an attorney and judge, he knows the process and knows what would be the best way for this issue to go through the courts for All of the people of Utah. To refuse to hear Oral Arguments to grant a Stay, Judge Shelby allowed the rights of the majority of Utahns to be trampled upon. And yes, there are other Utahns who have rights. If one man can change the law, tell me, why do I even vote? I don't even recognize our legal system; This judge should be impeached and removed.

The silent majority needs to stop being silent.


The court ruling hasn't created chaos, the state (and necessarily religion) have created chaos.

It would be interesting and appropriate if Utah, paving and paying the way to SCOTUS, was responsible for eliminating all state bans on same-sex marriage in the U.S.

Whether or not there's ever a stay, Herbert and the local religious and church opponents *MUST KNOW* what the ultimate outcome will be. And sooner rather than later.

If this offends God, personally I'm more than happy to leave it and the consequence up to Him or Her.

Meanwhile, society has *HUGE* problems. It will be nice to finally get this absolute nothing behind us so we can rationally attend to them.

The fact is, same-sex marriage has *NO* negative impact on traditional marriage and family or their benefits, and *NO* negative impact on the state's ability to support and encourage them. The state can support and protect both traditional marriage and gay & same-sex marriage rights at the same time. As they'll shortly be doing.

Traditional marriage and family have problems and could use some help but they certainly don't need defending or protecting from same-sex marriage.

West Point , UT

To those lds members questioning other lds members idea of prophecy and the inspired words of the proclamation, you need to step back and look long and hard at what you're saying. I am a faithful lds member and believe the words of our prophet and leaders to be true and right. Therefore I believe in the proclaimation, but here's the problem. We can't create laws to govern others based on OUR beliefs and moral principles. We don't want our government creating laws that dictate what our moral values are and how we should follow them, therefore why should we be asking our government to do such to those who seek same sex marriage? NOWHERE in our constitution does it suggest that the government should be the moral police and create laws based on moral principles. Allowing a government to do so will quickly allow for a totalitarian dictatorship like the middle age monarchies which were "annointed by God" according to the moral principles of the people at that time. Think about whether you want a government creating laws that tell lds members what is moral and immoral about their practices and beliefs.

Mexican Ute
mexico, 00

As a member of the LDS Church, I sustain the General Authorities of the Church whenever they speak, ask God for direction, and follow it.

This has led me to believe that in this case the GAs are right.

My Reading of the Scriptures, specifically, 2 Nephi 2, Malachi 4, and D&C 2 confirm this for me.

And I have seen how the Atonement can cause many people to change. Even gays.

mid-state, TN

@donn --

“King was a man sent by God to do His will and there is no way that you can have that type of relationship with God and accept wrong as right,"

Why do you expect anyone to care what the Christian Post writes?

King's own family members are likely to have known MLK much better than any reporter, donn. And, of course, King himself worked closely with at least one openly gay man in his civil rights campaign, Bayard Rustin.

@ThomasJefferson --

" to say that gay marriage is different than plural marriage which is supported by many nations is.....bizarre to me!"

What you do or do not find bizarre makes little difference in the grand scheme of things.

Polygamy conveys a significantly increased risk of harm.

Gay marriage does not.

It's a very simple distinction.

Vince here
San Diego, CA

Can someone cite me what's traditional about marriage - religious or secular?

Dietrich, ID

@cougsdawgs All laws are based on morality. Dallin H Oak's said that many times in his sermons and writings. So people without legislation can legislate there lack of morality?

mid-state, TN

@wrz/etc. --

"Cite an example of harm re polygamy/incest in the Constitution."

Not sure what you mean here. It's very easy to cite examples of harm from polygamy and incest. But polygamy and incest themselves are not specifically mentioned in the constitution, just as murder is not.

"Maybe because there haven't been any gay marriages in the US until recently. Too few for an informed judgement."

Massachusetts has had gay marriage for 10 years. Canada has had it for 8. Several Scandinavian countries have had gay marriage and/or registered partnerships for roughly 20 years. There's been plenty of time.

"Sorry, but Canada has but a few if any polygamy marriages. Too few for an informed judgement."

There are millions of polygamous marriages around the world. It's very easy to see their effects.

"Can you stop posting misinformation? "

I've never started posting any misinformation, so it's impossible for me to stop something I've never even started.

Salt Lake City, UT

Chaos is not what I see in the pictures from last Friday. What I see is joy, happiness and love.

And to those on here who speak of the "will of the people", it is hubris and conceit to think that civil liberties can be denied/forfeited by the "will of the people". Read a history book and you'll see how flawed your thinking is.


Doesn't a state's constitution have to be approved by Congress before a state can be admitted to the Union? If that is the case, then it seems that if any part of a state's constitution is to be disapproved by the federal government, then it would have to be disapproved by an act of Congress, not by one judge acting alone.


I'm not advocating plural marriage, but actually I would like to see polygamists bring their case before Judge Shelby, and do it soon, and see how far they get. If he denies their petition but sides with the gays with their petition it would make his arguments about equal protection under the law sound hollow. And, I would like to see what the reaction of the gays would be to such a petition, or would they be insisting on "marriage equality" for us but not for them.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ Bernard GUi

Somebody else's marriage has nothing to do with your own.

Phoenix, AZ

"The Constitution trumps the electorate every time."

The Constitution says 'No state shall... deny to any person within its (state) jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'

Sounds like the document is talking about state law, not the Constitution. And the electorate of the states create state law... The electorate in Utah (and other states) tried to define marriage as between male/female. The judge's decision should be thrown out as unconstitutional.

"The concept of harm is inherent throughout the Constitution..."

Cite an example of harm re polygamy/incest in the Constitution.

"Every lawyer who has brought gay marriage cases before US courts has tried desperately to prove harm. They have all failed"

Maybe because there haven't been any gay marriages in the US until recently. Too few for an informed judgement.

"...reaffirming Canada's polygamy ban..."

Sorry, but Canada has few if any polygamy marriages. Too few for an informed judgement.

@im lds2:
"Intuitively, don't you feel you have the 'right' to marry the person of your choice?"

Are you saying my 85yo grandfather can marry his 9yo granddaughter?

Bob K
porland, OR

Salt Lake, UT
"I am totally against same-sex marriage, although I well know the pull of same gender attraction. You "just say no!" and resist it, because any other course would be unthinkable. Yes, life's difficult. There aren't shortcuts to any place worth going."

... sorry, but that is a terrible example of not thinking things through. What you postulate has caused thousands of mormon men and women who married a Gay partner who was "fighting it" to live in a phony marriage and miss the passion that a marriage should have.

Putting "what a church wants you to do" above what God put in your heart, due to family and community pressure, is living death.

Children raised by two men or two women who loved each other enough to marry, despite society, are in a happy, loving home.

Children in a mormon family that exists only because "resisting the attraction" is paramount, are in an environment that is innately a lie, and they can tell it.



See: "rational basis"

If Canada is right, and if huge opinion in the US is right, there exists "rational basis" for laws against polygamy rooted in protecting people, especially children, girls and women, from an inherent high risk for abuse.

If Utah cannot establish such a "rational basis," then there is no reason not to decriminalize polygamy and Shelby should so decide.

I tend to think that risk is real and significant. If it were possible to regulate out and protect against that risk, then polygamy should legalized.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT


"Are you saying my 85yo grandfather can marry his 9yo granddaughter?"

Can his 9yo granddaughter give consent? Is she a legal adult? Is this the most irrational question ever?

to comment

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