Comments about ‘Letter: Civil unions’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Dec. 28 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
American Fork, UT

No objection my foot. You wanted all or nothing; you got nothing. It's too late for the civil union idea.

Salt Lake City, UT

'Traditional marriage provides a father and mother and children born to that relationship.'

Simply put…

No, it does not.

Octo-mom, x8 children, no husband.

John and Kate, plus 8. Eight children, now in a divorced family.

As for actual children raised in a SSM marriage…

"In most ways, the accumulated research shows, children of same-sex parents are not markedly different from those of heterosexual parents."

- 'Coparent or Second-Parent Adoption by Same-Sex Parents' - POLICY STATEMENT - PEDIATRICS Vol. 109 No. 2 February 2002, pp. 339-340 - Pulished: 02/01/10

Now, with those false hoods out of the way, about the legal rights denied to LGBT in America that can be 'solved' by civil unions?

*'Kept From a Dying Partners Bedside' - By TARA PARKER-POPE - NY Times - 05/18/09

'...the couples had prepared for a medical emergency, creating living wills, advanced directives and power-of-attorney documents.'

And yet, even with Living Will, Medical Direct, Power of attorny and emergency contact information...

Janice Langbehn was kept from the bedside of her dying partner, Lisa Pond.

They were together for 18 years.

Why fight for Civil unions, when the do nothing?

Salt Lake City, UT

Separate but equal is inherently unequal. Besides, if you all really wanted to go with civil unions you should've voted down Amendment 3 because it bans those too.

West Valley City, Utah

Well said. The normal legislative process should be required always. There are no excuses for side-stepping the process that doesn't amount to either lawlessness or outright fascism.

Robert Johnson
Sunland, CA

Sorry, but "separate but egual" is not equal nor Constitutional. Funny how many of those who support "civil unions" today are those who fought adamantly against them until marriage equality became a real reality. All of a sudden they are crying "Why aren't civil unions enough". Sorry...but gay men and women are not going to settle for table scraps any more. We've been invited to join the table and we are going to take our righteous seat.

Jim Holmes
Ventura, CA

All the whining sounds and looks just like George Wallace and those who fought against equal rights for blacks in the 50's and 60's. It was bigotry then and it is now.
You should be ashamed of yourselves.
My marriage is not threatened if gays marry.
As for 'traditional marriage'... the mormons above all have no leg to stand on with plural marriage in the heritage, both with more than one wife as well as more than one husband.
"separate but equal" is still bigoted, hateful and not right.

Salt Lake City, UT

Mr. Nelson would have made the same arguments in favor of Jim Crow ("separate but equal") laws pertaining to equal rights for black Americans.

embarrassed Utahn!
Salt Lake City, UT

You are free to believe what you want. The majority of our populace begs to differ; and will prevail.

Salt Lake City, Utah

You seem to be forgetting the second part of Amendment 3, "No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect."

Same-sex couples in Utah were prohibited by Utah Constitutional Amendment from having civil unions or domestic partnerships or anything else.

When Amendment 3 was up for a vote, many opponents pointed to the scond part and warned it would cause trouble by creating an "all or nothing" situation. That is exactly what happened and, due to the verbiage of the Amendment, there is no option other than marriage for same-sex couples.

Utah and Utah voters have no one to blame but themselves.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

Federal laws trump state laws.

Utah cannot make state laws which violate the Constitution.

Banning gay marriage violates the Constitution. It's that simple.

Utah could have had civil unions. They chose against it. They wanted all or nothing.

Now reap the fruit of your labor!

Roland Kayser
Cottonwood Heights, UT

If Utah had a civil union or domestic partnership law, Judge Shelby could have ruled on their constitutionality. We don't have those laws, so he was forced to rule on what we do have.

Huntsville, UT

Gary, guess what? Your own marriage is nothing more than a "civil union". It required a governmental license (civil) in order to be legal. Why call a union between people, that is in every way the same, something else? You just want to feel special over other couples?

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

Sure -- sounds good NOW!

We supported the compromised of Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships for years,
and were beat down DAILY by the conservatives.

NOW your All-or-Nothing law gets shot down,
and you want to compromise.

Sorry. Too late.
Compromising with "Separate but Equal" will not cut it now.
You get what you asked for.

BTW -- I'm good with that too.

Now -- to fight that stupid "Citizens United" ruling.

Salt Lake City, UT

I love the high pitched cries of 'lone, activist judge' from conservatives today…

*'Judge's Prop. 8 ruling upheld' - By Lisa Leff - AP - Published by DSNews - 06/14/11

'...ruling that struck down California's same-sex marriage ban…'

*'Judge Ware Denies Motion To Vacate Decision Overturning Prop 8' - By Barry Deutsch - Family Scholars - 06/14/11

*'Gay marriage wins rulings in pair of federal challenges' - By Denise Lavoie - AP - Published by DSNews - 07/08/10

'...ruled in favor of gay couples' rights in two separate challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA...'

*’Prop 8 declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL by 9th circuit court’ – by Michael De Groote – Deseret News – 02/07/12

"Proposition 8 served no purpose, and had no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California," the Ninth Circuit said in its ruling on appeal in the case of Perry v. Brown.'

sound familiar?

*'Appeals court DENIES stay on same-sex marriage, ruling pending hearing Monday' - By Emilee Eagar, Deseret News – 12/22/13

'SALT LAKE CITY — The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver on….

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

We act as if homosexuality was invented yesterday and a host of new folks were found who all of a sudden needed rights bestowed upon them. Civilizations have dealt with homosexuality for millenia. Marriage has generally not been a part of the equation (yes, I have read the minor exceptions - they are few and unconvincing).

It seems foolish to take institutions - marriage and the family - that have been with us for millenia and change them all rather suddenly. We are moving the foundation blocks about without knowing how this is all going to play out and whether the structure will continue to stand.

Using racial intermarriage as an example, it might have been illegal in the US at one time but it goes back to biblical times so it is not a good comparison when looking at long-term consequences.

Kearns, UT

"Civilizations have dealt with homosexuality for millenia."

You mean thinks like hanging them, sending them to concentration camps, and castrating them? By all means, let's not progress as a community and improve how we treat one another.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY


No question that folks should be treated well. The question is whether and how we reconstruct our entire concept of family for our civilization.

Morgan, UT

Really??? said:

"You mean thinks like hanging them, sending them to concentration camps, and castrating them? By all means, let's not progress as a community and improve how we treat one another."

See if you can follow me here...I'll go slow. Nobody is advocating homosexuals being hung, beaten, or sent to concentration camps...okay? Twin Lights and others are simply making the point that marriage throughout recorded history has been between a man and woman. I realize this presents problems for homosexual activists and their agenda, but facts are what they are.

First, unlike homosexuals, man and woman can procreate and continue the species (wow, what a concept!). Secondly, it serves children best to have a mom and dad, and the unique influences both have on the child's development. I understand there are always exceptions, but generally this has proven true. Doubt me? Look at the high crime rates among young black people in this country. Couple this with the fact that nearly 70% of black children have no father. The missing influence of the father for black children, in this particular instance, cannot be ignored or denied.


I would like to nominate "traditional marriage" as the most overused word of 2013.

Salt Lake City, UT

"Nobody is advocating homosexuals being hung, beaten, or sent to concentration camps...okay?"

First, yes they are. Listen to rightwing talk radio. There's no shortage of people wanting to make being gay a crime. Second, are you suggesting that as long as physical violence is avoided, other forms of persecution and bigotry are OK?

"First, unlike homosexuals, man and woman can procreate and continue the species (wow, what a concept!)" Lots of gays have kids of their own, and adopt children. Conversely, many straight couples don't have kids.

"Secondly, it serves children best to have a mom and dad, and the unique influences both have on the child's development." There's no objective, testable evidence to suggest this is true.

Your statistic about young blacks and crime has infinitely more to do with the economic, educational and social barriers faced by young black men than whether or not their fathers are present.

Courts have held repeatedly that "separate but equal" is _not_ constitutional, and Amendment 3 outlaws civil unions anyway.

The rights of a minority are not subject to a vote by the majority.

to comment

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