Comments about ‘Court ruling on gay marriage opens door to same-sex divorce in Utah’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 2 2014 3:25 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
socorny
Canyon Country, CA

If it was so important for them to be married in the first place, then why did they move to a state that didn't even recognize their marriage soon after?

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

I kind of assumed that opportunities for marriage and divorce came as a matched set.

Dave D
Spring Creek, NV

Really Socorny?

How many of us move to a place based on the marriage laws on the books? The fact that your question could not even be asked of a straight couple is revealing of the inequalities people like this have to endure.

Kings Court
Alpine, UT

This article tries to spin another argument against same-sex marriage by saying there is going to be a "boom" in same-sex divorces. Because such a small number of people are homosexual and only a certain percentage of them will ever get married, the vast, vast majority if divorces on the docket will be opposite sex divorces and will always be opposite sex divorces. I would hardly call the same-sex divorce industry a "boom" for attorneys. Divorce lawyers have already had an ongoing "boom" with divorces well before same-sex marriage came along, especially since about 50% of all marriages end in divorce.

Saguaro
Scottsdale, AZ

Seems odd to me, that Utah encourages same-sex marriages so strongly that the state refuses to help dissolve them.

Christopher B
Ogden, UT

I sure wish liberals would stop being hypocrites and start including polygamists rights in their fight for equality.

And to say that a polygamists already had the same rights in being able to marry ONE person would be like me saying a gay already had the same rights as everyone else in being able to marry someone of the opposite gender.

G-Day-M8
WVC, UT

What a mess this whole thing is turning out to be, Aaarrrggghhh!

ChuckGG
Gaithersburg, MD

I believe this drives home the point even further that we are now, and always have been, talking about secular CIVIL marriage - not religious marriage. I fully expected divorces to accompany Marriage Equality. That is just human nature. Having civil marriage is why we have Divorce Court and not Divorce Church.

Regarding the quote: "What a mess this whole thing is turning out to be, Aaarrrggghhh!"

What mess? This is mindlessly simple. A state cannot very well recognize the undoing of the marital contract that it doesn't recognize in the first place. Once same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, same-sex divorces will not encounter these glitches.

ChuckGG
Gaithersburg, MD

As far as polygamy goes, that is another battle for another day. While I am not against it, same-sex marriage is a far easier concept to implement than would be polygamy. Once you go beyond two people in a contract, then you have a wide variety of issues to address ranging from custody, inheritance, multiple people on a health policy, and so on. Implementing it looks like a legal can of worms what will take some time to figure out. It should keep attorneys employed for years to come.

DN Subscriber 2
SLC, UT

More slippery slope stuff from messing with a natural and fundamental definition which had served civilization well for thousands of years.

Moving forward, we MUST legalize polygamy. After all, if two (or more) people love each other why discriminate? How about the folks that love their pets, don't be a bigot!

But, all of this is sort of irrelevant any more since a (disgustingly) large number of people play house together, have children out of wedlock, purchase property together while unmarried, et. Thus, the necessity for marriage of ANY sort (hetero, same sex, polygamous, etc) seems to be crumbling onto the ash heap of history.

Change is not always good. Sometimes it is just made legal.

1978
Salt Lake City, UT

Now that the state of Utah can not define marriage legally ALL types of unions should be legalized or the ruling is hypocritical and fradulent.

Brothers to Sisters
One man to 12 women
One woman to a 13 year old boy
etc.

Once you open up Pandora's Box ....

Darrel
Eagle Mountain, UT

Whoa...wasn't ready for that shocker...

That's kind of like saying the leading cause of divorce is marriage.

Darrel
Eagle Mountain, UT

@Christopher B

"I sure wish liberals would stop being hypocrites and start including polygamists rights in their fight for equality."

============

Hey, as long as everyone is a consenting adult, I really don't think it's societies place to dictate who, or how many.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@Christopher B

"I sure wish liberals would stop being hypocrites and start including polygamists rights in their fight for equality."

The people who fought for interracial marriage in the 1960s... were they also hypocrites for not including other types of marriages in their fight for equality... or do you use different standards when it comes to marriage advocacy you support and marriage advocacy you don't support?

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Hey, if they get married, this liberal hypocrite is all for polygamist divorce rights. In fact, since polygamy is usually driven by religion and therefore rife with abuse and coercion, I would advocate that every polygamist wedding be prefaced with a mandatory sitdown of the group with a judge or lawyer and the various partners of the relationship. Everyone should be informed, and sign off that they've been informed, that they have legal rights in the process and may leave of their own choice, and possibly be entitled to a portion of the assets of the group. Not to be discriminatory, I don't mind if that happens before same sex or hetero marriages, as well.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

What am I reading? Do "same-sex" couples really think that they should have all of the advantages of "marriage" but none of the consequences? Do they think that only marriages consisting of one man, one woman should have alimony and child support levied when that marriage is dissolved?

Well, welcome to the real world where actions have consequences. If you want to be "married" you automatically sign up for the penalties that come from "divorce". Open your wallet and be prepared to pay for the rest of your life.

Every "heterosexual" couple has known about that possibility, why should it come as a shock to same-sex couples who demand to be "married"? Anyone want to guess what the figure for alimony will be?

About 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce. Anyone want to venture a guess of what percent of "same-sex marriages" will end in divorce?

E Sam
Provo, UT

Well of course there are going to be divorces. That's all our gay brothers and sisters want--to be treated equally. That means marriage, and that also means, sometimes, divorce.

wwookie
Payson, UT

How ironic that most lgbt activists claim that a prohibition of same sex marriage doesn't allow them to be happy.

Never heard traditional marriage proponents state that their happiness depended on the law allowing them to marry.

bandersen
Saint George, UT

if it was't a marriage in the first place, how can it be a divorce? that is why the will of the people is so important! the will of the people won't make foolish laws in the first place, including recognition of ss marriage!

CDL
Los Angeles, CA

Kings Court- the article did not try to spin anything nor even attempt to make an argument. All it did was point out an obvious fact that now with one came the other. But if you want a little truth though I doubt you do, but in States where Gay Marriage has been legal a while, there has been a much higher divorce rate for that group as well. Do a little research. It's not hard, and that fact has noting to do with any bias, it simply is what it is.

to comment

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