Quantcast

Comments about ‘Linda & Richard Eyre: Defining marriage by what it does’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 8 2014 10:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
MJ Annie
LAYTON, UT

Daniel L - I'm a lesbian with 4 biological children. Our kind actually do procreate. :-) Think outside the box, brother.

Pops
NORTH SALT LAKE, UT

Lagomorph wrote: "Then the state is going about it all wrong, because gay couples DO have children..."

Not naturally (unusual measures are required), and not anywhere near the degree that heterosexual couples do. Then there's the issue of raising children without the benefit of gender roles - the state should exercise extreme caution on this aspect.

Redshirt wrote: "To 'Pops' and 'LDS Liberal' actually it isn't 'all about the children'. In the religious world, ..."

Well, there you go. We're debating the state's involvement in marriage, which is strictly a quid pro quo. Religious reasons for marrying are wonderful (and I subscribe to them), but the state needs to have blinders on and do what's best for the state. Which, in my opinion, is to NOT grant marriage licenses to gay couples for the the reason I've previously stated but will, for some inexplicable reason, now repeat: The state has no interest in extending marriage benefits to gay couples because, on average, the state stands to receive nothing in return from the gay couple, whereas, on average, it receives significant and long-lasting benefit from the marriage contract with heterosexual couples.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'Not naturally (unusual measures are required)….'

Octo-mom. Eight children created through invitro fertilization. Single mother.

John and Kate plus 8. Eight children, created for a married couple, also though invitro fertilization. Now, a divorced couple.

The 'traditional family' supporters did….

nothing.

As they did nothing to prevent these 'unnatural' families, we can take it that they are being selective about which 'traditional' families they do, and do not support.

Traditional.

What does that word even mean?

We should prevent women from voting? Or practice human slavery?

Time to move forward ladies and gentlemen.

Unless you want to claim that you walk to work….

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ Pops

Should the state deny infertile couples the right to obtain a marriage license?

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "Pops" if you want to go strictly by what is best for the state, then it should outlaw gay marriage. The DOJ has a study out there where they found that just the act of 2 gay people cohabitating there is a significant increase in the likelyhood of violence for them. When that violence occurs, it costs the state and local communities money to deal with the increase in crime.

You also have the fact that if gays are allowed to adopt or rais children as a couple that their children are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior. That risky behavior can lead to an incrase in teen pregnancies. Teen pregnancies lead to increases in poverty and dependance on state and federal resourcces.

So, the best solution for the state is to deny gays not only marriage, but custody of children.

oragami
St. George, UT

Fact: Homosexual couples currently cohabitate and have children.

So, unless you propose removing those children from their families and homes, wouldn't they benefit from their parents being married, with all of the psychological, legal, and social benefits that are associated with the institution of marriage? Seriously?

oragami
St. George, UT

1.96 Standard Deviations

It seems to me that you, and Hinkley for that matter, are ignoring Doctrine and Covenants 134:9

"We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government"

Kevin J. Kirkham
Salt Lake City, UT

Pops
The real question is whether the state should provide marriage benefits to gay couples that are not likely to reciprocate by taking on the obligations by providing the six "services" or benefits to the state so aptly enumerated by Richard and Linda Eyre. When the state doesn't issue a marriage license to a same-sex couple, it is because it has no reasonable expectation to receive anything in return.
KJK
Heterosexuals over 50 marrying provide no more "services" or benefits to the state than same-sex couples would.

RedShirt
Kids raised by same sex couples are more likely to think of themselves as gay, more likely to engage in homosexual behavior, and are more likely to engage in risky sexual behaviors.
KJK
If so, it might be because that if they really are gay, they feel safer to "come out" as gay rather than try to stay in the closet and be straight. They are also more likely to be raised outside of a religion which condemns homosexuality and therefore if the kid IS gay, they may feel safer coming out than would a kid whose family is active LDS.

SLC gal
Salt Lake City, UT

The issue is two - fold.

First, legally, gay couples that choose to live as a married couple should have the same rights, and privilages of straight couples with regard to property, death benefits, etc... And if they want to divorce, why should they not be subject to the same lengthy miserable process that straight people have to endure?

Second is religious. How long until the govt. rulings ignore the seperation of church and state, and require churches that don't belive in gay unions to perfrom such unions or else. Further more, the precedent this is setting is that a single judge can overturn a law that the people of this state voted on in an election. Fair, or not, is it right that a court can intervene on any law of their choosing, and overlook the wishes of the people of this state as expresed in a government election?

El Chango Supremo
Rexburg, ID

Marriage is a religious institution that years ago was adopted & recognized by the government. It's not the government's place to change it!

Gay marriage isn't about rights or taxes or anything else we commonly hear about. It's about the desire of homosexual couples to have their relationships/lifestyle be declared moral.

El Chango Supremo
Rexburg, ID

MJ Annie,

You are a female. It took a male to procreate with you. You can't procreate with your female partner. It's not bigotry that's the problem, it's biology!

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ El Chango Supremo

Marriage is a legal contract that offers many benefits and privileges. This is about a group of people who just want equality. I can promise you that nobody from the LGBT community gives a wooden nickel if you approve of their lifestyle or not.

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

Everything said in this article is absolutely true--for Mormons.

But it isn't the One and Only Truth for everyone. I recall a news story about a gay male who was in (and still is in) a deeply loving relationship with another man. One night he found an abandoned baby in a subway station. A New York City judge encouraged him and his partner to adopt the boy.

Today that boy is a happy, healthy (and straight) young man. He apparently didn't need a "mother" and a "father." He needed one or two people in his life who gave him the qualities of mothering and fathering.

There are many similar stories.

It would be nice if the argument were no longer made that "society would fall apart" if gays were allowed to marry and have children. Gays are a small percentage of society--and when they choose to marry and have children, their goals are the very same as with straight couples: devotional love and family.

Utah is an American state, not a Mormon state. Thus the Eyres' points have no authority to determine the rights of non-Mormon Americans who live in Utah.

Esquire
Springville, UT

"1. The role of procreation and reproduction, replenishing the population."

I suppose once you stop procreation and reporduction from happening outside of marriage, you can make this argument. In the end, it is just your preference, but it does not reflect reality. Never has in history.

"2. The role of precedent and example for the next generation. Boys need a role model for being a dad, and girls need a role model for being a mom."

Again, a stated preference. But I'm not convinced that reality reflects this. There are many heterosexuals who were raised in gay households who do just fine. What is the ideal male or female role model? I think we can all do better than the role models of the 1950s.

As for the rest of the points, I agree with the writers that it can easily be argued that they can apply to SSM situations.

SlopJ30
St Louis, MO

I prayed and fasted for divine inspiration as to how I should deal with the gay couple down the street who wanted to get married. That still small voice, that burning in the bosom, The Comfortor, The Holy Ghost whispered to me "Thou shalt mind thine own business, champ. Seriously, this hath nothing to doeth with thee. Dost thou have any legit questions about thine own conduct or circumstances or that of your family? If not, I must bounceth . . people with real problems needeth me."

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

@SlopJ30

Loved your posting.

As a non-Mormon, I've always wondered: when a Mormon has a dilemma and does what his/her church instructs--fasts and prays for divine inspiration, etc.--and then gets an answer, clear as a bell, but the answer differs from church doctrine, how does the church see that?

I know that when I ask a question of someone (human or divine), I don't have any pre-expectation of what the answer will be. So again, how does the church treat the answer someone gets when it's different from the church's own position?

SlopJ30
St Louis, MO

Free Agency:

That has never happened in the history of the Church and will never, ever happen.

But seriously, I've asked variations on that question from time to time as I've navigated my way through a lifetime of church membership and callings. As an Elder's Quorum instructor, I once asked if, in a completely non-religious setting, it was possible to have a deeply emotional experience (with non-Mormons) that felt exactly as the same as the HG's much-relied-upon "burning in the bosom." After much harrumphing, the answer was "yes."

So how does one know if a strong feeling is just emotion and wishful thinking talking or an actual communicae from deity? The best the people in the class (a pretty stalwart bunch of LDS men) could come up with was "Well, if you were discussing religious topics, it was the Holy Ghost. If you were not, it was emotion." Oh. Allll righty then.

To answer your specific question, the individual involved would ostensibly feel God was on their side, while other members aware of the situation would silently (or otherwise) judge them for being disobdient apostates and "pray for them."

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "SlopJ30" you got a great response for what you should do about the couple down the street. However, when it comes to laws, you should follow the prophets who have said that we should support laws that define marriage as between a man and a woman.

Free Agency
Salt Lake City, UT

@SlopJ30

Thanks for your answer. It all reminds me of Henry Ford's line when he was first manufacturing cars: (a paraphrase, but accurate) "The customer can have a Ford car in any color he wants, as long as it's black."

Esquire
Springville, UT

@ RedShirt, to say "when it comes to laws, you should follow the prophets who have said that we should support laws that define marriage as between a man and a woman" seems to totally confuse the separation of church and state. I'll not pontificate, but the comment reveals the problem with the issue, and the attitude subverts the concept of freedom of religion.

to comment

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