Comments about ‘Utah grappling with legal status of married same-sex couples’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 7 2014 6:05 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Rexburg, ID

How about a refund?

Big Bubba
Herriman, UT

Give them a refund and say, "Sorry but we ain't going to marry you."

Starry starry night
Palm Springs , CA

Worf...you equate being gay with murder, lying and immorality....do you think that this statement adds quality to this historic debate?

Starry starry night
Palm Springs , CA

No, Fredisdead....God made Adam and Eve, Adam and Adam,
Eve and Eve, and while you're at it...Steve and Steve.

Salt Lake City, UT

Article: "Gill said the ceremony would violate the state constitution and state law, which makes it a class A misdemeanor to solemnize a marriage between same-sex couples."

This paper has repeatedly raised a royal hullabaloo over the alleged infringement of secular Hobby Lobby's religious liberty for being required to very indirectly support contraception by providing insurance policies that include contraceptive coverage, yet here we have a case where the power of the state is directly interfering with the ability of actual religious institutions to practice the tenets of their faith and we hear crickets chirping.

FREDISDEAD: "NOT Adam and Steve."

David Sedaris has the best rejoinder: Of course it's not Adam and Steve. No self respecting gay couple would be Adam and Steve. It's Adam and STEVEN.

That's the end of that story.

Salt Lake City, UT

'God made Adam and Eve.'

AND Adam and Steve.

Unless you want to claim your infallible God made a mistake….?

Go Big Blue!!!
Bountiful, UT

It is silly to try to blame the state or the AG for this conundrum. If the law is ultimately upheld you can blame the judge that acted hastily. If the law is ultimately struck down those that rushed to get married will remain married. It is in the courts hands. Let the judicial process sort it out.

Heber City, UT

@FREDISDEAD "God made Adam and Eve. NOT Adam and Steve."

But how?? I've heard this trite couplet my whole life. In every creation story in my faith tradition, God or Gods (all male) create Adam by using their power to command the elements. Maybe gender roles and relationships beyond our limited existence are beyond our limited understanding.

Salt Lake City, UT

I have had mixed views of SSM, but it is ABSOLUTELY unreasonable to break up the marriages which have been performed. Such is unthinkable, period.

Bob K
portland, OR

ohn Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT
"... the inevitable result of an activist judge who attempted to set public policy himself"

-- NO, the confusion is because the Utah AG office completely dropped the ball on preparing the proper motion for stay in advance, just in case the judge happened to actually do his job and come up with the obvious verdict, for the plaintiffs.

If the AG had been on the ball, the judge would have granted or not granted it, and the appeal to the 10th Circuit would have been speedier.

All this fantasizing about "activist judges" and "legislating from the bench" ought to be saved for an occasion when the judge has not rendered the obvious Constitutional relief the plaintiffs sued for.

The Judge simply followed the LAW -- not the book of mormon or the Bible

---As for those married: since the marriages were perfectly legal and valid on the day they were performed, they will remain so.

Fairly soon, there will be some pressure on churches from INSIDE, not out, for them to be fair to their Gay members, sons and daughters, friends, etc.


A marriage between a Man and a Woman is a religious action.When they get married in a Church it is a religious action. When someone gets married in a Courthouse it is a civil matter. Why can't the Gay and Lesbians have a civil union and have the same rights as a Married couple but not call it a marriage. In the beginning God created Adam and Eve so in God we see that a marriage is between a man and a woman. This is how God wanted it to be. This was his commandment not our's. We can all tolerate and should tolerate everyone no matter how they are or what they believe in. What we need to do is make sure that the Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. But not judge and love all of God's children no matter what they believe or who they are.

Columbia, SC

You're going to lose. Gay marriage will be legal throughout the Union. It's just a matter of time.

Vince here
San Diego, CA


God did create Adam and Steve.

Your argument is flawed.

Chula Vista, CA

There may have been dozens of ways to grant couples who wanted to have equal protection under the law to be given those protections: the Citizens of Utah chose to ignore those gaps in equal protection, and instead wrote a knee-jerk constitutional amendment that simply denies same-sex couples the same rights as opposite sex couples. This may have been an unintended consequence, but denying visitation, survivorship and inheritance rights purely on the basis of sexual orientation seems to be problematic. Imagine the following scenarios:

1. Opposite sex couple that were physically unable to have intimate relations, and could not procreate: should this couple be given equal protection under the law?
2. Same sex couple that is sexually celibate: not really participating in any activities that would be biblically "immoral": why would this couple be denied equal protection and rights granted to the couple in "1"?
3. Same sex couple that engage activities considered biblically "immoral" (Like eating ham and cheese sandwiches?): what is the basis for denying them the rights granted in "1"?
4. Oppositie sex couple that actively "swing" committing serial adultery (Also biblically "immoral"): Should this couple be treated the same as 2 and 3?

Seems like this ain't so easy.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

"Making something legal, doesn't make it right.

Can't legalize murder, lying, or immorality."

The exact same was said when the Constiution defeated states which banned inter-racial marriages, allowed slavery, and established Jim Crow laws.

Oakland, MI

Worf, of Mcallen, TX,

If same sex preference is something a person is born with,,, and all available evidence, evidence, not opinion or morality, points that it is innate.

Born with short legs? Born as a red head? Born in Texas? Born white? or Black? Male ? Female? Or LGBT? Born that way.

Then by all that is Constitutional, and ALL that is moral and right, Equality to all.

Bigotry and discrimination are both sins,,,, but those both can be cured by education, or healed with thought and effort.

Moab, UT


>>Perhaps you wish to backtrack on laws that have been around for a LONG time?

The US Constitution has been around for longer. When two laws conflict, the Constitution wins, and the other law is invalid. That is the basis of Judge Shelby's ruling.

>> These Natives, who had ancestors who came here first, have made it very clear the State of Utah was meant to be a moral sanctuary, very, very different from the other states.

They also made it very clear that the State of Deseret was meant to be a part of Mexico.

Here, UT


"...perhaps through legal civil unions ..."

In order to do that, you MUST strike down Amendment 3, which says that NO unions, of any sort (i.e. "civil unions") will be recognized. Amendment 3 violates the civil rights of LGBT American citizens.


Why do we frighten you so much? Why should I "control" my desires when you refuse to control yours?


If you believe the bible, literally, then God cloned Adam to create Eve. She, clearly would have been a 'he'.

There is no uncertainty about these marriage. They were legal when they were performed, they'll remain legal. That is exactly what happened to those marriages performed in California before the stay was issued and before Prop-H8 passed.

Far Rockaway, NY

Ultimately, this matter will be decided by the US Supreme Court. In California, after US District Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8 by using very similar analysis (violation of Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment), the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld his ruling, but on narrower grounds. It also issued a stay of Judge Walker's opinion. The US Supreme Court held that no legal entity had standing to challenge Judge Walker's decision, thereby lifting the stay and permitting gay marriages to continue pursuant to Judge Walker's decision. In Utah, the US Supreme Court has issued a stay until the US Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit can hear an appeal of Judge Shelby's decision. If the decision is upheld (my money is on this), couples will be able to marry immediately. If the decision is overturned, we simply go back to invoking the democratic process. At least 18 states have legalized gay marriage to date, and this trend can only climb.


S.L.C., UT

what's to grapple with? if they were legally married at the time the marriage occurred then common sense would dictate they are legally married. the stay of further marriages pending the outcome of the appeals process said nothing about invalidating any marriages already performed.

to comment

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