Quantcast

Comments about ‘Traditional marriage advocates rally over lunch in Orem to make voices heard’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 8 2014 6:05 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ImaUteFan
West Jordan, UT

I M LDS 2 - We will need to respectfully agree to disagree on this issue.

If you truly believe what you have posted, then you must also believe that the Plan of Salvation (as has always been taught to LDS people) will need to be completely altered as will the temple ceremony to include same sex marriage. The Spirit confirms to me that this is simply false and will never happen.

Wilf 55
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

Spellman789: "I love the LGBT community enough to show them the path they are on is a dead end. There is a life after this, and what can they expect? ... What kind of love is that to encourage someone in a relationship that will end as surely as this life will end? What about the long term?"

Thank you for worrying about their afterlife. But all they ask now is to be allowed to marry "till death does us part." Your belief in eternal marriage and eternal procreation is admirable, but it does not give the right to deny two responsible adults a civil marriage here on earth.

Vala Johnson
Harlem, Montana

For those of us who are Latter Day Saints, and who are striving to do what is right, the statement issued by our Church following the court ruling on same-sex marriages in Utah gives us clear direction, as does the Family Proclamation.

That 'news room' statement is as follows: "The Church has been consistent in its support of traditional marriage while teaching that all people should be treated with respect. This ruling by a district court will work its way through the judicial process. We continue to believe that voters in Utah did the right thing by providing clear direction in the state constitution that marriage should be between a man and a woman, and we are hopeful that this view will be validated by a higher court."

The key words, in this statement, I believe, are 'all people should by treated with respect' and 'marriage should be between a man and a woman'.

How grateful I am for a Prophet in these latter days, when so many are running every which way.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

bandersen said:
"I'm LDS Too: This is the most irresponsible bizarre understanding of said scripture that I have ever heard. If you are a member in good standing, I would challenge you to go tell the Prophet that you supposedly sustain that he doesn't speak for God when he says that marriage is between a man and a women. "

I would challenge you to think for yourself occasionally and realize that men are not perfect even prophets...

(BYU address) Brigham Young said "If the white man mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, (black man) the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (JD 10).

Judging others though, that is where your talent obviously lies.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "I M LDS 2" you are wrong. If you go to your Gospel Principels book, chapter 10, it states "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts four books as scripture: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. These books are called the standard works of the Church. The inspired words of our living prophets are also accepted as scripture....In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, the Liahona or Ensign magazine, and instructions to local priesthood leaders."

The Family Proclamation should be considered scripture.

You said that if the Prophet said to support marriage equality, you would run to do so. Well, the Prophet has said that we should support laws that support traditional marriage of a man and a woman. The "Church Statement on Definition of Marriage" the church leadership said that "We especially urge those entrusted with the public good to support laws that uphold the time-honoured definition of marriage." Why do you not support Utah's ammendment that upholds the time-honored definition of marriage?

MAYHEM MIKE
Salt Lake City, UT

@WILF55: Here's my response (as a devout Mormon) to your dredging up remarks by Mark E. Petersen and others re mixing the races: Elder Petersen was wrong. Got it? He was wrong, and, although I support him as an ordained Apostle of the Lord, I completely disavow his prejudiced remarks. He was a prophet only when speaking as such; the discourse was his opinion and his, alone. The former quotes as to the so-called "seed of Cain" have been completely disavowed as incorrect doctrine by present LDS leaders. (See remarks made by Bruce R. McConkie when the revelation giving priesthood to the blacks was received.) Consult LDS.ORG for the Church's complete statement. Finally, the doctrine of the LDS Church is completely irrelevant when debating what harmful social effects gay marriage later might foist upon our children. That is a chapter yet to be written. Are you prophetic enough to bet the future emotional well-being of your children and grandchildren on your support for it? I'm not.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

All of you who are condemning members of the Church for being pro-gay marriage, please read what was said during Prop 8:

"Latter-day Saints are free to disagree with their church on the issue without facing any sanction, said L. Whitney Clayton of the LDS Quorum of the Seventy. "We love them and bear them no ill will."

Either you believe this or you think he was lying.

MAYHEM MIKE
Salt Lake City, UT

@ATL134: You wrote, "How about you google "slippery slope logical fallacy (sic)". I have and and the arguments presented there either admit that there is no conclusive way to predict the social outcome of same-sex marriage, or use arguments that are not logically on point (i.e., comparing mix-race marriages or marriage between humans and non-humans, etc.).

Candide
Salt Lake City, UT

@Spellman789
I love the religious community enough to show them that the path they are on is a dead end. I try to reason with them about science, equality, and justice. I give them evidence about the LGTB community and how marriage rights for them will protect all children and not just families in hetero marriages. I explain to them that we live in a democracy and not a theocracy and that benefits everyone because no one religion should dictate their dogma to all. I remind them that they are a minority in the US and there groups that don't even believe they are Christians. Allowing gays to marry is the right thing to do, not because you approve of gays, but because we live in a country where the majority does not get to deny the rights of the minority.

pleblian
salt lake city, utah

I've no problem with these people voicing their opinions.

I do have a problem with any support of the State's current action to not honor the marriage certificates which were legal when issued. This is not a difficult legal issue. The state is directly disobeying the Federal ruling.

Anyone who supports that does not support the Constitution.

worf
Mcallen, TX

I'm a nice person, and I do not support gay marriage.

M Hes
ROY, UT

I am really concerned about those of you who claim to be good LDS and you support gay marriage! You apparently do not understand the doctrine about marriage. It appears you do not consider marriage as the sacred, special institution that it is. It is not just about two same gender people being in love, it is about their lifestyle being based upon an unnatural sex act AND the facts they want to destroy the institution of marriage and cram their lifestyle down our throats. Please consider this thought…

“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As to be hated needs but to be seen; Yet too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

- Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
English Poet, Critic, and Translator

Where in this cycle are you?

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ MAYHEM MIKE
You wrote:
" to your dredging up remarks by Mark E. Petersen and others re mixing the races: Elder Petersen was wrong. Got it? He was wrong, and, although I support him as an ordained Apostle of the Lord, I completely disavow his prejudiced remarks. He was a prophet only when speaking as such; the discourse was his opinion and his, alone."

Thank you for your honest answer. As an LDS I have never read anything "revealed" about homosexuality. Nothing in the BOM, D&C, Pearl of Great Price.

Homosexuality is mentioned in Leviticus/The Law of Moses and in the words of Paul. Paul epistles were letters to guide members with what he thought was best, using your words "his opinion and his, alone". Was he writing as a church leader or as a prophet? After all, Peter was the highest leader of the church, yet, he didn't mention the subject.

Perhaps you would like to google " Joseph Smith and Homosexuality" The prophet seemed to have been very at ease with the subject.

In the meantime perhaps you or somebody else could guide me to a "Latter Day Revelation" about this subject.

I M LDS 2
Provo, UT

RedShirt,

The Gospel Principles book is NOT scripture.

Enough said.

jlee67
Payson, UT

I'm a Mormon living in one of the most conservative areas in the state and I've always found this argument ridiculous. While marriage does have religious ceremonies involved, as far as State and Federal is concerned, it is a legal definition. You are not recognized as 'married' until you get a marriage license from the court. There are no legal reasons why same-sex marriages should not be allowed; only religious reasons are ever presented. And in this great country of ours, we believe in religious freedom and the separation of Church and State. That is why the law was found Unconstitutional, not because of any "activist" judge.

BYUalum
South Jordan, UT

Voices in the grassroots for traditional marriage: today Golden Corral, tomorrow the Salt Palace. From there the national mall or the White House. I support traditional marriage. It is time we had a strong voice! Lots of squawking from the other side!

morganh
Orem, Utah

@ Versant

Thankyou for your comments regarding why you are opposed to same sex marriage. As an active LDS who is married to a woman I agree with you 100%.

Mayfair
City, Ut

EDM said "I have brave, active, temple-working family members who have made it very clear to church leaders that they do not agree with the Proclamation because it isn't inclusive."

It is officially entitled "The Family: A Proclamation to the World"

That is inclusive of every single human on earth.

Really???
Kearns, UT

"It is hard to believe so many, even one is astonishing, LDS people who haven't read the Book of Mormon scripture that says that you can't take happiness in sin."

Actually, I have read the scriptures, fasted, and prayed hundreds--more likely thousands--of times asking to have my sin of homosexuality removed. It never happened. One day, however, when I changed my prayers, I received the distinct impression that my sin was dishonesty. I wasn't being truthful about who I am. I moved from a single adult ward to the family ward where I reside. I never get visits from anyone in my new ward, and 95% of the single adults from the previous ward have neglected to make contact with me since I came to terms with who I am.

Is my life lonelier now that I have accepted my sexual identity? Yes, but I am also happier in the honest life I am now living.

jlee67
Payson, UT

@ M Hes, I am a "good" Latter Day Saint. I pay my tithing, hold a Temple Recommend and pray regularly. None of that has anything to do with the rights of same-sex couples to obtain a marriage license from the State and have it recognized for purposes of filing joint taxes, sharing health benefits, hospital visitation rights. I am a FIRM believer in the separation of Church and State. My faith and belief has absolutely no bearing in my support of marriage equality from a legal standpoint.

to comment

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