Published: Thursday, Jan. 9 2014 12:00 a.m. MST
Well said, Paxton Guymon -- you are exactly right.
I understand the concept of a constitutional republic and how it protects the
rights of minorities. However, I don't understand the logic that elevates
the discretionary status of marriage to a fundamental right. People have a
fundamental right to live together as they please. The state has the right to
offer marriage licenses to whom they please, not unlike the dispensing of
driver's licenses if certain criteria are met. The question is whether the
state benefits by restricting marriage to heterosexual couples. If so, it is
within the purview of the state to do so; otherwise, the equal protection clause
dictates that it cannot (which is why laws against interracial marriage were
overturned).If Amendment 3 is overturned by the Supreme Court, what
it will mean is that the court believes that the state has no reasonable
expectation of benefit by limiting marriage to heterosexual couples. Possible
benefits might include such things as more children, and children less likely to
be dysfunctional, both of which I believe to be true but with which the court
may not agree.
It is inappropriate for Gov. Herbert and others to characterize Shelby as an
activist judge and lambaste him for undermining the "will of the
people.” Such tirades reflect a fundamental ignorance of the purpose of
the Constitution — to protect the rights of those who are not part of the
popular majority.========= Agreed.As a
reminder -- There are more than 13 million homosexuals in America, while there is less than 5 million Mormons.People who live in
glass houses should not be throwing any stones.And what goes around, comes
around.Karma - Jesus taught us about Karma.
The family is under attack. Period. No "rights" can be granted that
destroy the family. "Feelings" are not the basis of equality. If you
carefully read his ruling, you can plainly see that he is allowing people to
tell us that their "feelings" about who they are the basis for their
demand for "equality". His ruling is preposterous. He used the
dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court to justify his ruling. The Supreme
Court clearly stated that the STATES were the proper place to decide what
constitutes marriage. Utah is a State. Utah has a Constitution. Utah's
people clearly modified that Constitution to include the definition of
"marriage". The 14th Amendment does not include "feelings" as a
basis for determining equality. Any man can marry any woman regardless of race,
religion or national origin. That is equality. That preserves the family.
That protects children from being told that same-sex sex is normal and proper.
Nothing is more important than protecting the family from those who would mock
God and reverse His doctrine that marriage is between a man and a woman. Their
argument is that God is irrelevant. What more needs to be said?
Great letter by a true American.
Paxton,The reason that the Governor and others are ranting that the Judge
is an activist is based on two parts....1. They asked for a Stay
until the full court could hear it and was denied. This is common practice by
the courts to allow an appeal of their decision by the losing side. Shelby did
not do that and now we have thousands of marriages in limbo because of it. If
the Gay community had lost, would they "Accept" the decision? or would
they want to appeal it to the full court? The answer is the latter.2. There is an issued of Federalism vs State rights that needs to be
clarified. Does the State have the right to restrict marriage? Everyone points
to the Loving vs Virginia case as their based for the Judge ruling. in that case
it clearly ties the right to marry to a "Race" issue. That all races
have the right to marry and not be denied because of they have different color
of skin. There is also the issue Pops brings up as well.I think SCOTUS needs to stop kicking this can down the road and rule on it.
He has a good point.Democracy is one thing... tyranny of the
majority is another. We need some rules that protect the minority from a
majority that would vote to diminish others rights, or vote to oppress or abuse
or tax the minority.That's the principle I was talking about
when I denounced the move by Democrats in Washington to implement the
"Atomic Option" and do away with any power the minority had to even slow
down their agenda. That's Democrats voting FOR tyranny of the
majority.And the Democrats who stood on their soap box back then and
placed their hand over their harts and said, "But we believe in Democracy...
and that the Majority SHOULD get what they want"... Where is your
consistency now?We vote to determine popular preferences regarding
our laws... but we don't allow the majority to vote to take away other
people's rights or to silence or abuse the minority. If that's what
the Judge was saying then I agree 100%.
Good letter. Laws need to applied equally across all affected demographic
groups. You can have a situation in which the Straight majority gets to decide
whether or not all the legal benefits and opportunities they take for granted
should be denied to the Gay minority. If the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964 had
been put to a popular vote in the Deep South, I think we all know how THAT
would've turned out.
LDS Liberal,Where in the scriptures did Jesus teach us about
"Karma"?Karma comes from Buddhism... in connection with the
concept of reincarnation. Buddhism also teaches us the concept of "No
Judge, No Justice". Kinda like Jesus's concept of "judge
not"... but different... it's the concept that there is no pre-defined
"Good" or "Bad" (kinda like what Korihor taught).Buddhist scholar Walpola Rahula said,"The theory of karma should not
be confused with so-called 'moral justice' or 'reward and
punishment'. The idea of moral justice, or reward and punishment, arises
out of the conception of a supreme being, a God, who sits in judgment, who is a
law-giver and who decides what is right and wrong. The term 'justice'
is ambiguous and dangerous, and in its name more harm than good is done to
humanity. The theory of karma is the theory of cause and effect, of action and
reaction; it is a natural law, which has nothing to do with the idea of justice
or reward and punishment."I don't think Jesus taught us
Pops writes, "The question is whether the state benefits by restricting
marriage to heterosexual couples."No benefits have been
demonstrated. Couples do not need to marry to bear children. The ability or even
desire to bear children is not a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.
Furthermore, there are countless Gay couples who are raising their
adopted children to healthy, well-adjusted adulthood. If marriage provides a
more stable environment for the raising of children, what justification can be
made for denying Gay couples who DO have children the option to marry?
Paxton, you are a brave man. There will be a lot of people looking at you
askance this weekend in certain venues.
Can you imagine what it would be like if we didn't have a way to work these
things out! People here should think about their own history and what was done
to early Mormons, by the people who were the majority. They were ran out of
their houses, tared and feathered and their prophet was killed! I believe there
was some kind of law that allowed someone to kill a Mormon! The lovely majority
of the state of Missouri,I am sure, felt like the majority in Utah feel today
about amendment 3. They had the right to do those things to the Mormons! They
were the majority and they had a right to drive them out! Can I just say that it
is not the end of the World! We are not as bad as people think and it isn't
going to hurt anyone! Come on! I grew up Mormon and we were taught the
importance of others! Our lives are important! I am sorry people believe what
they do, but surely it is not a bad thing for us to improve our lives!It is the
hardest thing. People I love have so little respect! Come on!
2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UTLDS Liberal,Where in the
scriptures did Jesus teach us about "Karma"?=======What is the Golden rule?[Do unto others, as you would have them do unto
you. = Karma]I spent 2 years in SE Asia as a LDSMissionary.Our
discussions explained Jesus and Karma. Galatians
6:7…whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.Job 4:8 -
…they that plow iniquity, and sow wickedness, reap the same.Matthew 7:12 - Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to
you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.Matthew 26:52 - Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his
place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.Proverbs 26:27 - Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein: and he that rolleth a
stone, it will return upon him....the Curses Pharoah brought upon
his own people.Karma.That's just using a Bible, The
BoM, D&C, PoGP, and General Authorities give us even more.What
goes around, comes around.[...you reap what you sow.]Just
because you can't find the word "Karma" in scriptures, Doesn't mean the concept isn't right there.
@pops;LGBT couples getting married isn't going to change the
number of children being born one iota. Straight people aren't going to
stop having kids because gay people get married.The state has no
valid interest in preventing marriage of LGBT people; the only rational
explanation has to be animus.
Wow. That is two (2) Op's in support of marriage equality. Anyone keeping track of the ones against?
Three cheers for this well-reasoned letter.
Would anyone like to tell me how examples like these without marriage
protections 'help' families…? *'Report details
inequities for kids of gay parents' - By David Crary - AP - Published by
DSNews - 10/25/11'Carrigan is among a growing multitude of
American children possibly more than 1.2 million of them being raised by gay and
lesbian parents, often WITHOUT all the LEGAL PROTECTIONS afforded to mom-and-dad
households.' *'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 Directive, Power of attorney and emergency contact information... Janice Langbehn was kept from the bedside of her dying partner, Lisa
Pond. They were together for 18 years.
LDS Liberal,That's not what "Karma" means (as a religious
concept). But if that's what you think of when you say "Karma"...
then OK.----RE: "LGBT couples getting married
isn't going to change the number of children being born one iota"...
(Ranch)That kinda flies in the fave of all biology I've
learned. It won't affect the straight population's birth rate, but
the more gay marriage we have and the more acceptance of gay marriage grows...
the overall birthrate will be effected, more than an iota (whatever that is).
@2 bits"That kinda flies in the fave of all biology I've learned.
It won't affect the straight population's birth rate, but the more gay
marriage we have and the more acceptance of gay marriage grows... the overall
birthrate will be effected, more than an iota"You think gay
people are going to start making babies if there's no same-sex marriage?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments