Comments about ‘Same-sex marriage supporters rally on same day feds recognize Utah nuptials’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 10 2014 6:10 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Meckofahess
Salt Lake City, UT

The American Constitution: Godly or Godless?

"Despite ... intermittent controversies implicating the Constitution, the more usual
response of religious people to the nation’s founding document has been unqualified
support. Given the successful history of the Constitution in action, this fact should come
as little surprise. By crafting a document that took seriously the fallibility of human
nature, the Founders created a government that has withstood the political passions that have destroyed so many other regimes throughout human history. By refusing to sanction even the hint of an official state religion in their new Constitution, the Founders encouraged the conditions necessary for religion to flourish free from government regulation.

Finally, by recognizing the need for civic virtue in order to make their constitutional system work in practice, the Founders opened the door for religion to act as a vibrant moral force in American public life". From - Religion and the Constitution by John G. West

Springvillepoet
Springville, UT

@ Jaar van kwaad:

You being opposed to gay-marriage based upon your religious convictions doesn't make you a bigot. However, you crying foul because you think gay marriage limits your religious freedoms in any way certainly takes you a few yards closer to that designation.

War on Religion? Give me a break.

78.4% of all American Adults identify themselves as Christian.
There are 350,000 religious congregations in the U.S.
Approximately 40% of Americans report going to church services weekly.

The chances of gay marriage destroying religious freedoms in this nation, acknowledged as the most Puritanical of all Industrialized countries, is insignificant.

wazzup
Cottonwood Heights, UT

That's funny. The feds don't recognize Utah's constitution and the will of the people. Well, I don't recognize the feds. For some reason Holder can't investigate the IRS, NSA, etc but can immediately weigh in on a case that is headed to the Supreme Court. Talk about going after political enemies.

I see Utah's case being the case that upholds the states' rights to determine legality of gay marriage. Isn't that what the gays wanted just a few years back. Not a federal law against gay marriage but let states decide. Well states have decided ..... this latest ruling by ONE judge on a Friday afternoon at 4:30 (coincidence?) speaks for the 'court'? Laughable.

skeptic
Phoenix, AZ

For all those who feel they should have the rights and conform to the seventeenth century constitution should be reminded that it was legal for only white male property owners to vote, all others had no vote. or say. So how many posters here would have a voice in denying others equal rights under yesterday's constitution. It is anew morning; wake up.

LOU Montana
Pueblo, CO

As upsetting it is to conservative they have to learn that this is America the land of the free. Even gay people have rights.

Bebyebe
UUU, UT

You may think it's 'icky' but there is no rational argument to fight it. It's over let it go and spend the 2 mil somewhere useful

kolob1
sandy, UT

"It's very clear we cannot recognize those marriages under the plain language of Amendment 3," Reyes said when he released the opinion Wednesday." Under the plain language of Amendment 3? Amendment 3 has been declared unconstitutional!! What kind of legal double speak is this?
Governor Herbert ordered the county clerks to issue the marriage applications and AG Reyes ordered the county clerks to issue the certificates. If you want "plain language read the order from Governor Herbert, the ruling from Judge Shelby and US Attorney General Eric Holder. Utah is confused. It's leaders are trying so hard to mix their morality with the law and to mix their salvation with the legal rulings of our courts. A religion that needs man made laws to survive is not of God and Faith.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

Yesterday, the LDS Church made an official declaration where stands on the SSM issue. It has declared that no LDS building can be used nor LDS officers will participate in SSM ceremonies.

AG Holder has declared that all SSM made in Utah will be recognized for the federal government.

I think the clouds of uncertainty has been lifted. The LDS church may continue with their position against SSM on religious grounds. But the secular government will provide equality to all citizens of the United States.

Now, it is time to wait for the final resolution of the SCOTUS.

LDS against SSM may relax believes and church property "will not be violated". SSM marriage supporters can relax because the Constitution of the United States, the Federal Government and our check and balance system is alive and well.

CONGRATULATIONS to all the 1,300 couples who got married. For all the others who were not able to marry on time. Well, the struggle continues! But know that you made history in Utah and perhaps you made positive changes in the dynamic of this process for all of us in the United States of America.

ThornBirds
St.George, Utah

When the subject of marriage is updated in history, the State of Utah may deserve an even longer, more detailed, and much more interesting, section than it already occupies!

Really???
Kearns, UT

"Today more than 1000 people tried to protest Governor Herbert and Attorney General Reyes out of defending Utah's laws."

I would dare say it's more like 55,000 people. While the numbers of people in attendance are close to what you mentioned, a petition from tens of thousands of people was delivered to the governor's office. The people of Utah are evolving on this issue.

Candide
Salt Lake City, UT

Look at all the wonderful gay families. I don't understand how anyone would want to deny these families the rights that hetero families enjoy. At least when the case gets to the Supreme Court all 50 states will have equal rights.

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Provo, UT

We chose this mortal existence for ourselves, to learn how to chose and continue in what is good or otherwise.

On my right we see the path to the temple. When traveled we receive blessings, including an eternal bond no earthly power can veto, a sealing recognized by God. The happiness found by following God has no end.

On the left, we see a political dispute. This conflict is full of contention and hatred, men will recognize what they will but the conflict will swelter with religious ceremonies, children being adopted, and other avenues of legal dispute. The dispute seem endless.

But it does end. The dispute will end. The marriages will end.

"All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity... are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead."

Why would anyone who knows about eternal families choose one that isn't?

Copy Cat
Murray, UT

LOU Montana

As upsetting it is to homosexuals they have to learn that this is America the land of the free. Even religious people have rights.

LeslieDF
Alameda, CA

State's rights? Here's an example.

Jane and John, married, file jointly, state and federal income taxes. Each earns $35,000 or $70,000 combined. Neither qualifies for a subsidy under the Affordable Care Act.

Joe and Jim, married - same situation - only Utah says they are not married and must file separately. If they do, each of them qualifies for a subsidy under the Affordable Care Act. But it's a Federal benefit, so they will not qualify for subsidies.

Who should tell the couples, if they are married and how to file their taxes? Shouldn't they file the same way for the state as the federal government?

There are over 1,300 situations where marital status applies to couples under Federal law, hundreds of situations where Utah laws do too. Some are benefits, some are obligations.

Don't you want the same laws - benefits and obligations - to apply the same way to all citizens of Utah?

Demiurge
San Diego, CA

The churches did not create marriage. Marriages existed for property rights, survivorship, and inheritance long before any church appropriated it.

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

What's wrong with choice?

What's wrong with freedom?

Why don't we let folks have the option for gay marriage?

As I remember, satan was all about taking away choice and freedom.

I M LDS 2
Provo, UT

What an awkward situation. Same sex marriages performed in Utah are not recognized in Utah, but are recognized in other States and by the Federal Government. Meanwhile, same sex marriages from other States may have some validity in some cases in Utah, especially for Federal employees, some State employees (such as Weber State University), and a number of private companies, healthcare providers, etc.

Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, known as the "Full Faith and Credit Clause", was explicitly designed to smooth out such a mess. And I am confident the District Courts as well as the SCOTUS will apply it again to smooth out this marriage equality mess Utah has stubbornly participated in creating.

What a wonderful country we live in! Freedom, equality and justice for all! God bless America!

Mig
SLC, UT

An excellent example of the vocal, litigious minority forcing their will onto the majority who have already voted and spoken. The fed needs to realize that marriage is not a right but a regulatory issue, just likes some states now regulating and LICENSING pot. Its no difference.There isn't a right to be married.

D-56
Riverton, UT

Eric Holder would recognize anything that would keep the votes flowing towards progressive liberalism.. Being Gay is not a Constitutional Right, nor is it a Religious right. With the separation of Church and State at every juncture these days, it becomes a civil Right,,one that was ratified by the voting majority of Utah, 2004..

Perhaps the Polygamist community should be acknowledged and all of these families should be able to come out from behind the walls they live in...... Perhaps Utah did not need to abolish this to become a State and Johnson's Army could have stayed back at the Fort and not be sent out here by the mormophobic.

Every Gay lives out in the open,, has the right to marry in one of 17 states,, they can live wherever they please but if they choose a state that does not recognize the union,, they should not expect the majority to role with the minority or the Gang back in Washington.... Holder,, Mr. Fast and Furious....,,

22 months to go,,

Ghost Writer
GILBERT, AZ

To each his own label, but if I say that "marriage should be a union between a man and a woman" I'm certainly not a bigot. If same-sex couples want to form permanent unions with all the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples, that's their right . . . go for it . . . but why do we have to call it marriage? (Shall we vote on it? I guess not according to some of you). It's ludicrous to insist that gay marriage should suddenly be called a "Constitutional Right". The voters in the individual states should be allowed the right to define marriage as they see fit.

to comment

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