Comments about ‘Same-sex marriage debate could impact proposed Utah nondiscrimination bill’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Jan. 13 2014 5:40 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Susan Roylance

What is the point of the non-discrimination bill before the legislature? It is probably on a list of bills that the gay and lesbian community are trying to pass, to get special consideration. All people should be treated equally, not receive special consideration because they have chosen a specific lifestyle. Yes, I said "chosen." I have been involved in the international public policy area for over 20 years, and I have seen an almost missionary zeal from homosexuals to promote their lifestyle. In Beijing, at the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995, one of the lesbian promoters said to me, "try it, you'll like it." And, in 1977 at the national Women's Conference, celebrating the International Year of Women, the huge conference hall in Dallas, Texas, was filled with booths promoting lesbian devices and how-to manuals. They have been very successful in moving their agenda into the legislature and the courts. Those who support the natural family of a husband and wife, with both a mother and father for the children they conceive, as the best method for raising children, need to speak up!

New to Utah

Utah voters are acutely aware of how one unelected judge can overstep his bounds and force his will on all the people. The anti discrimination bill should not be passed. There are plenty of laws on the books to protect home buyers and renters. It is legislation that in so many other states has set the stage for liberal judges to be creative in forcing their agenda on the people.

Riverton, UT

A private business / organization has the RIGHT,, to refuse service to anyone they choose, Gay or Straight. If a Baker does not want to bake your cake,,that really is his / her business decision,, however I think the Gay crowd will find that they are met with kindness and respect in Utah by the majority usually referenced in these articles.

Governments are run and bound by law, usually dictated by the constituents through representation. In Utah, this was already ratified in 2004 by the majority in Utah. SSM is not recognized by the states majority of constituents. There are other groups in Utah that feel their unions should be recognized by the State, the country and other religion as well, why not allow them to stand up, file a law suite in contrast to the beliefs of the majority in Utah.

There really is no point of being a State if the Fed can manipulate the laws of the State.. There are so many states violating the Constitutionally given rights vis loophole regulation and executive order these days.. It is rampant across the country.. Hopefully the law stands.


@Bob K
"Take the example of Catholic hospitals not wanting to provide contraception. Do women working their have fewer rights?"

No they don't. Contraception is not a right. That's like me saying that I have a right (for my health) to a job that provides me with a gym pass and that my employer should pay.

It is unconstitutional to FORCE any group to exercise their freedom of religion. If the Catholic church does not support abortion or contraception, they can't be forced to provide it.

Layton, UT

I've found a serious lack of civility and palpable lack of empathy coming from the advocates of gay marriage lately. When it was still an inkling in the minds of a few, those seeking consideration were a lot more genteel. they would appeal to the common decency we all hold. Now it is being treated like a given--something they demand or the world will end.

I find this transition in attitude very destructive. It's as if those now starting to see their political agenda fulfilled have no care for any person or need to show respect for any who might struggle to find the legalization of their personal mindset.

Oh well, I guess this is the new body politic. More emotion, less reason. More protests, less compromise. All hail our new masters! The beatings will continue til morale improves.

Mcallen, TX

Gay marriage is just one step in a progression.

Billy Bob
Salt Lake City, UT

LOU Montana, Guess what! People everywhere discriminate, even in your precious liberal Pueblo Colorado. They discriminate against Christians, conservatives, whites, and males, or especially Christian conservative white males. Discrimination is discrimination no matter who it is against.

Kearns, UT

After reading the comments on the Deseret News over the past year, I have come to the conclusion that people only see and hear what they want to see and hear. The hyperbole that is expressed on both sides of the issue are what is keeping us from coming together and looking out for the interests of all citizens. There is a wide gulf separating people, and it's keeping Utah from becoming a truly great state it has the potential of becoming.

The only way I see us coming together is by declaring 2014 the year of service. With that in mind, I think we should set aside our differences and work side by side to serve the underserved in our communities. Together--gay and straight--we could serve at the homeless shelters, clean our parks, and work on ways to clean the air along the Wasatch Front. We don't talk about politics nor our particular agendas during these times of service; we just serve. That's the only way we will learn to love and accept one another.

I am serious about doing this. Who's with me?

Mission Viejo, CA

The majority of the comments opposing the bill show exactly why it is necessary.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

Reading some of these comments, I find myself having to ask a question...

Why did Utah ever even want to join the United States in the first place? What was that all about? You could have been your own little insular theocracy off in the desert, with a fence all around, persecuting whoever you wanted, not just excommunicating heretics and apostates, but imprisoning or executing them as an example to others. The Book of Mormon could have been not just your religious foundation, but the basis of your entire government, with the Prophets as governors and the Twelve as your Supreme Court.

Why did you just throw away such a perfect chance at your religious Utopia?

Provo, UT

Just Stop It!


@ tgurd: Have you read the bill? It very clearly defines everything.

@ Meck: "The notion that the right of privacy of individals in public restrooms and locker rooms is allowed to be violated..." You are the one that wants to violate privacy. You want to verify that every individual who enters a locker room or restroom has a physical appearance that matches their genetic code. Contrary to popular fear mongering, we are not talking about men with full beards wearing dresses or high school boys who are seeking a thrill. We are discussing individuals who dress, look, and act like the gender they identify with and who you would never know are transgender without being told.

Speaking of beards and dresses, though - about a year ago there was a news story about a picture on the web of a woman with a full beard wearing yoga pants and sandals. Someone took a picture because they thought she was a freak. The woman is Sikh. Sikhs believe in honoring the bodies God gave them and feel that any body modification is a sin. Should this woman with a beard be forced to use the men's restroom?

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

I suspect the legal battle over Gay Marriage may make any other kind of legislation about Gay rights "radioactive." That is what has happened in other states. Its easier to kick the can down the road than try and have a rational discussion on the merits of this particular bill.

Orem, UT

Breaking news, judges don't read comments.

Bluffdale, UT

"or a baker for religious reasons refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding."


I understand the photographer in New Mexico that was forced to attend a same-sex marriage and take romantic pictures of the couple. ...you can't make people do stuff like that. The court is wrong.

But, c'mon. The proposed story like the baker is just making your case look worse not better.

Salt Lake City, UT

@Susan Roylance

Bravo Susan for speaking the truth and for having the courage to raise your voice in defense of everyone's rights!!

You said:"What is the point of the non-discrimination bill before the legislature? It is probably on a list of bills that the gay and lesbian community are trying to pass, to get special consideration. All people should be treated equally, not receive special consideration because they have chosen a specific lifestyle".

I believe the silent majority of Utahns agree with your assessment.

I would ony add that I think both the gay and straight communities should see if there is some "middle ground" which respects the needs, concerns and rights of both sides.

Alas,the comments posted depict a dearth of that spirit from the gay community. Many Gay citizens seem to only have an agenda to try to FORCE their will on the citizens of the state.

We must stand up for rights that are fair to all citizens and avoid creating a "special class" of citizens that have different rights than the rest of us!

Bluffdale, UT

Red Corvette "RE: "The legislation, Assembly Bill 1266...Trust me. That is NOT going to happen in Utah. That nonsense was passed by the Democratic state legislature. A very liberal left-wing legislature. Utah does not have such a legislature. Never has and never will."

And yet, Utah is in this battle over same-sex marriage.

Yet, Assembly Bill 1266 happened, and now some of the country's most conservative counties are forced to apply the law. A 14-year old girl may have to see a young man in her locker room.

For this reason, the northern counties are voting in the fall to secede from California to form the State of Jefferson and the southern counties; San Diego, Orange, Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, are discussing to do the same. (Then it goes to Congress that won't pass a Democratic Senate.)

Trust me. The liberal agenda DOES happen in conservative America.

Far Rockaway, NY

When a person enters the realm of commerce, some rights taken for granted in the personal realm are either sacrificed or are greatly watered down in the public arena. I refer, for example, to comments made by Rand Paul, who claimed that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (one of the most widely praised legislative initiatives of the last century) should not apply to private businesses. In Paul's world, a restaurant should be able to turn away an interracial couple. Whether or not Paul likes it, this Act DOES apply to private businesses -- the owner of a motel cannot refuse to rent a room to an interracial couple on the grounds that his religious beliefs are affronted by doing so.

And so it is with sexual orientation. In roughly half the states in the country, legislation exists which prevents sexual orientation discrimination in housing, employment, and access to places of public accommodation (e.g., restaurants, hotels, and department stores). These laws have been held by the courts to be legitimate exercises of the Commerce Clause. Quite simply, when you enter the public domain, you sacrifice some of the rights you enjoy as a private citizen. This has been established repeatedly.

New to Utah

Michael D, recent cake bakers in New Mexico and Portland Oregon lost their business by having
conscience issues with baking a cake for gays and lesbians. I have lived in liberal land and the there is no protection if you are not politically correct. That includes judges,city officials, and the state goverments.Look at the facts and make your own conclusions.

Far Rockaway, NY

@KarenR -- "Discriminate all you want in the privacy of your temples, churches, and homes. But the minute we or our businesses step into the public sphere, we are ALL accountable to the same public laws. That's the deal of our republic. We need to stop exempting religious institutions that offer services to the general public from meeting the same standards the rest of us must meet."

THANK YOU! This is precisely the point which I have made repeatedly, and it is an almost verbatim repetition of what I have been saying for many years! Separationist churches -- continue, by all means, to refuse to marry interracial couples. That is your right. But when members of your congregation enter the free market, they are required to play by the same rules as any other group. Perhaps the non-discrimination bill in question would stand a greater chance of passing were this principle to be made explicit in the bill's provisions...


to comment

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