Comments about ‘Poll: Majority of Utahns against same-sex marriage and say states have the right to decide’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Jan. 18 2014 10:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
bandersen
Saint George, UT

Many take no stand with abortion either! So! Whether people have convictions or not, the state of Utah has a right, not just to disagree, but to claim that right and defend it! Hopefully others who can develop some self respect will come around to the same!

Really???
Kearns, UT

I am interested in seeing exactly how the questions were worded in this poll. This one seems contradict every other poll that has been conducted recently, so I question the data-gathering approach and whether a bias was automatically written into the questions. Does anyone know where to find the questions to this poll?

road2provo
Davis, CA

There appears to be a discrepancy between the infographic and the article on Judge Shelby's decision. The agree and disagree percentages are swapped between the two.

BYU_Aggie
Salt Lake City, UT

For those curious about the LDS Church's stance on "civil unions," here's a quote taken from an interview with Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman of the Seventy (the article is titled "Interview With Elder Dallin H. Oaks and Elder Lance B. Wickman: “Same-Gender Attraction”):

"ELDER WICKMAN: One way to think of marriage is as a bundle of rights associated with what it means for two people to be married. What the First Presidency has done is express its support of marriage and for that bundle of rights belonging to a man and a woman. The First Presidency hasn't expressed itself concerning any specific right. It really doesn't matter what you call it. If you have some legally sanctioned relationship with the bundle of legal rights traditionally belonging to marriage and governing authority has slapped a label on it, whether it is civil union or domestic partnership or whatever label it;s given, it is nonetheless tantamount to marriage. That is something to which our doctrine simply requires us to speak out and say, 'That is not right. That's not appropriate.'"

Really???
Kearns, UT

Now that I asked about the polling questions the graphics show up with the story. After looking at the data, it appears that people were confused and contradicted themselves on a few questions. For example: 57% of respondents claim to support civil unions for same-sex couples, yet 54% claim they would vote for amendment 3 again with the exact same wording prohibiting civil unions. Another interesting note is that 45% of respondents say that we should recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, but I don't see any question asking whether or not we should recognize the same-sex marriages performed in Utah.

It's interesting data, for sure, but I would like to compare them side-by-side with the other polls that have been conducted.

jrp7sen
Logan, UT

Not that Utahn's opinions or beliefs influence the realness of another person's life and their ability to love another human being. Nobody should could care what they want. It has nothing to do with them.

Gay people are human beings. Human's fall in love, therefore, gay people fall in love and their love is just as pure, kind, gentle, lovely and righteous as the next love.

These people, if so paranoid about marriage, should focus on the high divorce rates over people actually trying to get married.

IndeMak
South Jordan, UT

Amen.

Vince here
San Diego, CA

What would the Founding Fathers think about the voting rights of the majority vs. the rights of the minorities?

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."

Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, (03-04-1801)

"If a majority are capable of preferring their own private interest, or that of their families, counties, and party, to that of the nation collectively, some provision must be made in the constitution, in favor of justice, to compel all to respect the common right, the public good, the universal law, in preference to all private and partial considerations... "

John Adams --- " Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States"

Moreover, if more than 50% encompasses enough reason to change the law of the land, what will become when the scales tip to a simple 51%/49%?

My majority alone, many of the rights we see as distinctly American would not have happened.

Kings Court
Alpine, UT

The Salt Lake Trib. also did a poll on Gay Marriage four days ago and found that it was split 50/50 on the issue. So I wonder whose poll is accurate. There is quite a big difference between these two poll results.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

"....and say if gay marriage were legal, Utah should pass laws to protect places of worship from having to perform weddings for gay and lesbian couples."

Uh, like the First Amendment? The paranoia is spinning out of control.

jr85
United Kingdom , 00

I'm not stating which side of the argument I am on but it is really frustrating when two polls on the same question say completely different things. One polls says a majority of Utah supports same sex marriage while this one says the opposite. Muddles the argument further. Interesting to see how this will all turn out

Ax-man
OREM, UT

Everyone supporting a decision or concept does not make it right.
Everyone rejecting a decision or concept does not make it wrong.

Some try to use the fact that the majority of Utahns are against SSM to reject it.
Some try to use the fact that the majority of Americans favor legal SSM to support it.

Both methods are wrong. Plessy v. Ferguson was the law of the land. Dred Scott v. Sandford was also "legal." Few would argue today that they were fair or right. But the numbers that support or reject those decisions, then or now, do not give them any strength.

Decisions and public policy must not be based on the opinion of the day - whether you're Bill Clinton or Congress in 1996, or Robert Shelby in 2013.

Capsaicin
Salt Lake City, UT

Collectively accepting gay marriage as acceptable is ONLY an equality issue. It's a short term, feel good, pointless cause because it undermines everything heterosexual marriage stands for.

danr
San Bernardino, CA

A law protecting the church from gay marriage is superfluous and unnecessary. Religious freedom is sacrosanct in this country. This is just more fear mongering by conservatives and an opportunity to demean and ostracize Utah's gay citizens, AGAIN.

Anyone without a recommend cannot attend the temple wedding of a family member or friend. It doesn't matter how Christlike and loved a person is, the the LDS church can deny that person entrance to the ceremony. This is upheld by the US Constitution. What makes anyone think gays can make the church allow gay marriages in the temples???

The rights of minorities in America are not subject to the tyranny of the majority. Mormons, of all people, should value this.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

So 57% support civil unions... and 54% support Amendment 3 which in addition to same-sex marriage bans civil unions...

Gibster
San Antonio, TX

Does not matter. 50 Years of legal precedent says that the 14 Amendment is there to protect the rights of minority groups like this.

Stop trying to legislate morality!

flo-jay
Boston, MA

Unlike where i live I say let the people vote, then if yes make that the law of the state if no then make that the law of the state.

Riccar
Moses Lake, WA

I have seen this gay rights agenda go from domestic partnerships, to "everything but marriage", to gay marriage. Each time with the attachments that churches and certain businesses would not have to service gay marriages. Since then, I have heard of photographers, bakery shops, caterers and Pastors that are in legal trouble for not providing service to gays. I have also read of pressure on a school district to insert gay curriculum into the classroom. My concern is: How far will this go? Are there really exemptions? And, if so, will they get any legal protection? Many small businesses, Pastors and churches could not survive financially if they have to defend themselves in court.

Bruce A. Frank
San Jose, CA

The real problem as I see it is that the homosexual community wants to force same sex marriage on the religious community. In the process they also want to force all who are religiously opposed to supply facilities and services regardless of the business' religious position. I expect eventually that a church will not be able to refuse to marry a homosexual couple, under threat that the church will loose its tax-exempt status...and the churches, including the LDS faith, will cave to the economic pressure. It will take only one law suit and the right bunch of "Progressive" judges to turn the First Amendment topsy-turvy!

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

Two wolves and a goat do not get to vote on what's on the dinner menu.

This is why we have a constitution - to protect the rights of the minority from what's currently popular with the majority.

to comment

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