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
JayTee
Sandy, UT

I should hasten to point out that the "majority" isn't always right, and the "majority" shouldn't always have their way. I think we have far bigger fish to fry now that struggling to protect people from themselves. Nearly every attempt to legislate morality has failed miserably, and we should be concentrating on the wrongs that are perpetrated upon UNWILLING participants.

bandersen
Saint George, UT

this is actually quite humorous. The tit for tat about whether the citizens of the state can decide an issue or not is meaningless if the action is immoral! The real issue is whether something will stabilize or destabilize a country. If something that is wrong is given the right under the law to be O.K, then it really doesn't matter whether it is Constitutional or not, does it? In fact, you might as well dump the Constitution in the ocean. laws that are immoral will destroy a country. IT IS THAT SIMPLE!

ldschristian
Salt Lake City / USA, UT

Every man in Utah already has the "right" to marry. It just has to be to a woman. And every woman in Utah already has the right to marry. It just has to be to a man. We are not withholding the right to marry for anyone. Everyone already has the right to marry.

kargirl
Sacramento, CA

When this is all over, if and when marriage equality carries the day, those who are so adamantly opposed might seriously wonder if they truly wanted the democratic-republic style of government that this country is, with the distinct separation of church from state that has caused many of its fine citizens to wonder about its most obvious secular nature. Perhaps there will be a hue and cry over the "Godlessness" of it all. Sadly for those folks, it is what it is, and what it is not is a theocracy. Should anyone want one of those, and then believe it is possible to design one, I'm sure he or she and a group of like-minded individuals could find suitable land upon which to form that theocracy. But I don't believe it would be as wonderful as the dream, nor as secure. So lick your wounds, mourn awhile, and stay here in this messy but free, secular democratic-republic with the rest of us.

Dennis
Harwich, MA

For those of you that don't understand, majority is not the issue here. It's the legal rights of citizens of the United States.

Karen R.
Houston, TX

@ banderson

"The real issue is whether something will stabilize or destabilize a country."

Did you ever notice that the decline of the U.S. is correlated with the rise of fundamentalist-type religiosity? I think a strong argument can be made that religion has had an undermining effect on our country. It certainly has shown itself hostile to knowledge and growth. How is this moral or good?

Frankly I think it is more often the case that we are moral and good DESPITE religion than because of it.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

@ldschristian 10:56 p.m. Jan. 19, 2014

Every man in Utah already has the "right" to marry. It just has to be to a woman. And every woman in Utah already has the right to marry. It just has to be to a man. We are not withholding the right to marry for anyone. Everyone already has the right to marry.

-------------------------------

Let's take your argument back to the 1960s in Virginia:

Every Negro (using the term of the time) in Virginia already has the "right" to marry. It just has to be to a Negro. And every Caucasian in Virginia already has the right to marry. It just has to be to a Caucasian. (The same argument being made for any racial designation in Virginia at the time. ) We are not withholding the right to marry for anyone. Everyone already has the right to marry.

That argument was wrong then, and it's wrong now. Article 14 to the US Constitution says ". . . nor shall any State . . . deny to ANY person within its jurisdiction the EQUAL protection of the laws" (emphasis added). Separate but equal isn't equal. The Supreme Court decided that a long time ago.

CBAX
Provo, UT

Ha. I am so glad that tax benefits and a few other rights entailed true happiness. All of that pure love and righteous love. Gay people were only prevented from experiencing true bliss in this life because the government had not yet given them tax breaks, or a marriage license. Yes! This is great. If gay marriage is allowed in utah, then only now will gay people be truly happy.

equal protection
Cedar, UT

Interesting, can this be true, did the sky really not fall? From the SacBee:
"Not a single one of those 900 marriages took place in LDS temples or other places of worship. Just as was true in California, before Prop. 8, civil-marriage equality does not infringe on religious freedom. Churches—including the LDS—remain free to refuse to marry any couple that does not meet their doctrinal requirements for marriage.
Those 900 Utah couples were married in public courthouses and in churches that support marriage equality. And, thankfully, Americans are—rather quickly—coming to see that marriage equality is no threat to religious freedom. In fact, marriage equality will actually strengthen the First Amendment rights to freedom of religion, as those religious organizations who support marriage equality will finally be free to practice it."

RanchHand
Huntsville, UT

Bruce says: "The real problem as I see it is that the homosexual community wants to force same sex marriage on the religious community..."

ldschristian says: "Every man in Utah already has the "right" to marry. It just has to be to a woman. And every woman in Utah already has the right to marry. It just has to be to a man. "

From where I stand, it is the religious community trying to force opposite-sex marriage on gays.

@CBAX;

Have you ever had to worry about what is going to happen to you or your significant other if one of you dies? You have legal protections in your relationship that we do not. This is extremely stressful.

TheTrueVoice
West Richland, WA

@LovelyDeseret:

"This is how a democracy dies. To say that the basic moralities of the majority are subject to the whims of the minority and their lifestyle choices is to kill democracy."

There are so many inaccuracies and stereotypes going on in this one sentence, it boggles the mind. Example: to assert that being gay is a "lifestyle choice" immediately disqualifies you from the discussion due to lack of knowledge.

Many of those against marriage equality fail to realize that we are not a pure democracy, we live in a democratic constitutional republic. That means that the people can vote to make the laws of the land, as long as those laws comport with the US constitution and do not trample upon the rights of free citizens. Utah's Amendment 3 utterly failed legal scrutiny, and that's why it was struck down. This same situation occurred in Oklahoma, with similar results after the 10th Appeals Court rules in favor of the Shelby decision.

equal protection
Cedar, UT

Even convicted spousal abusers, and adult child molesters have a fundamental right to marry, but a same-sex couple? Oh no, the sky will fall, society will collapse and religious freedom will be destroyed. Seriously?

get her done
Bountiful, UT

Salt Lake Tribune indicates their poll at 50%.

kofender
Rockaway, NJ

In 1967, the residents of the United States were polled as to whether interracial marriage should be legal, and the vast majority said no. Then along came Loving v Virginia and interracial marriages were legal (much to the loud grumbling of many racists throughout the country).

We are at a "Loving" moment. Marriage equality is legal in 17-19 states (Utah and Oklahoma currently on hold) and DC. In a couple of decades, when SCOTUS paves the way for marriage equality in all 50 states, are people going to admit they were against it? Liars and hypocrites probably won't.

And yes, marriage equality IS going to be the law of the land, much sooner than you think. Even in Utah...

newkid45
Taylorsville, UT

It's been my experience that when "majority of Utahns" oppose anything it's because they are "told" to by the leaders of the predominant religeon. I've experienced this through family members who are very active in "the" church of which I am not as active as I once was since I started to think for myself and come to my own conclusions.
We, the faithful are told that we are put here to prove ourselves righteous and worthy of the return to "heaven". By doing everything you are told to do by the religeous leaders, you don't experience anything but day to day life. Make up your own mind, your own decisions, mistakes and learn from them. That's what you are "here for".

Stephen Dickey
PACIFIC PALISADES, CA

Sounds like the same "states rights" arguments made by Virginia when it went so far has trying to jail mixed-race couples for getting married out of state and them moving to Virginia. The Supreme Court found that such anti-miscegenation laws violated the 14th Amendment and will surely do the same with same sex marriages.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment provides:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

farsidefan1
midvale, UT

Why do religions think they "own" marriage? Marriage exists outside of marriage all over the world. If a religion is anti gay marriage then don't perform them. Trying to make laws to enforce your religious beliefs is wrong on every level. Just because the LDS faith doesn't want to accept gay marriage should have absolutely NOTHING to do with the law of the land.
Let's step back and let our religions or lack of religious belief rule where they should - in our own lives and Churches. Many feel Islamic law should be the rule of law in countries but what about the other churches? Religion in this corner, government in that corner. May the 2 harmoniously co exist. That is how it should work.
Personally I see this as the right to pursuit of happiness. As long as it doesn't impinge upon the rights of others, well, butt out. Not your business. Your ox is NOT being gored.

formerteacher
Salt Lake City, UT

I sense a lot of fear of equality. Fear of the unknown is the greatest fear of all. We have seen this throughout the history of this fine country. Personal religious beliefs should not be the reason to deny equal rights and benefits to others who may believe, think or live differently. If that were the case we would be no different than some countries in the world where only one religion is accepted and there continues to be war and discrimination against anyone of an opposing faith or belief. Religion has been the cause of nearly every war in the world, whether it was the Christian wars centuries ago to the wars we see in the world today. Giving equal rights to those who do not have it will not stop any religion from believing as they wish. It does not infringe on their rights and they do not have to perform any ceremony that differs from their teachings.

Bob K
portland, OR

Where do these destructive myths come from?

Riccar
Moses Lake, WA
"...attachments that churches and certain businesses would not have to service gay marriages.... photographers, bakery shops, caterers and Pastors that are in legal trouble for not providing service to gays... pressure on a school district to insert gay curriculum into the classroom."

A--- Let's be clear that churches and businesses are separate issue. No legislature and no judge could make a church marry people who do not fit its rules, but if a person or a church owns a business open to the public, it must obey the laws.
B--- In some more liberal areas, where everyone knows there are Gay people and Gay couples, they appropriately inform kids about the community, not teach them sex. Remember, some kids know they are Gay at 5, and deserve to be told they are OK.

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.

C--- Actually, the real problem: some churches are afraid that their own members and their own kids who are Gay will want to be treated equally.

My2Cents
Taylorsville, UT

I hope bias was written into the question, its the basis of the right of the state.

Every state, all 50, have the constitutional right and obligation to establish moral and social standards and why there are no federal laws that dare to challenge all social and moral standards because of the variety of cultures and values that immigrants thorough out the expanison of this country in its divine destiny.

Our forefathers knew that morals and social standards of immigrants varied by country they came from and this right was given to the states to create and maintain standards that society will live by. So the state do have the right to discriminate the moral and civil and economic values of its residents.

Its also why there are no federal laws that establish moral and civil laws. It was believed that people have the wisdom to defeat dishonesty and immorality without the need for these laws. Truth and humanity would defeat the unwanted and this is our right. It is our right to be biased, prejudiced, in profiling to establish law and order and rule of law. Fair is not a right and not all laws can be fair to all.

to comment

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