I'm such a big proponent of diversity I feel very sorry for children raised
in an environment without both a mother and father, whether because of
homosexual marriage or any other reason. Being exposed to both a female and
male influence as a child, generally speaking, is a disadvantage that can be
difficult to overcome.
The state of Utah will lose their appeal, as they should.
The Bible is a higher law, it says to forgive and let it go; the Constitution
won't solve all your problems.
Totally predictable. That said, I would guess this will require a lot of tax
dollars for our state to have to go to court over another questionable law suit?
I think it would make more sense for the opponents of the existing law to lobby
to put this money into our schools or some other cause rather than using it for
a law suit that surely won't go anywhere until the 10th circuit court of
appeals or the supreme court rules on the constitutionality of Amendment 3. Just
This is unfortunately what happens when a judge tries to legislate from the
bench. Lots of confusion and silly money is spent on both sides trying to come
to a conclusion. There are several polls out there about the opinion of the
people: put it up to a vote again and let that be the end of the matter.
They should sue the judge for not granting the stay in the first place. He put
them in the problem their are in right now, not Utah. All the state is doing is
abiding the fact that a stay is in place.Saying "hold on,
we'll wait for the judge" isn't wrong, illegal, or illogical.
Suing the state for doing so is absurd (at best).
I think that gays receiving the privilege to marry is an eventuality. They are
not going to go home until it happens. Half of me wants to just throw the ball
in the air and say "Fine. If you want to get married, here is a piece of
paper that says you are married."All told, why do these people
want to be "married?" Maybe that is a stupid question, but is it really
just the tax breaks? Is it a matter of principle? Why do gays want to be
married? All of the reasons that I seek a legal marriage are reasons that gays
mostly despise it seems (namely religious reasons). I am willing to grant gays
the privilege to be married, but I still am not sure what drives them to
actually want to be married. Please explain.
They would have a stronger case if the legislature had passed the change and
then changed its mind. Given that the only reason why the same-sex marriages
were performed in Utah was due to a temporary hiccup in the judicial process
(one that was promptly remedied by the Supreme Court), they are facing a bit of
an uphill battle.
@Crisco BWith respect, gay couples marry for the same reasons that
heterosexuals marry. Some of those reasons contradict what you seem to believe
about gay people and their motives. Some of it is social. Some of
it is religious. Some of it is legal. Some of it is financial.Marriage is the way society connects two unrelated people who are thus
committed to one another.We married religiously for the same reasons
that other people of faith marry: to establish our commitment to one another
before our families, our friends, our community and before God.Once
we were permitted to marry civilly, we did that as well. We did that for the
same reasons that other couples do it-- it provides legal protections and
responsibilities to us as a couple rather than as two unrelated individuals.We married because we fell in love and because our lives are now
completely interdependent-- it would be odd for the law or society to treat us
as "single" individuals. We aren't. We don't live our lives
that way. We share a house, a mortgage, all our possessions, our income, our
bills, our decisions both small and large.Peace.
@ Crisco B.you wrote: " I am willing to grant gays the privilege to be
married, but I still am not sure what drives them to actually want to be
married. Please explain."Crisco, LGBT people want to get married
for the same reasons that most heterosexuals want to get married.Love each
otherWants to have spend the rest of their life with each otherWants
"to build " a future i.e. buy a house, have children (or not), travel
togetherBe secure that whatever wealth they create stays with the one is
left behind in case of deathAble to make decision, right visitations in
case of sickness (hospital bound)Any reason that heterosexuals have
to get married may be applicable to LGBT.
@christoph - The Constitution is the law of the land, the Bible is not.@I
know it. I Live it. I Love it. - The AG office was not prepared, it was not the
Judge Shelby's fault, it is Mr. Reyas's team that made the procedural
Bernie, you may be right the state may loose it's appeal. Remember
however, it is not as much a done deal as some who suggest that Utah should just
give up would suggest. SCOTUS had the opportunity to rule one way or the other
last summer and contrary to what many SSM proponents write in comments, and
SCOTUS Did Not rule that SSM is a Constitutional right protected by the 14th,
10th or 5th Ammendments. On Prop 8 they simply said those bringing the suit did
not have standing as with that ruling kicked the can to another time another
case. If Utah looses at least it will have been in defending what 66 persent of
the people voted for. If it wins it will be a major states rights victory
either way it will be a landmark case.
mcdugal, perhaps you should remember the underhanded manner in which Judge
Shelby imposed his judgement. His timing was well calculated to make the edict
at the most difficult time to challenge. He had previously said he would
probably rule sometime in January, there was an interim Att General at the time,
it was late on a Friday afternoon, the weekend closest to Christmas, persons
were on hand and ready to issue marriage licenses and perform marriages even
going afterhours and some on Saturday, and people were lined up to be married in
momnents. The word was out and there was a determination to take one mans law
and force as much through before the voice of reason by Justice Sotomayor, a
liberal judge herself would stay the judgement as should have been done
Crisco B wrote:"All told, why do these people want to be
"married?" Maybe that is a stupid question, but is it really just the
tax breaks? Is it a matter of principle? Why do gays want to be married? All of
the reasons that I seek a legal marriage are reasons that gays mostly despise it
seems (namely religious reasons). I am willing to grant gays the privilege to be
married, but I still am not sure what drives them to actually want to be
married. Please explain."Wow. Obviously, you have no idea how
telling this statement is. The thing you seem to fail to understand is that
"they" are people. People marry for a variety of reasons: love,
companionship, security, sex, money. You can't give one reason why gay
people marry anymore than there is one reason that anyone gets married.The fact that you believe that "they" must have some different reason
to marry than anyone else, shows that you seem to believe "they"
aren't quite human. "They" must have some motive beyond the mundane
reasons we all have.
Crisco B wrote:"Why do gays want to be married? All of the
reasons that I seek a legal marriage are reasons that gays mostly despise it
seems (namely religious reasons)"Another telling phrase. The
clergy were among the first people to the County building when marriage equality
was the law in Utah. These were clergy from a different religions in the area
that support gay marriage. Not all religions fit into your definition of what
religion should be.Many religions embrace the gay community. And
religion can be just as much a part of a gay person's life as it is a
I don't see this case being successful for the plaintiffs. While Amendment
3 is unconstitutional, it's still in force at the moment.
I do not think that cris b is suggesting that gays are not people. He is
referring to them as any reasonable English speaker would. He is not gay, so he
refers to them as they. Not much to read into there. I also do not think he was
necessarily suggesting that their reasons were different. There is at times an
unfortunate anti religious aura from some people of the LGBT community, so I
think he perceives a relative antagonism towards religion by the LGBT community.
He is just seeking to know what reasons LGBT persons have for desiring marriage,
and his question was answered. Again, not much to read into there. Understand
that most of us are not gay, we do not always know your reasons for wanting to
Thank you Linguist. I think my comment came across as a bit too critical, which
was not my intent. I am not trying to persecute, aI am just asking what
the LGBT community believes. In all this talk of marriage, I have not really
heard WHY marriage is desirable for this community. I of course realize that
gays have feelings and that they can have similar reasons for wanting to get
married like anyone else. Seeking an answer straight from someone in the
community was what I was doing. Thanks again to Linguist.
These couples are suing in an effort to compel the state of Utah to recognize
all same sex marriages performed between the initial ruling and the Supreme
Court stay. What these couples, and the ACLU, seem to forget is that under
operating legal theory if a ruling is stayed it is as if that ruling had never
been issued. Given the Supreme Court's issuing a stay against the initial
order, the state of Utah would have been perfectly within the law to refuse
recognition of all those same sex marriages performed. That the state is
compromising should be seen as an act of compassion, not vilification.
mcdugall,The U.S. Supreme Court disagrees with you.
@rocket Science and those who blame Judge Shelby did not stay his rulingFirst, Utah state attorneys should have asked judge Shelby BEFORE the
ruling, that if the ruling does not favor the state, it should be stayed. That
is the right way of handling. Judge Shelby did not grant stay because it was not
asked in the first place. That is the first mistake state attorneys made.Second, after gay marriage started, state attorneys should first go to
Judge Shelby to request stay. But instead, they surpassed Shelby and directly
asked 10th circuit, that is why 10th circuit court rejected the state for three
times, because it was not properly handled on procedural grounds. Even many lawyers in conservative corner admitted that the state attorneys
made several mistakes that only freshman law student would.
@ I know it: Nothing in the Supreme Court stay addresses mcdugall's
comment, therefore it is impossible to claim they disagree with him.@ Rocket: When the initial plea for summary judgement was heard, Judge Shelby
stated that he would try to have a decision quickly and he set himself a
timeline of January 7, with the very clear understanding that his ruling may be
issued before that date. When he was ready to issue his decision, the AG's
office was notified that the decision was pending and were told when it would be
issued. Yes, county clerks were available on Friday to issue licenses, because
county clerks are always available on regular business Fridays to issue
licenses. Interim AG or no, the AGs office dropped the ball. It is
not the role of a judge to do the job of the state or the state's
lawyers.@ Brent: A stay does not mean it is as if the ruling had
never been issued - a stay means no further action can be taken on the ruling
until the terms of the stay are met. A stay does not invalidate actions that
were legal at the time they were performed.
As long as government controls marriage through regulation, there will be strife
and arguments. Get the government out of marriage and let it focus on civil
rights. Let social groups define marriage any way they want, and let people join
social groups that agree with their personal views.