Comments about ‘Marriage debate fills the halls of the Capitol’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 28 2014 10:40 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mr. Bean
Phoenix, AZ

"Can any of you provide a rational argument defending the proposition that same-sex marriage (SSM) harms children?"

One thing, children with same sex parents are disadvantaged because they will more likely be teased and shunned by their 'heterosexual parented' friends.

Secondly, children need male and female role models to help them avoid same sex attraction.

"Polygamy and Polyamory are not considered immutable characteristics (race, sex, and sexual orientation)."

Has nothing to do with 'immutable.' Has to do with who loves whom... at least according to many same-sex supporters.

"Behavior is a choice, sexual orientation is NOT for most..."

All sinful conduct is a choice. Bank robbery is a choice... as is murder, even if predisposed.

"The 9th Circuit court of appeals, as a result of Windsor, determined sexual orientation merits heightened scrutiny..."

So should polygamy, polyandry, etc. There's a list somewhere showing who might love whom and would like to live together as marrieds.

"You missed the argument about immutable characteristics, the practice of polygamy is choice."

Not so. In the animal world of deer and elk, the male usually rounds up several females. There's some 'immutable' for ya.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@wrz: If, as you say, it shouldn't be important whether a family headed by a same-sex couple have some piece of official legal paper in their closet, then why is it important to you that they shouldn't be allowed to have it in the first place?

I mean, is it important, or isn't it? If it's not important at all, as you suggest, then why don't you want them to have it?

I'd be interested to see if you can put together a coherent answer of the sort which might hold sway in court. Why is it, in your view, terribly unimportant for a gay or lesbian couple to have a marriage certificate, yet so important to you that they don't?

O'really
Idaho Falls, ID

@ Evidence, Not Junk... Even the most learned historian of marriage who completely discounts the Bible and the beliefs of millions in this country, is still missing the boat. Marriage IS between man and woman or the species would cease to exist. It's simply the way it is. No animus on my part. Only logic.

Also, just because a long list of churches have abandoned a clear commandment from the scriptures doesn't make what they are doing right. I feel for them when they have to face their maker and explain their actions.

MaxPower
Eagle Mountain, UT

@O'really

Marriage IS between man and woman or the species would cease to exist. It's simply the way it is. No animus on my part. Only logic.

=====================

For your argument to carry weight, one would have to assume that only those legally married can have children...

Plenty of teenagers can be offered as counter-examples...

No it does not take marriage, simply a sperm and egg.

Alfred
Phoenix, AZ

@No H8 - Celebrate:
"Where do sovereign rights take priority over the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process? Where is one particular religious view supposed to be codified into civil law?"

All citizens currently have equal protection. Anyone can marry provided it's one man/one woman. This rule applies across the board to all. No one is left out.

If you're saying that equal protection has to include SSM because they love each other and want to be together for any number of other reasons, you have to say it also applies to any other combination of loving relationships... such as polygamy, polyandry, siblings, children, etc., all of whom are now denied marriage.

The Supreme Court has put itself into a quandary with the DOMA ruling where the right to define marriage is a state and not a federal government responsibility. It can't now say oops, states can't define marriage after all. The Court can't open the door for gays and not open it for other loving combinations.

wrz
Phoenix, AZ

@No H8 - Celebrate:
"Slippery slope arguments are considered to be logical fallacies."

If there's no slippery slope alotta folks who would like to marry would be denied... such as polygamists, polyandrists to name two.

"Sky will fall argumentation has no basis in law."

That the sky will fall has a basis in fact.

"Parent and child and brother and sister relationships are not intimate relationships and therefore are not legal civil marriages."

Who said it has to be intimate? Many people marry today for many other reasons besides sex, intimacy, children, etc.

@A Quaker:
"Why is it, in your view, terribly unimportant for a gay or lesbian couple to have a marriage certificate, yet so important to you that they don't?"

A marriage certificate is important to hold a family together in the event there are children to raise. Homosexuals can't have children... at least don't think two men can.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@O'Really: said, "Also, just because a long list of churches have abandoned a clear commandment from the scriptures..."

That's quite insulting to over two dozen Christian denominations. Unless you think you're God Almighty, you don't have an inside track on which religions have "abandoned a clear commandment from the scripture," thank you very much.

Every denomination, every religion, can interpret scripture according to their own leadings. My religion, for example, the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), has a very straightforward and clear approach to following the Lord and a very direct and personal relationship with Him. But, we won't criticize anyone else's dogma or sacred texts. We only hope you can use your religious foundation to find the Light.

As far as your own self-righteousness goes... If you are that enamored of the Old Testament, you should know it contains 613 commandments. (Ask any Rabbi if you don't believe me.) I wonder how your selective citation of one while ignoring hundreds of others would be respected by those who actually worship with the OT.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@wrz: said, "A marriage certificate is important to hold a family together in the event there are children to raise. "

You should really read your state's laws. Utah Code Title 30, Chapter 1 describes marriage. Nowhere does it contain language even remotely resembling what you suggest. In fact, I'm unable to find any stated purpose whatsoever.

Marriage is a voluntary arrangement to bind two people into one household with certain legal rights and responsibilities. It is not a requirement for, nor conditional upon, child-bearing. It is not mandatory for child rearing. Nor is it difficult to dissolve a marriage, even when minor children are present. Your rationalizations are not supported by your state's laws. And, by the way, your state's laws are impermissibly discriminatory according to the District Court's reading of the U.S. Constitution.

Your marriage laws are child-agnostic. And, your family laws regarding children (child support, etc.) are marriage-agnostic. Neither depends on, nor is based on, the other. And, these are the civil laws that we're talking about. There's no basis to deny marriage on the issue of prospective issue.

nycut
New York, NY

@Mr. Bean
"One thing, children with same sex parents are disadvantaged because they will more likely be teased and shunned by their 'heterosexual parented' friends."

This sounds familiar:

"One thing, children with *inter racial* parents are disadvantaged because they will more likely be teased and shunned by their *racially pure parented* friends."

This argument didn't work before and it doesn't work now.

The existence of racism and homophobia in others is not justification for continuing racist or homophobic practices, such as preventing some people from marriage simply because of existing prejudice.

The problem is prejudice, not gay or interracial marriage.

nycut
New York, NY

@Mr. Bean:
> "Behavior is a choice, sexual orientation is NOT for most..."
> All sinful conduct is a choice. Bank robbery is a choice... as is murder, even if predisposed.

The "choice" relevant to this discussion is each person's right to define "sinful conduct."

You may see someone's sex life as sinful, they may see that as nothing of the kind and none of your business.
You may think some parents are better than others. Again, you don't get to say who is allowed to parent and who is not.

Comparing gay marriage to roberry, murder and so on has not been successful. Those are crimes with victims that cause demonstrable harm. Gay marriage has no victim and causes no harm (beyond the insult to your beliefs its existence may present to you).

sctrojanfan72
St. George, UT

Humans make mistakes. Unfortunately, even though we don't have enough research on the impact of same-sex marriages on individuals and families, the day will come when that impact will be made clear. What we do know and get as humans is design, in fact we utilize design everyday to our benefit. We also know that when we go against design that we get into trouble.

I suspect that the day will come that we will recognize the impact of going against design in relation to this issue.

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

wrz: A marriage certificate is important to hold a family together in the event there are children to raise. Homosexuals can't have children... at least don't think two men can.

-------------
Can they raise a child? Are any gays in Utah raising children? (hint: Read the caption under the picture that goes with this article.)

Actually, gays are raising over 200,000 children right here in America. But you do not want them to be raised in the most stable, legally recognized homes. Why?

Is defending the use of your special word so much more important than these kids?

Families come in all sizes and shapes. Lets support ALL families and offer the best our government can give them - marriage and the stability that goes with it.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

A two parent household is certainly better than a single parent household, for logistical, financial, and emotional reasons. It does not follow that the two parents have to be of opposite sexes.

But for those who think that there's something special about having a father and mother, please tell me what efforts you are making toward getting children yanked out of their homes when one parents skips or dies.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

JSB, you haven’t heard “a logical response to this concern from anyone supporting gay marriage” because your argument is specious. Marriage requires two unrelated consenting adults. That leaves out your three or foursomes. And perhaps you can explain how marriage equality will lead to social chaos, crime, child abuse, and higher taxes. Massachusetts has had marriage equality for ten years. Last time I checked they were doing just fine.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ Alfred

That same argument was used in the Loving v. Virginia case. It didn't work then and it won't work now....

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

"Secondly, children need male and female role models to help them avoid same sex attraction."

This is 100% wrong. People are attracted to whoever they are attracted to. If it happens to be someone of the same sex, so what? It's not your life.

Inis Magrath
Fort Kent Mills, ME

Folks can "rally" all they want. It will make no difference to the Federal Judiciary. They are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. The steady march towards equal treatment of LGBT Americans under the law is inexorable. Marriage equality in all 50 states is coming, no matter how many anti-gay rights rallies there may be.

Really???
Kearns, UT

"Could it not be possible to be a 'sympathetic neighbor' and at the same time oppose a lowest-common-denominator redefinition of marriage?"

You do see how your choice of words can create some contention, don't you? When you define another couple's relationship the "lowest-common-denominator," you making us somewhat less than everyone else. That's not being a sympathetic neighbor; that's not empathy.

What we need in this community is a monthly day of service where gay and straight neighbors come together to clean garbage from their streets, work together to get rid of tagging and graffiti that is creeping up everywhere, serve meals at the local homeless shelter, and do whatever it takes ti make Utah the best state in the nation. We need to get to know each other and realize that we are all God's children and we all deserve civility, respect, kindness, and equal protection from those things that really harm a society.

Really???
Kearns, UT

"Your point only supports the findings that gayness is caused by severe emotional hurt or abuse at an early age--not genetics."

I know of many studies that dispute this claim, but I will humor you a little bit. If, like you say, we are gay because of severe emotional hurt at an early age, is that an excuse to discriminate against us? Instead of fighting us as adults, wouldn't a much better mission be to protect our children from emotional and physical abuse?

By your reasoning I could imagine some people saying "well, they are used to being abused, so we don't need to change anything."

Really???
Kearns, UT

"If this is a battle for the hearts and minds of Utah's voters, my suggestion is that proponents of SSM would do well to listen and try to understand why some oppose their views rather than attempt to simply shout them out of the public square."

We know their views. We have listened to those ideas our who life. We come from the same families, attended the same churches, work in the same offices, and live in the same neighborhoods.

For many of us we felt like we had to hide some horrible truths about ourselves until we woke up and realized those truths weren't horrible. What is horrible is the way we are abused, denied protection, condemned, and abandoned because of those truths.

If you are asking us to understand your view, I would like you to understand that most of us already have that background knowledge. We would like to turn that plea back to you and ask you to try and understand what it is like to be on our side of the issue. I think our pain is so much deeper.

to comment

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