Comments about ‘Gov. Herbert: Utah faces challenges but 'the state of our state is strong'’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 29 2014 6:55 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
equal protection
Cedar, UT

@ Meckofahess "same-gender persons marrying each other is biological incompatability."

Does civil marriage law excludes opposite sex couples who may be "biologically incompatible?" Assisted reproduction is a legal option. Could your discrimination be better expressed through reproductive law? Same-sex couples actually have children. Marriage is NOT defined by those who are excluded from the institution. Otherwise, why do we allow felon adult child molesters and spousal abusers to marry?

@Cats "Children have the right to have a mother and father whenever we can make it possible." Then your issue is with changing reproductive law and NOT civil marriage law. Please think about it.

@RBB "polygamy, two sisters who live together, do not get that benefit."
The legal rationale for same-sex couples and their children, is that restricting marriage to the opposite sex or the same race based on immutable characteristics (race, sex and sexual orientation) is not either fair or rational. Therefore, the law does not require governmental recognition of friendships or other relationships (cohabitation) a person may want to enter that may or may not involve intimacy. Understand better? Also, your slippery slope arguments are not valid argumentation in law, they are classified as logical fallacies.

Paddycakes
South Jordan, UT

ValiesVoter

You comments are loaded with presuppositions: I am NOT LDS, nor have I ever. I embrace one of the historic Christian churches, so your comments about LDS documents/doctrine, I have no knowledge. BTW, you have never seen an LDS write as I. I don't take my arguments before the courts where the Constitution and righteousness little exist, and the Bible says we (Christians) shall be hauled before the courts for speaking righteousness, and, as many have, be imprisoned or worse. I speak truth, you speak lies. Your words shall, one day, be witness against you. Additionally, I have only support for LDS, albeit, they seem to becoming ensconced with false sense of 'love', preferring the doctrine of pleasing men, than pleasing God. They, nevertheless, are some of the finest people I have met.

TheTrueVoice
West Richland, WA

"While I support traditional marriage and will continue to defend Amendment 3, there is no place in our society for hatred and bigotry."

This stunning statement represents the absolute height of political hypocrisy.

Since Dec 21st of last year, I have read a lot of disingenuous statements by those who would deny equal rights for their fellow citizens - but none come close to this statement.

I will stop short of saying that Amendment 3 is hate-filled - having animus against a group doesn't actually require hate, it only requires indoctrination.

There is no question, however, that Amendment 3 promotes bigotry. It creates an environment that allows legal discrimination against a minority segment of lawful, tax-paying Utah citizens.

Honestly... the state knows it is going to lose this appeal. The entire SSM issue was, for all practical purposes, decided upon last year when SCOTUS ruled on the Windsor case. As we have seen in many, many states since then, the courts are no longer willing to accept dogma-driven arguments that have their basis in animus. If the ultra-conservative state of Virginia can see this, Utah should be able to, as well.

LovelyDeseret
Gilbert, AZ

Bigotry is defined as "intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself".

It seems to me that the gay agenda is completely intolerant of any opinion about marriage except the one they want. While the pro-marriage agenda has given the gay agenda both time and deference.

Imagine if a pro-marriage rally was held in San Francisco?

JMHO
Southern, UT

I don't think the gay/lesbian movement is analogous to the civil rights movement. However, those for the gay/lesbian movement have tried to make it common place to assume it is the same. My reasoning is simple. If you sit at my diner and order dinner, I have no way of knowing you are gay, unless you make a big deal of it. During the civil rights movement, it was pretty easy to tell someone was black, even if they never told you. For this reason I don't believe gay/lesbian should be considered a protected class. However, they are winning the argument by getting people to believe their original (but flawed) assumption that being gay/lesbian is the same as being a woman or a person of clear ethnicity. I personally don't agree with the assumption. That does not make me a hater. It makes me a logical thinker.

equal protection
Cedar, UT

@JMHO Gay rights are civil rights.

Naaa.. who would ever say that?

"29 states had laws that allowed gays to be detained by the police simply on the suspicion they were gay. In California and Pennsylvania they could be confined to mental institutes, and in seven states they could be castrated. Electroshock therapy and lobotomies were sometimes used to “cure” homosexuals. Professional licenses could be revoked or denied on the basis of homosexuality, so that professionals could lose their livelihoods, and they could not work for the federal government.

Most states prohibit marriage equality but any legal recognition, and adoption in some states. The legacy of virulent homophobia and legal inequality still looms large in many parts of this country, and will for many years to come.

Critics of gay marriage would be wise to learn the history of institutional homophobia in America and how it helps drive today’s gay rights movement, just as institutional racism inspired and drove the civil rights movement. Utah will come to understand the fundamental injustice of subjecting gay and lesbian Americans to their own form of Jim Crow rather than sharing in equal rights for all." - D Lampo

Snapdragon
Midlothian, VA

If you find yourself not able to visit your partner in a hospital, this is not a result of hatred. This is a separate issue. Don't let the issues get confused with emotions.

Values Voter
LONG BEACH, CA

@ Paddycakes:

Notice the word "if" in my comment:

". . . if you're LDS, try to do the work of reconciling . . . "

I used it because this site has a large LDS readership, fully understanding not all here are Mormon. For you I would say, try to better live by your Golden Rule. Also, issuing threats of religious judgement are not effective for those who don't subscribe to a religious world view, whether it be Christian, (or more nearly Christian, if I'm understanding you correctly). LDS, or anything else.

LOU Montana
Pueblo, CO

Herbert is becoming a reasonable governor just like Huntsman. Selling out principles to appease the right who will never like him anyway. Yes we need to improve the air quality, but no matter what you do short of killing jobs, shutting down industry, and taking food out of the mouths of children the militant republicans will not be satisfied. They hate for the sake of hatred.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Dude!!

equal protection
Cedar, UT

@Ksampow "...they are asking for everyone to CALL IT what THEY want us to call it, to adopt their definition in place of the traditional definition of marriage."

Marriage is simply not defined by those who are excluded. Otherwise, why would we allow opposite sex felon child molesters and spousal abusers to civil marry? Interracial couples wanted to participate in the institution that traditionally did not allow them to marry. There are no Interracial marriage licenses. There are no Felon Marriage licenses. There are no infertile marriage licenses. By being allowed to participate and/or strengthen the existing institution, there is only ONE marriage license for all. Nothing has been re-defined.

Even "traditional voting" was NOT re-defined by allowing women the right to vote. Understand better?

The "redefinition argument" is complete nonsense.

@ Snapdragon "visit your partner in a hospital, this is not a result of hatred. This is a separate issue."
Try accessing the 1100 state and federal benefits, spousal heath care, hospital visitation, end of life decision making, pensions, social security etc. with your partner and without a marriage license, then you may understand why a civil union is not enough let alone desirable. Marriage is universally recognized.

flo-jay
Boston, MA

Let the state vote Let The People Speak! remember We The People!

Mont Pugmire
Fairview, UT

I hope the legislature ( election year beside the point ) has the courage to NOT impose more taxes on the people ...gas tax, income tax or any other tax. Keeping taxes at levels that attract businesses WITH JOBS for Utah's people will do far more to raise revenue than any tax increase would provide. What we need the most (fat chance with the present national administration) is permits and ability to wisely develop the world's largest deposits of oil right here in our own state. In addition, I hope the State will stick to the will of the people and vigorously present the majority's desire for traditional marriage and family in the courts.

Shark51
Wellsville, UT

Seriously Gov Herbert? I didn't know you were on that side of the isle. In a time when the economy is hurting, you want to give in to the save the planet myth? Utah has been like this forever and we choose to try to clean the air now? My salary and benefits keep taking hits and now you want to raise the costs on bringing my car up to code, raising the price of gas, and basically raise taxes. Raising requirements on businesses will raise the price of goods. Energy is going up because we can't use coal any more. Free mass transit? Guess where we get the funds for that. Looks like we'll be looking for a replacement in the Governor seat.

InLifeHappiness
Salt Lake City, UT

As other comments have mentioned, this article is ironic considering their desperate emergency attempt to stay SSM. I just attended an Eggs n Breakfast with legislatures this morning who say they are looking to California, flushing out issues that are unconstitutional instead of spending money and time to make them constitutional, and trying to get the real issues into the mix - possible issues such as UVU 40 million necessary monies, gender bathrooms in the public school system, transportation gas hike, more science/math/physic competition into the public school system, and air quality. Somehow the 5,000 homeless youth were forgotten in their important issues.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

Civil, I don't think that anyone is questioning the fact that same sex couples cannot have biological children without assistance. But as Ruth Ginsberg so succinctly pointed out, "If the man and the woman are both over 55, I assure you that there will be very few children coming from that marriage". Are you in favor of limiting marriage to couples of a fertile age? You haven't said that, but I don't know what else to make of your argument.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

JoeCapitalist, same sex marriage has been the law for 10 years in Massachusetts. If the state really had gone south in a handbasket, the anti's would be gleefully quoting the dire statistics--but they don't. Is this because it's the law, and people today can't understand why the Utahns are making such a fuss about it?

It has been repeated that the 2004 law was approved by 2/3 of the voters of Utah. That was ten years ago. There's no chance that it would get that margin today, if it even passed 50%.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

To all the folk who trumpet the complementary nature of male and female body parts--let's suppose same sex marriage were the law in Utah. Do you seriously think that, say, straight men will start marrying other men, now that it's legal? And that fewer babies will be born because of this?

I'll tell you one thing that will change. The suicide rate of young gay men will go down.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

Flo-Jay, if the good citizens of the state of Oklahoma voted to collect property taxes from all Mormon churches in the state--while the (dominant) Baptist churches got off scot free, you wouldn't have a problem with it? Because the people voted for it?

to comment

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