Quantcast

Comments about ‘Lesbian expectant couple sues Utah for recognition of marital rights’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 30 2014 6:25 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
worf
Mcallen, TX

Proof:

This is not about love, but benefits.

How much I can squeeze out of tax payers.

Pathetic.

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Will those "rights" include making the mother's (spouse?) responsible for child raising expenses, and specifically exclude the "sperm donor?"

In another state, it was held that the sperm donor had to pay child support after the mother's (spouse?) divorced the mom.

Are they really seeking 'equality" or just working an agenda for that "some are more equal than others" stuff?

koseighty
Logan, UT

@worf
"This is not about love, but benefits. How much I can squeeze out of tax payers."

As a married man, I seem to be missing out on all these wonderful tax benefits marriage brings.

But the article isn't about that at all. From the article:

"The couple, who have been together for more than eight years, are worried that Roe will not be able to "make emergency and other significant decisions for their daughter," who is the result of careful selection from a sperm bank in California, the suit states."

Yes, gays are seeking the "benefits" of marriage. Things like being able to make medical decision for each other and their children in the event of an emergency, being able to inherit, to even be able to visit in the hospital. There are tons of "benefits" that come with marriage. Very few (any?) have to do with government handouts.

omahahusker
Modesto, CA

It's time for the state and the people to come together and provide benefits that are equal and fair for all. Most affected will be the children, aren't their needs to be given the highest consideration?

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@worf
"This is not about love, but benefits."

What's wrong with wanting both?

play by the rules
SOUTH JORDAN, UT

Dear Modesto, Children are entitled to a Mom and a Dad.

Laura Ann
Layton, UT

I am for traditional marriage. If a gay couple has a child, why don't they create a trust fund, a will, or some other way to deal with these problems. I am sure there are legal ways to solve these problems. Just a thought: If these children are happy with gay parents, why are so many trying to find their biological parents?

Vladhagen
Salt Lake City, UT

Why all of the sudden is getting the benefits of marriage worth suing for? When they decided to have the child, gay marriage was illegal in Utah. If she has a February due date, they conceived well before Amendment 3 was overturned. Why not sue then? This seems like opportunistic timing. I feel that yes, the state should grant legal status to the marriages performed. That would be a only right. But if benefits are important now, why was this lawsuit not filed back in July or so?

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ Laura Ann: If adopted children are happy with their adoptive parents, what are so many trying to find their bioligical parents? By your reasoning, we should prohibit adoption. We should also probably prohibit single women from having babies.

And how exactly would establishing a trust fund allow the making of medical decisions or address any of the other concerns the couple has expressed? Why should same-sex parents have to spend thousands and thousands of dollars in an effort to get rights and access that heterosexual parents (whether married or not) get just by being listed on the birth certificate?

@ play: If children are entitled to a mom and a dad, what laws are you advocating to ensure that entitlement is met? Should single parents have their children forcibly taken from them? How long does a parent have to get remarried after a death or divorce before the children are removed from the home? What incentives are going to be offered to encourage married couples to provide homes for all the children who won't have a mom and a dad otherwise?

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ DN Subscriber: In another state that also does not recognize same-sex marriages, two women had a child together. They did not consult an attorney or a doctor, nor did they read through state law - neither did the donor.

Because the relationship was not legally recognized, when it ended there was no way for the non-custodial patent to be held responsible to support her child. Because the law was not followed when the donor was chosen, the contract he signed was not valid and his rights were not protected.

The couple here in Utah want their relationship legally recognized which will avoid all the problems associated with the situation to which you refer.

Legal recognition of same-sex marriage means legal responsibilities and protections for same-sex parents.

@ worf: The nerve of these women wanting the benefits of married parents for their child! How dare they!

(And FYI - most same-sex marriage advocates freely state they want access to the benefits of marriage - that's where the whole pesky "equality" argument comes in.)

informed?
Utah, UT

This couple obviously cannot create a family together, so how can it be classified as a marriage.
The problem is that if we classify a same sex couple as marriage, then you open a new can of worms. Where do you draw the line, what if my neighbor wants health insurance, can they just move in and become insured? Should they be put on their neighbors food stamps because they have know each other?
Perhaps we can have everyone in one company decide they want to be a family so they can all be on the same insurance plan. All 750 employees. Where do you draw the line?

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ play by the rules

So should divorce be illegal, or what?

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Provo, UT

To barter a child for self-interests is cruel.

A bishop, arguing against the roman take over of the early church, once compared the mistreatment of children to barbarism. I have to agree. Abusing children physically or intellectually amounts to nothing less.

So where are we now?

The very idea of robbing children of their male Father and female Mother is not a good one. Sometimes it happens in extreme circumstances, such as a father who dies and other situations. But those are not circumstances we seek out.

Does this issue have an inevitable outcome? Maybe.
Do those who offend little children have an inevitable outcome? Yes.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying anyone is bad because they believe differently that I do. I'm not intolerant of beliefs. I'm intolerant of doing things to children that they don't deserve. Children deserve to have a Father and Mother.

I'm not in favor of illegalizing behavior. I'm in favor of protecting children and honoring good behavior. There is a difference.

Youtube: Ryan Anderson in the Indiana House Judiciary Committee
Youtube: The lost art of democratic debate

BlackDiamond
Provo, UT

I would help them get there baby but not allow or recognize their marriage. Just move to a state that recognizes it.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

@Scoundrel:
"The only thing accomplished by withholding marriage rights from same-sex couples is the punishment and degradation of their children, who become de facto second-class citizens through no fault of their own. "

So, by that logic should we criminalize having children out of wedlock? Because, after all, if the child born out of wedlock is going to be a second class citizen because their mother did not marry their father? Should we ban single people from adopting children? If one parent dies, should we take the child from the surviving parent and put them into the orphanage or give them to a married couple so the child does not become a second class citizen?

I support traditional marriage because it sends a message about the ideal way to raise a child, but extending your logic is draconian and is heartless.

Willem
Los Angeles, CA

Like it or not,in the end love and equality always wins!

Brown
Honeyvale, CA

This is not about protecting citizens rights, it is about rights of one political group and legitimizing a behavior. Who is protecting the rights of the children gays will adopt?

Legal rights? If I want to know about my spouses health care treatment, my spouse has to sign a form--thanks to HIPAA laws. If I want to inherit my spouses property, we have to sign legal documents to assign that property upon death. It all isn't automatic because we are married. Another lie the media continually fails to represent.

Yes, you do need to be married to file joint tax returns, but how is that an advantage? The rates for marrieds are higher!

This is about 2 things, legitimizing gay relationships as normal and, giving gays the ability to adopt. My question is, who is looking out for the rights of the children who have no say in whether they get a mother and a father? No one seems to care about doing what is best for children and fighting so adoptive children will obtain the best possible start to their lives. This is not about protecting citizens rights, it is about the selfish rights of one political group.

Brown
Honeyvale, CA

@Kalindra

The gays who went to the sperm donor already had to sign a contract indicating they wouldn't hold the donor responsible in the future for child support, etc. They could have easily completed a similar contract with each other but they chose not to. Kind of like a pre-nuptial agreement, some have them to make divorce easier and some don't. There are legal options already available for gays to give the same benefits of marriage (other than taxation laws). Perhaps instead, the government needs to regulate set fees for those legal instruments, let's say, the same cost as a marriage license, so gays can afford it and not be 'taken by lawyers.'

No matter what happens later in a child's life, we as a society have a responsibility to protect children and place them in the best possible situation to succeed--and that is with a mother and a father. Anyone who is in a loving marriage relationship sees the unique benefits their spouse provides to their child that they cannot, because of the gender differences. It is simply an indisputable fact

MoreMan
San Diego, CA

@ DNsubscriber... "Are they really seeking 'equality" or just working an agenda for that "some are more equal than others" stuff?" Try looking into your magic mirror. Are these really your own "true and living" beliefs?

higv
Dietrich, ID

Where is the father in the picture as two women can't produce a baby

to comment

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