Quantcast

Comments about ‘LDS Church, other faiths say same-sex marriage opposition not due to bigotry’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Feb. 10 2014 8:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
10CC
Bountiful, UT

This whole line of reasoning would be credible if senior citizens were not allowed to marry, if childless marriages were easily dissolvable - on the basis of not being able to produce children (or unwillingness to adopt children) - and divorces where children were involved were much more difficult to obtain.

Since none of these things are true, the argument is pretty flimsy, no matter how many churches, citizens, or even Vladimir Putin's opinion, not withstanding.

Church member
North Salt Lake, UT

I find the argument "marriage should be between one man and one women because that is how it has been for centuries" pretty funny. Slavery has been around for centuries, should we allow that? Women have been treated inferior to men for centuries, should we continue that? Since when does doing something for a long time make it the right thing to do?? There are many things that we have done as human beings for thousands of years that aren't the right thing to do.

KJB1
Eugene, OR

I feel it's best to judge people on what to do, not what they say. They can sugarcoat it all they like, but they still want to enshrine their own personal biases into law based on no valid reason besides "because God said so."

The fact that they're talking like this means that they're grasping at straws. They're going to lose and deep down, they know it.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

It is a church or a political organization?

Uncle Rico
Provo, UT

Most homosexuals are not for equality, they are for what they want.

Most oppose people like Cody Brown who has multiple wives. Shouldn't he have rights to marry multiple people if he wants?(all consenting adults)

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

Why is it okay for a single person to adopt a child in Utah but allegedly harmful if a same-sex couple does so? The lack of consistency suggests that this is all just an excuse to try and justify a same-sex marriage ban.

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

“We do not reject you. … We cannot reject you. … We will not reject you, because we love you.”
-Boyd K Packer

The problem with hard feelings is that it's hard to see clearly. But the message is clear!

God placed leaders on the Earth for our benefit. When messages of encouragement and hope are given, we have a choice to accept the conditions of the truth or reject them. We can't change the truth, we can only choose whether we will live by it or not. As a law of happiness, or code of conduct, it can be hard to live. It can even be hard to want to live by. But along with positive messages we are given something much more- Every General Conference the brethren remind us of their love for us and our Heavenly Father's love. There is no hatred found in these messages. What is found is open arms and love; a plea to return, yes, but a plea to return to something good.
//

Don't believe me? Go ask your bishop if you're loved. You may be surprised how powerful you'll feel it.

johnthomasjones
St. George, UT

Are the State's interests in responsible procreation and optimal child-rearing furthered by prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying?

oragami
St. George, UT

Are the State’s interests in responsible procreation and optimal child-rearing furthered by prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying?

No.

Then why is the State and it's backers fighting so hard to prevent same-sex couples from getting married? ANIMUS pure and simple. Quit hiding behind these stale arguments and religious privilege.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

They keep focusing on this idea of children and claim that marriage should be child centric not adult centric.

That would be fine if they actually wanted to focus on children - but they don't. They deny marriage to same-sex couples with children while granting it to heterosexual couples without children. Obviously, marriage is about more than children.

I really don't worry myself with what a church I don't belong to thinks about marriage or anything else - but they should not be able to use the law to force me to follow their religious teachings.

Hemlock
Salt Lake City, UT

The brief's assertion is not "dishonest and desperate." It is acknowledging that marriage is between a man and a woman - a biological reality to become "one flesh." Anyone wanting to have legal rights and commitments to another person, irrespective of gender, is free to make those commitments. Co-opting the term "marriage" is disingenuous and deceptive.

LittleStream
Carson City, NV

Heterosexual marriages end in divorce 50% of the time, tearing the children between their parents. Heterosexual marriages and partners sexually abuse, physically abuse their children. With the scientific capabilities of artificial insemination we have today, any gay couple can have children. Gay couples do not turn their children into gay children. These are all issues that I struggle with on this issue. I also don't believe people who are truly gay (as opposed to bisexual)turn into heterosexual. When we quote the bible on this subject, why then do we choose other parts of the bible to ignore?

panamadesnews
Lindon, UT

Re: Church Member

There are also things that are done now that are not the "right thing to do". Gay and lesbian relationships cannot be considered marriages because they cannot be solemnized by the conjugal process. The uniting of gay and lesbian partners should be considered "unions" and such unions might be given all of the benefits that marriage partners enjoy. But to consider them marriages is a real stretch for the reason stated above as well as many more reasons not mentioned in my posting.

panamadesnews
Lindon, UT

To Hemlock:

Very good points. I agree 100%.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Call it what you will, it manifests itself the same.

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

Those who favor calling unions between same sex couples 'marriage' have only their self interest in mind. They want societal endorsement for themselves. It has nothing to do with what is best for society or children. It is 100% selfish.

If there are children involved, the 'parent(s)' have selfishly denied the children a father or a mother for their own gratification.

Even though some marriages don't last, (it would be better if they did) that is no excuse for normalizing relationships as parental when they are not, hurting children in the process.

David
Centerville, UT

If polygamy is a red herring, then so to is the fact that in some heterosexual marriages children cannot be conceived. It is beside the point.

One major purpose of marriage is to fulfill the law of God and to have children, raise them within a family, with a father and a mother.

The fact that in many cases those ideals are not present does not mean that we should aim for the lowest common denominator and normalize the breakdown of marriage and families. I am sure that in most of those marriages where having children is not possible, the husband and wife feels great pain.

In a homosexual relationship, anatomically and physiologically is it simply not possible to have children. It is not meant to be.

Standards are set to be sought after, even when they are not always met. This is certainly true in marriage.

The state should establish and maintain the ideal marriage and family situation for children, even when it is not always attained.

LovelyDeseret
Gilbert, AZ

I wonder if Justice Sotomayor will be persuaded by the religious issue. I doubt she wants to force religious beliefs and the people that hold them into second class status. She might be the wild card.

It is good to see these religious groups uniting in a common good. I look forward to the day that marriage is once again cherished and respected.

Sal
Provo, UT

Let the people decide state by state whether to uphold traditional marriage or not. There will be less divisiveness if this process is allowed to play out. Witness the hatred, contention, and anger Judge Shelby has stirred up by circumventing the normal democratic process. It has been years of contention and anger since the courts decided Roe vs Wade--should have left it to the people. They were approving abortion state by state. The same is happening with gay marriage.

As Americans abandon God and religion they are gradually accepting of most immoral behaviors.

JoCo Ute
Grants Pass, OR

News Flash: The Governor and AG of Nevada announced today that Nevada is dropping its defense of the state wide gay marriage ban. The quote from the AG's office is "the state's argument cannot withstand legal scrutiny." This statement came today in a motion filed w/ the US 9th Circuit court of Appeals.

According to the AG's office, based on their interpretation of relevant case law, it has become clear that this position is no longer defensible in court.

to comment

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