Comments about ‘National, local businesses file briefs supporting same-sex marriage’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 4 2014 10:30 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@firstamendment
"But, it is odd that most gay marriage campaigners contend that bisexuals, underage children, polygamists, siblings, pets, and others should not be married."

Do you also think that about interracial marriage activists 40 years ago?

@zeep and wazzup
" One of you in a same-sex relationship is NOT the biological parent."

Are parents of an adopted kid not "your parents" even though they aren't the biological parents?

Ranch
Here, UT

Oh come one moderators, you're printing comments denigrating the families of same-sex couples and you won't print this comment?

"...the purpose of the state's voter-approved constitutional amendment is to impose inequality on same-sex couples and their children."

--- Exactly!

The bigotry in some of the comments today is apparent; and you all say you're going to heaven because you're righteous. I say you aren't going and you aren't righteous either.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

I try not work where I eat lunch around an eatery's stand on Gay Marriage. Ten years from now, everyone is going to wonder why there was so much fuss on the issue.

Maudine
SLC, UT

From the 46 companies brief accessed on Scribd:

"This brief is filed on behalf of the following businesses: American International Group, Inc. Aspen Skiing Company LLC Cisco Systems, Inc. Civitas Public Affairs Group LLC Clean Yield Asset Management eBay Inc. Facebook Inc. FoodArt LLC Google Inc. Hackman Capital Partners, LLC Inspirato, LLC Intel Corporation Jackson Hole Group LLC Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Jim Henson Company Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group, LLC Le Croissant Inc. LLC Levi Strauss & Co. Liberty Heights, Inc. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. Mod a-go-go LLC National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce NCR Corporation New Belgium Brewing Co., Inc. Oracle America, Inc. Outerwall Inc. Overstock.com, Inc. Pfizer Inc. Qualcomm Incorporated redditgifts Red Thread Creative Group LLC Rocky Mountain Personnel Recruiters, Inc. Ruth Lewandowski Wines LLC Sage Hospitality Resources, LLC SLC HEMP LLC Starbucks Sun Life Financial (U.S.) Services Company, Inc. Support.com, Inc. TeleTech Holdings, Inc. Third Sun Productions, Inc. Dr. Steven Tilliss D.D.S., M.S., P.C. Tony Caputo’s Market & Deli United Therapeutics Corporation Urban Utah Homes and Estates LLC Vail Resorts, Inc. XMission LLC"

Amazing how easy it is to find things with Google.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I do not support same sex marriages because I don't agree with the homosexual lifestyle.

I do support and try very hard to promote personal freedom of adult American individuals to do and be any thing they please that does not interfere with the rights and freedoms of others.

I do not support any sort of business operation to use its economic power to deny the freedom as mentioned.

I regard traditional marriage to be the joining of two people according to their own desires and needs. Love is nice but not necessarily required. In this I make no rules or requirements regarding the individuals or their purpose. Their are many cases where individuals may wish to have a family relationship without giving up everything about being separate.

I believe the best world for rearing children is to have one father and one mother. I think society should support that notion without prohibiting others.

Maudine
SLC, UT

Interesting thing about comments - those who make the comments already know what their stand is and, no matter what facts or evidence to the contrary are presented, are very unlikely to change their opinions. This is not true for all commentators and some, when presented with contrary information, will actually engage in a little bit of research to verify the contrary information and the occasional commentator will form new opinions. Additionally, some of those who read the comments have not yet formed an opinion and will use comments to help form an opinion.

Here is another interesting thing - every person reading these comments has a computer with internet access. When claims are made, it is really easy for them to verify the truthfulness of those claims.

When blatently false comments are made, those making those comments are seen as, at best, uniformed. This paints them and the view they are promoting in a negative light. It also portrays whatever cause they are supporting negatively, especially when others on the same side of the issue do not call them out on the false comments.

This is part of why opponents of same-sex marriage are losing ground.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ ClarkHippo: People are not protesting against churches that recognize same-sex marriages because those churches are not actively engaged in trying to prohibit a right to a segment of society nor are they trying to force other churches to live according to their doctrines.

@ firstamendment: The only ones trying to deny marriage to bisexuals are those who oppose same-sex marriage and won't let bisexuals marry someone of their same gender. Underage children, pets, and objects cannot enter into contracts and therefore cannot consent to marriage (they also cannot drink, smoke, or have a job). Polygamy creates several legal conundrums that must be addressed and worked out before it can become legal - and although you keep complaining about it not being legal, I have yet to see any suggestions from you on how to handle those complex issues. When individuals who are too closely related marry and have children, there is an increased risk of genetic defects which creates a social harm, this is why incestuous relationships are prohibited.

An inability to make distinctions and identify social harms is not a legally valid reason for prohibiting same-sex marriage nor for allowing the other situations posited.

JSB
Sugar City, ID

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. There are people who wouldn't want to take their children into a business (like a restaurant) if there are gay men holding hands or kissing each other. This is a real problem for a business. For example, if a heterosexual couple is overtly displaying affection, the owners could ask them to stop and there probably wouldn't be a problem. But, what kind of repercussions will there be if the couple is gay? Would the business be branded as homophobic bigots?

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ zeep: ""They say the law tells children, 'Your parents are not really married," and, "One of your parents is not really your parent.'"

"You have to tell the truth sometime. One of you in a same-sex relationship is NOT the biological parent."

Just because someone is not a biological parent, does not mean they are not a parent - ask any adoptive, foster, or step-parent - ask any child raised by adoptive, foster, or step-parents.

You inserted "biological" into the sentence - those making the statement didn't. They understand the difference between biological and non-biological but also realize it takes more than biology to make a parent. Did you insert biological because that was the only way you could argue with the statement?

@ mpo: If Amendment 3 is struck down, the parents will be really married and they will be real, legal parents to their children. Cool how that works, huh?

@ JSB: The businesses can post a general sign discouraging public displays of affections and then treat all customers the same. If, however, the company asks a gay couple to stop holding hands while allowing a heterosexual couple to hold hands, there may be a problem.

Ranch
Here, UT

@JSB;

As with the hetero couple displaying too much PDA in a restaurant, I would also expect the gay couple to refrain. That isn't the problem and most gay couples will agree that such behavior, as with the hetero couple is inappropriate.

You would rather ban all gays than be required to see something between a gay couple that is pretty much the norm with straight couples. Heaven forbid you see two men holding hands. Great Scott! You might witness a lesbian couple give one another a good-night kiss after a date as they depart a restaurant.

If you don't want your kids to witness reality, perhaps you should just keep them home (which would extremely kind and thoughtful of you in regards to the other patrons in the restaurant anyway).

Lilly Munster
netherlands, 00

It's interesting how our LDS Church and Faith pretends to not have any fingerprints on this issue. Since we all know, from accurate research, the very organized, well financed and concerted effort to send LDS Members to go knock on doors in California (thousands of Mormons from several states) it is dishonest to pretend that we are not fighting the same Equality in Utah. In fact, our fingerprints and political posturing is the primary opponent of SSM in Utah. Before we accuse the other side of misrepresentation, let's admit that we have crossed the line of being a Tax Exempt Organization actively engaged in Politics, Law, and Cultural Impact. We will have to learn to live with Total Equality. We will have to live with our LGBT Citizens, without marginalizing, demonizing, or shunning them. After all, Mormons have been, are, and will continue to be Gay. Let's not demonize our own children. If we continue that, they will simply LEAVE.

Discombobulated
Centerfield, UT

There has been lots of talk about the 2004 vote on same sex marriage ,,, take another vote now and the results may be quite different.
Children should have 2 parents, a mother (woman) & a father ( man ) to be raised properly. What about divorced parents where the mom is the supporting parent ? Good dad's or dead beat dads, doesn't matter. they are not living in the same house . This is not the perfect mom & pop parents.
Everybody has the right to love !! Matters not what sex they are,, everybody has the right to love and be happy !

Karen R.
Houston, TX

Wow, some of the comments here...Don't look now, but your animus is showing.

Christian 24-7
Murray, UT

Found after following a chain of links on fox13.

Here is the list of businesses in on the pro-SSM brief.
: American International Group, Inc. Aspen Skiing Company LLC Cisco Systems, Inc. Civitas Public Affairs Group LLC Clean Yield Asset Management eBay Inc. Facebook Inc. FoodArt LLC Google Inc. Hackman Capital Partners, LLC Inspirato, LLC Intel Corporation Jackson Hole Group LLC Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The Jim Henson Company Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group, LLC Le Croissant Inc. LLC Levi Strauss & Co. Liberty Heights, Inc. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. Mod a-go-go LLC National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce NCR Corporation New Belgium Brewing Co., Inc. Oracle America, Inc. Outerwall Inc. Overstock.com, Inc. Pfizer Inc. Qualcomm Incorporated redditgifts Red Thread Creative Group LLC Rocky Mountain Personnel Recruiters, Inc. Ruth Lewandowski Wines LLC Sage Hospitality Resources, LLC SLC HEMP LLC Starbucks Sun Life Financial (U.S.) Services Company, Inc. Support.com, Inc. TeleTech Holdings, Inc. Third Sun Productions, Inc. Dr. Steven Tilliss D.D.S., M.S., P.C. Tony Caputo’s Market & Deli United Therapeutics Corporation Urban Utah Homes and Estates LLC Vail Resorts, Inc. XMission LLC

JSB
Sugar City, ID

@Ranch
I just posed a question. I didn't say what my position is. My kids are all adults so they can go where they want to go.

However, the gay agenda isn't as noble as some portray it to be. Remember the Macy's incident in which a female employee asked a cross dressing man not to go into the women's dressing area and immediately a whole bunch of gays converged and created a big fuss and went to the management. It's interesting that Macy's issued an apology and fired the woman who was just doing what was the responsible thing to do. I wouldn't want some cross dressing gay guy going into a women's restroom where my wife or daughters or granddaughters were. Does this make me some kind of a mean spirited bigot? Or is gay marriage part of a longer term agenda; just a step along the way of completely undermining the traditional family?

koseighty
The Shire, UT

50 years ago, racists hid behind their God and churches to fight against civil rights and interracial marriage. They boldly proclaimed that they would rather be on God's side and be called a racist than love their neighbor as themselves.

Recently, one of those churches, admitted that it was because their leaders were racist, NOT that God had commanded it. It did so quietly. Without a press conference, or even a press release. Just an update to an obscure web page.

Today, many proclaim the will of their God -- willing to be called bigots because they are on God's side.

The older I get, the more I see the truth of the old saying, "We each create God in our own image." Yesterday, racists created a racist God. Today, bigots create a bigoted God, in their image. If I were to create a God, He would say things like, "Judge not, that ye be not judged," "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone, " and "Do unto others as you would have done unto you." He would have nothing but praise for two people who wanted a committed and loving relationship -- ANY two people.

Ranch
Here, UT

@JSB;

The simple fact you use "gay agenda" and imply that we're "out to get you" in your comment tells us a whole lot about your thinking on the subject.

I'd really appreciate if you could send me a copy of the nefarious "gay agenda" so I can start to follow it appropriately. I never gotten my copy, and as a gay man, I'd really like one for reference purposes at least.

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

It seems to me that rather than making targeted legislation for 1% of the people, we should address the concern of discrimination for everyone discriminated against by laws which target marital status.

If marital laws discriminate, then end those laws, so all single people can enjoy freedom and equality, regardless of sexual orientation.

"Equality for the 1% (committed homosexuals)" is an oxymoron.

Equality is for everyone, or it is not equality.

Kalindra
Salt Lake City, Utah

@ JSB: I don't know if you have ever used a dressing room at Macy's (or any other store for that matter), but they are private - they have doors that close and no one can see into them. Shocking, I know, to think that your wife and daughters aren't actually dressing in front of a bunch of strangers (male or female), but there you have it.

I find it particularly interesting that you would rather they change in front of a lesbian than a gay man.

And yes, the employee was fired for stating she would not follow company policy - but many, many employees are fired for that every year. Are you only upset when they are fired for not following policies related to LGBT issues, or do you also object when they are fired for not following policies related to personal emails and phone calls, personal use of company property, health code violations, or being rude to non-LGBT customers?

I don't know what this world is coming to when companies insist their employees follow rules!

HelioTeller
Mapleton, UT

Most of the traditional marriage commentators here have fallen into the SSM advocates trap. By alienating adoptive parents you're marginalizing yourselves more and more. Thanks for lifting my spirits, I was feeling pretty hopeless there for a while.

to comment

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