Quantcast

Comments about ‘Advocates rally and 'roar' for anti-discrimination bill’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, March 5 2014 7:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
wer
South Jordan, UT

Does anyone really think these people are just to go quietly away? Not when every court in the land grovels at their feet and businesses want to stay out of court.

These "tolerant" folks are no more: they want everything they can force government to givem in exchange for the rest of us being "inclusive".

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

This article presumes the Supreme Court will accept the (same-sex) marriage equality case. That may not happen. If Circuit Courts of Appeal rule uniformly, citing earlier Supreme Court precedence, such as Romer, Lawrence, Loving and Windsor, the Supreme Court may accept it as settled law. It would take disagreement between the various Circuits before SCOTUS would need to step in. They may very well grant cert anyway, but bear in mind that the stay in Kitchen was only granted by SCOTUS to last until the 10th Circuit hands down a ruling. Doesn't sound to me like they're itching to hear this case.

The ruling from the 10th Circuit might be Utah's final ruling if the State loses.

I note that the Court has given Schaerr's crew the 7 day and 5000 word extensions they asked to have for their answering brief. This is the second extension they've been granted now. The Court is clearly taking great pains to entertain every request of Utah. This will doubtless make it even less likely that there will be grounds for higher appeal.

JSB
Sugar City, ID

Is it discrimination to want a healthy civil society and to oppose those who want to undermine it? The purpose for sex is reproduction: 1) to unite the sperm and egg; and 2) to help the zygote to develop into a mature adult individual. In the human species permanent heterosexual pair bonds have evolved because it takes a long time to train human children into mature, responsible, productive adults. Humans who grow up in a home where there is a strong heterosexual pair bond are more likely to mature into well-adjusted adults than if the heterosexual pair bond is damaged, corrupted or missing. In the past this heterosexual pair-bonding has been called marriage. Societies, recognizing the important contribution married couples make to the community, have passed laws that promote and protect this relationship. Changing the definition of marriage will not change the biological reality of the need for strong, heterosexual pair bonds if we want well-adjusted children and a strong, healthy society.

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

HIDDEN(its not mentioned hardly ever) in this bill would allow any person to go in any locker room or restroom they want as long as they say they "identify" with that gender, regardless of the gender they actually ARE

I can "identify" as a flying purple dinosaur. That doesn't mean I AM a flying purple dinosaur.

Similarly, a man may "identify" as a woman

That doesn't make him a woman any more than my identifying as a flying purple dinosaur makes me a flying purple dinosaur.

Therefore I cannot support this bill in good conscience.

Women deserve to only have women in their locker room.

G-Day-M8
WVC, UT

The dogs may bark but the caravan moves on.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@JSB: In all your many posts, you've never explained how allowing homosexuals to marry would have any of the feared results you keep suggesting.

I strongly recommend you read the Amicus (Friend of the Court) brief filed by those states which already accept civil same-sex marriage. It's signed onto by the Attorneys General of 15 states and the District of Columnbia, and decisively disproves every single one of the reasons and assertions in the Utah State brief in support of restoring Amendment 3.

It's their actual experience versus your fevered, unfounded worries.

Heterosexual marriage and birth rates in those states are up, not down. Divorce rates are down, not up. Absolutely none of the scare tactic "justifications" to deny gay people marriage have any basis in fact. To say otherwise is either speculative, delusional, or intentionally misleading.

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

I know one thing for sure... which is that we are broken without God. I know this from my own life, from my friends, and even from my examination of those around me.

When we participate in things we shouldn't, the spirit withdraws from our lives. But we need His help and guidance. We need His love to feel a spiritual happiness not found anywhere else. The only way we can invite God into our life is by giving Him a place in it. When we replace what we shouldn't be doing with what we should be, we are inviting God into our lives.

We need to preserve love and kindness. Most of us agree on that. But we need to preserve marriage also. If we don't, there will be more hatred and pain in our lives. It's up to us. We either keep the commandments and receive everything our Heavenly Father has to give us... or we reject Him and face the consequences which are inevitable.

God DOES love us. But we need to love Him in order to allow ourselves to feel it. If we love Him, we keep His commandments.

Karen R.
Houston, TX

JSB, it is discrimination because none of your arguments work. Sex is one means to reproduction, but reproduction isn't the only reason we engage in sex. Sexual orientation has no bearing on whether one is capable of being a good parent. Children have a greater chance of thriving in the context of any stable, loving relationship, no matter the gender of the parents or their biological relation to the child. Allowing gay people to marry doesn't change the definition. The definition isn't dependent on gender.

Both sides of this argument believe they are fighting for a health society. We've tried your way. It has caused needless devastation of lives, needless loss of potential. Children shunned and kicked out of their homes; adults fired from jobs; children and adults harassed, assaulted and worse, all because of a characteristic that they did not get to choose. All of this will wane over time as LGBTs are acknowledged and treated as full-fledged and equal citizens. Can you say this for your side of the argument?

Really???
Kearns, UT

I suggest that people read the text of the bill and then read the comments of their own arguments against the bill to see if they actually match. The bill will not open up our restrooms, dressing areas, shower facilities, and locker rooms to anyone who simply decides to identify as the opposite gender. The text of the bill actually says "if an employer has reason to believe that an applicant's or employee's gender identity is not sincerely held, the employer may require the applicant or employee to provide evidence of that gender identity."

I will admit that I don't understand a lot about gender identity issues, but I am sure it is very sensitive for anyone dealing with the complexity of their situations. I will leave it up to the medical professionals skilled in those areas to make proper judgments about that and do my best to treat everyone with the dignity they deserve.

Jamescmeyer
Midwest City, USA, OK

Didn't Arizona try to pass a bill to prevent discrimination Christians have faced recently? That's hardly how you convince people to support anti-discrimination bills.

RBB
Sandy, UT

And please make sure that the bill has an express exemption to allow discrimination against anyone who expresses their opinion in opposition to homesexual conduct - like the American preacher in Scotland who was arrested for saying that homosexual behavior is a sin, or Orson Scott Card who had the audacity to say he supports traditional marriage. It is not an anti discrimination bill. It is a you must accept us bill.

RBB
Sandy, UT

If you cannot discriminate against sexual orientation does that mean that a family with children must rent their basement apartment to a pediphile? Pediphilia is his sexual orientation and discrimination is bad - right?

JSB
Sugar City, ID

Is the purpose of marriage to help to provide the best possible environment in which to raise children? Or is it to provide legal recognition of a relationship between two or more adults who claim to love each other? That’s the issue here. The long-term result of changing the definition of marriage will be recognition of multiple partner (3 or more adults) “marriages” and families. Children can and do thrive in a lot of different kinds of “families” but, for the sake of the rising generation, we should strive for the ideal, not just the selfishly convenient. I am very concerned that gay marriage will eventually lead to making marriage meaningless and the concept of family destroyed on the altar of some fuzzy concept of “we love each other and want to live together.” Whether, homosexual and heterosexual, it is selfish to behave in or strive for legalization of behaviors that will lead to more and more children living in dysfunctional homes.

U-tar
Woodland Hills, UT

Did they really "roar"? Every day it's like a circus with these folks, and why is it the headline everyday?

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@KnowItLiveItLoveIt: You are not the only one who loves God. Nor are those who oppose civil rights and marriage rights for gay people the only ones who love God.

The struggle for equality is supported by many people who love God at least as much as you claim to. We see it as our spiritual and civic duty to follow His commandments to love our neighbors, to leave judgement to Him, and not to question His motives. Further, by inviting gays and lesbians to worship with us, we've learned that the love of God is just as strong in them as it is in us. We see God's love and their love of God in their relationships, just as surely as it is in ours.

There is one source for all the love in the world. That universal source, God, doesn't parcel it out with an eyedropper, or only allow those who brashly claim devotion to have any. It's freely available to all. But, I don't understand how you can claim to love God when you refuse to see God's love in those you wish to ostracize.

mohokat
Ogden, UT

"My parents tried to show me that their relationship was normal, Really? Not in my world!

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

JoeBlow,

Can you prove I am not a flying purple dinosaur?

You cannot.

Therefore, it is discrimination unless I am treated as a flying purple dinosaur at all times.

Please do not discriminate against me for identifying as a flying purple dinosaur.

thank you

FatherOfFour
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

Jamescmeyer,

No Arizona tried to pas a bill, which the governor vetoed, that would allow any type of discrimination in the name of Christianity. You want to turn blacks away from your lunch counters, say you're a Christian. You want to refuse service to Hispanics, say you're a Christian. You want to open up a seething torrent of blind hatred towards gays and lesbians, say you're a Christian. It allows you to discriminate as much as you want. It failed in Arizona, but it would have easily passed in Utah.

If there were laws in Mississippi, Alabama, or South Carolina, that side you could refuse to hire Mormons, or deny them housing. We would hear about it everyday on Deseret News. But deny the same things to gays and that's ok.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

"Therefore, it is discrimination unless I am treated as a flying purple dinosaur at all times. "

Hmm, You raise an interesting point.

The incredible hulk is sometimes a man and sometimes a giant green hulk.
Superman transforms from a mild mannered reporter to the man of steel.
The Green Goblin morphs from respected scientist to a super villain.
And one would be remiss to leave out Underdog.

See, these are complicated issues.
I will clear my schedule today as more pondering is definitely warranted.

LOU Montana
Pueblo, CO

Remember the four "R"s of success?

Race
Religion
Relatives
Republican

If you carry these four "R"s then you will do just fine in Utah.

to comment

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