Quantcast

Comments about ‘Utah recognition of same-sex marriage in judge's hands’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, March 12 2014 4:41 p.m. MDT

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

I'm not LDS but I stand with Mormon Prophet Monson and Pope Francis on this. Technically I'm Catholic but don't really identify as a Catholic.

But it is nice knowing I agree with Pope Francis and Mormon Prophet Monson, both men who according to their religions speak for God.

Nice to know that I agree with them!

Values Voter
LONG BEACH, CA

Remember, the whole reason there was not a stay put in place immediately after Shelby's ruling was because the Utah Attorney General's office was in disarray following the Swallow debacle. Shelby called the attorneys in and, incredibly, the Attorney General's office wasn't ready to go with a stay request, as it should have been.

Snapdragon
Midlothian, VA

Judge Robert J. Shelby is the one that disrupted our lives, not the State of Utah.

george of the jungle
goshen, UT

I think that to have respect you have to be respectable. If you are in a position of respect doesn't mean you are respected. Respect is earned. It takes a life time to gain a good reputation i fraction of a second to loose it. Hold your standards high, your an American. Take pride in it and be proud of it.

Values Voter
LONG BEACH, CA

This case will be interesting to watch as it plays out. Here in California, once Prop. 8 was passed, same-sex couples who married during the brief window when it was legal, were ultimately granted full recognition and not stripped of their married status, even though no more marriages between same-sex couples could take place while the appeals process went forward.

After a quick check of Judge Dale Kimball's background, I would be extremely surprised if he ruled in favor of the couples, and against the state of Utah.

Azazael
Salt Lake City, UT

@Values Voter

No, when the AG's office sent the stay request Shelby denied it.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

While I support same-sex marriage, I don't think they have a good case here since the stay keeps Amendment 3 in force and so the state has the authority to proceed the way they have in the interim.

Furry1993
Ogden, UT

@Snapdragon 3:58 p.m. March 12, 2014

Judge Robert J. Shelby is the one that disrupted our lives, not the State of Utah.

-------------------

Actually not. He ruled in accordance with the Constitution, the federal law and the precedents. Given the ruling in Windsor, it was clear to anyone who had a clue about how the law works that he would find for the plaintiffs. The State should have done what every attorney knows to do -- have a motion for a stay prepared in case the ruling went against it. when the State lost, it went to the 10th Circuit or a stay, even though the case hadn't been appealed yet, instead of going to Judge Shelby for the stay. The State screwed up big time, and couples were lawfully married in the weeks between the judgment being entered and the Supreme Court issuing the stay. Regardless what happens with the appeal, the couples who married during the hiatus are in fact married and their marriages should be recognized.

Rocket Science
Brigham City, UT

Judge Shelby assured this big mess by not issuing an immediate stay as he should have.

The whole SSM action in Utah was very carefully orchestrated. At one point earlier in the process Judge Shelby said he would rule sometime in January 2014. Yet the activist Judge couldn't resist the timing,with the opportunity of an Attorney General's office in chaos due to corruption, resignation and temporary leadership; issuing his ruling late on Friday and within a few days of Christmas Holiday; SSM sympathizers in authority poised and ready to issue licenses, perform marriages and go later into the evening and some even on Saturday; LGBT couples poised and ready to rush out to get married in a moments notice; etc.

In blocking the will of the people, which came about in a fair and open election, all knew it would be challenged through the whole court system, and one mans opinion would have to be ratified by through the whole court system.

Values Voter
LONG BEACH, CA

Azazael wrote:
"No, when the AG's office sent the stay request Shelby denied it."

I'm not going to belabor this, but I think Judge Shelby's called it correctly at the time.

If you'll remember, the Utah Attorney General's team failed to make a stay request in advance of Shelby's ruling, as they could have done (and as was done in the prop 8 case here in CA with judge Walker) or even in the hours immediately after the ruling on that Friday.

In short, there were baffling procedural deficiencies on the part of the attorneys representing the state

the truth
Holladay, UT

@Furry1993

Actually he did NOT rule in accordance with the Constitution, the federal law and original intent and precedents are just someone else's later interpretation which may wrong.

His ruling was just his desire on how the constitution should be interpreted, completely misapplying the 14th amendment while ignoring all other aspects of the constitution (and what federal law?). Otherwise he would have ruled for the state forcing the gays to appeal. As should have been proper.

micawber
Centerville, UT

@Values Voter:
Judge Kimball is a very highly regarded jurist. I have no idea how he will rule in this case, but I am confident that he will do so based on the law. I disagreed with those (including this paper) who criticized Judge Shelby. I also disagree with your assumption about a perceived bias on the part of Judge Kimball.

Vince here
San Diego, CA

Chris B.

Religious sentiments and beliefs are great.

However, neither the Pope nor any ecclesiastical leader has a say in a legal matter.

Religious leaders' beliefs are contained to their own congregation.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

I think we'll find that the marriages contracted during those few days in December were validly contracted and the state will need to recognize them. Even if Utah prevails in its appeal to reinstate a ban on same-sex marriage, there is no way for the state to retroactively undo those 1300 couples' marriages.

It certainly does complicate things for those opponents of same-sex marriage.

Meanwhile, Friday evening should see Schaerr's second brief being filed. I look forward to reading it. I have no idea how he's going to rebut all the amicus briefs he claimed he wanted to address.

Speaking of which, one I just got around to reading tonight, posted as a document on Scribd with the name, "Historians of Marriage Amicus Brief," might be very enlightening to those of you hoping to prevail on a "traditional marriage" argument. It's particularly good at detailing where the authority for marriage lies. It's signed onto by a couple dozen history professors who study the subject and I would say you've got one tough hill to climb.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@the truth
A bunch of other judges ruled the same way as Shelby and... honestly when was the last time a judge ruled against same-sex marriage? I really have no idea.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

Does anyone know if similar issues arose in when inter-racial couples married in the days when such was illegal. I know for a fact that bi-racial couples had a lot of problems in those days, and humiliating experiences. Anyone care to share?

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@chris B
"When have I have supported religion using religion as a reason to impose restrictions on all Americans."

"I'm not LDS but I stand with Mormon Prophet Monson and Pope Francis on this. Technically I'm Catholic but don't really identify as a Catholic. But it is nice knowing I agree with Pope Francis and Mormon Prophet Monson, both men who according to their religions speak for God."

wrz
Phoenix, AZ

@Schnee:
"While I support same-sex marriage..."

If so, do you also support other types of marriages such as... polygamy, incest, close relatives, mother/son, father/daughter and a whole lot more?

If same sex marriage is allowed, the door then has to be opened for any and all other types of marriages. Denial will be discrimination.

I don't think anyone who has concerns for the direction we are headed wants to go there. Let's hope the courts nip this thing before it gets out of hand.

1aggie
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

How will UTahns and LDS members deal with the legalization of same-sex marriage?

It is going to happen. Sooner rather than later.

Life will go on, and most people won't even notice a difference--except those who gain the rights they've long been denied.

first2third
Elmo, UT

Marriages begin and end every day. If the LGBT community wants marriage, get use to the disappointment that comes along with it. The fact that it could end at any moment due to a judge is something married people are well aware of>

to comment

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