Comments about ‘Letter: Religious intolerance’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, March 25 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Here, UT

@Utes Fan;

Does the government recognize your marriage? Yes? Then it should recognize ours - equal protection of the laws.

You, however, have passed laws requiring the government to refuse to recognize our marriages. That *is* forcing your religion on us.

Salt lake city, UT

Would Hobby Lobby provide financial assistance to the women denied birth control after these unplanned precious babies are born? I doubt it.

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT


"You, however, have passed laws requiring the government to refuse to recognize our marriages. That *is* forcing your religion on us."

Your argument here fails given that there are people who oppose recognition of gay marriage for non-religious reasons.

Besides, supporting something because of my religious conscience is a perfectly legal right. Unless you believe that my right to freedom of conscience should be taken away? Then you will have to argue why a totalitarian, mind-controlling government is good for us. Good luck with that.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

This letter had little to do with the real issues. Is Hobby Lobby being forced to provide contraceptives on company property? No, and that decision should be up to a woman (or couple's) discretion. Not all of their employees share their religious beliefs, so why should it be ok that a company gets to make decisions for all their employees? As far as same-sex marriage goes, the judicial decisions are not forcing churches to go against their beliefs and marry couples they choose not to. How is legal recognition of a civil contract an infringement on religious freedom? Gay and lesbian couples aren't breaking down the doors of churches demanding to be married; my husband and I had a small ceremony overseen by a minister of a belief that accepts our union. We didn't demand that either a catholic or Protestant church solemnize our union, and no couples here have.

Salt Lake City, UT

to Utes Fan last night...

Ranch has it right. Equal protection under the law

Do U realize how ironic and your 2nd paragraph is?

Murray, UT

Karen R. & Mike in Cedar City

The Pope, Pope Francis, has spoken to President Obama about his concerns regarding freedom of religion and its violation in the ACA. Is Pope Francis just trying to repeal the ACA? Is he just trying to throw egg on Obama's face?

Pope Francis cares nothing about parties and politics. He cares about people, and he says the ACA violates a basic right, the right to freely practice religion.

Is Pope Francis just a petty partisan?

Good luck selling that one!

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT


"Ranch has it right. Equal protection under the law"
And yet, so many who favor gay marriage are opposed to alternative marriages such as polygamy, polyandry, etc. Yes... so-called "equal protection" that denies people the freedom of conscience to disagree (you know... just sue that photographer, baker etc!) Do you see how ironic YOUR statement is?

No irony at all in my stand, but fact. Government recognition of marriage does not deny marriage to couples - it just says the govt. doesn't recognize. Nobody is proposing that police and swat teams show up to gay marriages - they can still take place. But the militant gay marriage lobby DOES propose that those who refuse to cater to their gay marriage be sued and FORCED by law to conform.

Again... re-evaluate the irony of YOUR position.

USS Enterprise, UT

To "Ranch" ok, lets explore this further. If marriage is now the union of 2 people that love eachother, are you prepared to recognize all marriages?

That means that if 1 man and 3 women wanted to be married, you will recognize it. It also means that if 2 men and 5 women wanted to be married they could be. If just 4 women thought that they wanted to be married, you would recognize that. Unless you specifically define marriage as being between 1 man and 1 woman, you open the legal door for virtually any type of union people want.

A Guy With A Brain
Enid, OK

Personally, I hope that Jesus Christ comes soon and takes care of the foolish among us.

We must soldier on until that occurs but I'm hoping that happens "sooner" rather than "later". Too many takers, not enough makers, too much selfishness and absolutely foolish choices by the majority of those in power in just about every area of American society today.

How long, Lord, how long?....

Salt Lake City, UT

as an active LDS I have to say the employees have the right to choose whether or not they want to use birth control. Hobby Lobby isn't the place dispensing the pill but rather the pharmacist is. Let your employees follow their own concious and stop playing the bully on the playground. Some women need the pill for medical reasons besides avoiding pregnancy such as painful periods, fibroids, endometriosis to name a few. For some it could be that a form of birth control is needed as getting pregnant during an illness can be dangerous.

Utopia, UT

Isn't the best way to prevent an abortion preventing the pregnancy? I am against abortion so as a (reasonable person I hope)I am 100% for BIRTH CONTROL! Assuming these posters are adults- I would like to hear from the non-celibates who have less than 12 kids how they are managing that????

PS- someone else posted the fact that birth control can be purchased over the counter- true but not effective control. The most effective over the counter requires the participation of the man involved.... If men became pregnant this whole conversation would change dramatically.

Cleveland , OH

@Utes Fan: Government recognition of marriage does not deny marriage to couples - it just says the govt. doesn't recognize.

That is the point. I don't care if your church recognizes my marriage to my husband. I do care about the IRS recognizing it, and the Ohio Department of Revenue, as well as local hospitals and other health providers. I care about inheritance and joint property we are building together. I care about some 1,400 hundred laws and rules that govern and protect relationships that have nothing to do with your church or religious beliefs.

In fact, religious recognition is so low on the list it does not appear on the list. Personally, I think this discussion would be so much easier if we did as other countries and separated "marriage," performed by a clerk or magistrate at a court house, from any religious ceremony done in a house of worship.

The former is important for my relationship, the latter is not needed or wanted.

to comment

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