Comments about ‘Ad campaign advocating same-sex marriage in Utah launches Tuesday’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, April 7 2014 9:10 p.m. MDT

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

To Wilf 55

You can't be serious? The courage we heard about in general conference was the courage to stand up for our belief that marriage is between a man and a woman!. It was about the courage to have compassion and love for our gay children and friends and not to "disown" them but to also help them understand that same-sex marriage is contrary to nature and to God's law and that their eternal happiness cannot be achieved by violating God's laws.

It is sad that the Bradshaws cannot differentiate between their love for their children and the difference between right and wrong. They can love their children but they should never condone a concept that has been shown to be a failure in many many ways. Same-sex marriage is a dishonest impostor for the real thing.

Hey It's Me
Salt Lake City, UT

"Pairage" instead of marriage. Why do we have to change the definition of a word to suit everyone? Why can't marriage be between a man and a woman and "Pairage" between two people who love and are committed to each other. I don't have a problem with them being united just don't change the definition of what I did. New words and definitions are always being introduced to society, like twitter, e-mail, facebook etc.. So lets have "Pairage" uniting two people who are of age that love each other. Problem solved. Everyone has the same rights!

Far East USA, SC

Vanceone writes "If you choose to disobey him, how, exactly, can you sustain him as a prophet? "

But, we hear time and again how many times the prophet was merely speaking as a fallible man. So, do your words apply to everything the prophet says, or just when he is "speaking for god?"

And the bigger question. How do you know the difference between the two?

equal protection
Cedar, UT

@Shadow01 "You may ask why LDS are so vehemently against same sex marriage, it is because we know it is wrong and to endorse it is to endorse behavior that is against God's Law."

What you're describing is indeed one religious view, but there are many others that honor, perform, encourage and support same-sex couples, their children and marriages.

My question for you is: Which religious view, yours or the ones below do we codify into our nations civil marriage law?

Affirming Pentecostal Church International
Alliance of Christian Churches
Anointed Affirming Independent Ministries
The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Community of Christ
Conservative Judaism
Ecumenical Catholic Church
Ecumenical Catholic Communion
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Anglican Church In America
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Global Alliance of Affirming Apostolic Pentecostals
Inclusive Orthodox Church
Metropolitan Community Church
Old Catholic Church
Progressive Christian Alliance
Reconciling Pentecostals International
Reconstructionist Judaism
Reform Judaism
Reformed Anglican Catholic Church
Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
Unitarian Universalist Church
United Church of Christ
Unity Church

equal protection
Cedar, UT

@ Hey Its me, "Why do we need to change the definition?"

How so?

Did the definition of marriage change to something less than it was, when convicted spousal, child, drug and alcohol abusers were allowed to marry?

How so?

Did the definition of marriage change when interracial couples were allowed to marry?

How so?

Did the definition of marriage change when non procreative couples were allowed to marry?

How so?

To my knowledge there are no abuse or felony marriage licenses, nor are there interracial marriage licenses, nor are there non-procreative marriages. There is only one certificate of marriage which means the same for everyone.

Did the traditional institution and definition of voting change when women were granted the right to vote? It was a gendered institution, and became genderless, but for most folks, like marriage, voting remains the same as it always has. Allowing folks to participate or Including them seems to strengthen the traditional institutions of voting and marriage.

So again I ask, How so? How is marriage redefined?

Please explain.

Idaho Falls, ID

@ Wilf Classic twisting of truth! Your explanation of Mormon sexual ethics is rather bizarre. The "courage" spoken of in General Conference was not courage to encourage our sons and daughters to break the commandments. It was the courage to stand strong in the face of those who would demean and belittle the Laws of God. The Bradshaws need not even mention their religion because what they are encouraging has no place in the one they profess to belong to. It's a farce and the committee knows it.

Secondly, same gender couples can obtain all those rights without marriage. Gay couples just don't want to go through the work of getting attorneys and such. But strangely, roommates or dear friends who don't ever want to have sex or call themselves "married" can obtain those same rights. But apparently they have to be "married" to get them as easily as gays now. It just makes no sense.

@ Ranch- There is a difference between questioning the prophet and making a mockery of the doctrine by publically defying it.

@ Ranch Wh

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

I have to laugh at the hypocrites.

You know --

Keep the Government out of my life,
Stop "Forcing" us what to do,
No Muslims and their Scripture based Sharia Laws,
Protect our Constitutional rights of Freedom of Expression...

Yah-da- Yah-da, Yah-da...

It's called KARMA - Jesus taught it;

What goes around, comes around.
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.
Those who live by the sword, die by the sword.

If you want those rights, and keep those rights,
You must protect and given them to others as well.

If you take them for others,
You will loose them yourselves.


Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Vanceone said: As for the Episcopalian point of view--Where is their revelation allowing them to change Gods law? I would be mighty curious to see it.

...and there you have the epitome of religion, to question all but their own, with authority and arrogance.

Not everybody see's this as black and white.

Liberal Ted
Salt Lake City, UT

Gay marriage advocates claim they will have zero impact on society, they will have zero affect on religious practices etc.

If that is the case, then they shouldn't have an issue with laws being passed to ensure that peoples religious beliefs aren't violated. How can someone be forced to bake a cake for something they believe is wrong? What if someone wants a cake to celebrate their abortion and the baker refuses to make the cake. Should the baker be sued and boycotted because he/she doesn't feel killing babies is a good thing?

I understand the argument that gay people want the same rights as non-gay people. But, what about single people? They're taxed higher. So why discriminate against singles?

The fact of the matter is the institution of marriage is a religious institution, that the government has used to collect more tax dollars. Most religions teach that acting on homosexual feelings is a sin. As with other moral issues.

Logan, UT

All my love and light sent your way! I hope Utah's ban is thrown out and people can marry like everyone should. As a Mormon, there is nothing more immoral than preventing people from marrying and expressing love. I'll be watching this closely as I finish finals up here at BYU-I.

Centerville, UT

I am always amazed that Samuel the Liberalite, who takes his screen name from Samuel the Lamanite of the Book of Mormon, has such a different message. S the L says we must not call the wicked sinful but accept them for who they are it is not our duty to cry repentance. That those that do, he laughs at as hypocrites.

Samuel the Lamanite "came into the land of Zarahemla, and began to preach unto the people. And it came to pass that he did preach, many days, repentance unto the people..."

Is he one throwing rocks and shooting arrows at the prophets because they decry the sins.

And what was that karma Samuel the Lamanite promised those he preached to?

El Chango Supremo
Rexburg, ID

Logan, UT
"As a Mormon, there is nothing more immoral than preventing people from marrying and expressing love."

Would you mind sharing the specific scripture or General Conference talk which backs up your claim?

Here, UT

Vanceone says:

"I think we need to apply some truth in advertising laws here. If you want to promote Same Sex Marriage, you should promote the health risks, the immoral behavior, the psychological trauma;"

The SAME thing applies to heterosexual marriage.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

I think what has often been missing in all the talk about Gay Marriage is how this debate impacts real lives. I have relatives, friends, and students who are members of the LGBT community. You view things much differently when you put a human face on this issue. I also have friends who are LDS. They are a notoriously kind and giving people. I believe that once the political debate dies down there will be reconciliation between the two sides. I honestly do!

Cleveland , OH

@O'really: same gender couples can obtain all those rights without marriage. Gay couples just don't want to go through the work of getting attorneys and such.

Not really. Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer were US citizens married in Toronto. When Spyer died, Windsor owed $363,053 in estate taxes because US law didn't recognize their marriage. No amount of paperwork could fix that. She had resources to take it to SCOTUS and prevailed.

Marriage has 1,400 legal benefits, from hospital visitation to inheritance to annual taxes. No amount of paperwork can fix or equalize most of those benefits.

@O'really: "Sadly on the other hand the statistics are just the opposite for gay intimate relationships and gay marriage."

Not Really. Anyone who is promiscuous runs a risk of disease. My husband and I are monogamous, as are many of the Gay and Lesbian couples we know. We have exactly the same risk of disease as any other monogamous couple.

In the past society has said Gay relationships are second-class. As marriage rights become real, more and more Gays are rethinking relationships and finding value.

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

Dear Editors: Can we have a moratorium on letters which liken SSM to father-daughter marriage or marrying your cocker spaniel? These letters certainly fit the definition of specious and disruptive. And referring to loving, committed SS relationships as "immoral" (or worse) seems to qualify as name-calling.


"A marriage is bond between two people based in love and commitment," William Bradshaw says.

This may be the secular view of marriage, but the religious view of this bond brings God into the union and places the spouse above oneself. Certainly not what most couples marrying civilly would ever agree to...

Civil unions would be a fine alternative for LGBT couples. This would also protect the sanctity of religious marriage and protect religious freedoms. The answer is smacking us right in the face and we ignore it....

Laura Bilington
Maple Valley, WA

jsf wrote, "The next step in this argument, if the Bradshaws had a temple marriage do they expect the church to capitulate for temple marriages for SSM because they had the privilege".

Well, "capitulate" wasn't the word I had in mind. Did the Church "capitulate" in 1978 when the President said that God had told him that the priesthood was open to blacks? Did they "capitulate" when they quietly dropped the claim that homosexuality was a choice? Of course, I have never heard an LDS president ever say "We were wrong" about the disenfranchisement of blacks prior to 1978.

Logan, UT

@ El Chango

" And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man." D&C 49:15

Satisfied? To me, it is disturbing and immoral that you would go out of your way to deny other Americans their RIGHT to marry.

Bob K
portland, OR

Idaho Falls, ID
"Sadly on the other hand the statistics are just the opposite for gay intimate relationships and gay marriage."

--- You mean the phony statistics trumped up enemies of equality.
There are plenty of surveys, articles, etc, showing the real situation.

All anyone has to do is look around online and on TV to see that today's atmosphere of acceptance (other than in Utah and some other States) causes Gay people to become more everyday and ordinary in their behavior.

Yes, when people were living in the shadows in fear of job loss, imprisonment, beating, and being tossed out of their families and churches, they were more likely to act like someone outside society.

We are living in 2014, and we all ought to recognize that.

to comment

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