Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: Irony of persecution’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, April 26 2014 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
wrz
Phoenix, AZ

@nonceleb:
"But, to impose them on society at large through a democratic political system which allegedly guarantees all citizens due process and equal protection under the law, is not your right."

Everyone has equal protection under marriage law... provided they don't marry their mother, dad, brother, sister, aunt, a close cousin, a minor, someone of the same gender, a tree, a squirrel, and many other combinations that might enjoy a loving relationship.

@Schnee:
"By that argument I assume you (in order to be 'rationally' consistent) oppose interracial marriage..."

Interracial marriage is fine so long as it's not with mother, dad, brother, sister, aunt, a close cousin, a minor, someone of the same gender, a tree, a squirrel, and many other combinations that might enjoy a loving relationship.

@QuercusQateL
"Not so. Gays and lesbians are simply desirous of having a monogamous marriage with the one they cherish, just like you. It doesn't open any doors that aren't already open to heterosexuals: the door to monogamy."

I would judge your position to be discriminatory against others who might share a loving and cherished relationship. See above for some possible examples.

wrz
Phoenix, AZ

Hutterite: "You can keep your deeply held religious belief. Same sex marriage will triumph, and we shall all have diversity."

There's no diversity where other marriages are denied... such as with mother, dad, brother, sister, aunt, a close cousin, a minor, someone of the same gender, a tree, a squirrel, and many other combinations that might enjoy a loving relationship.

Thid Barker: "What if I want to marry my horse or perhaps the 12 year old next door and you oppose my 'right' to do so, is that being prejudiced?"

That's the height of prejudice and the depth of depravity to cheer for one aberration of marriage (SSM) and not dozens of others. Strange, indeed, that the SSM proponents can't fathom that concept.

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

ThidBarker: "What if I want to marry my horse or perhaps the 12 year old next door and you oppose my "right" to do so, is that being prejudiced?"

Seriously?

OK, when horses and 12 year-olds are deemed lawfully able to give their informed consent as adult US citizens, then you go right ahead and marry them.

I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Meanwhile, here in the real world, there remain no credible arguments to justify denying same-sex couples the same rights to marriage that you take for granted.

Resorting to the argument, "because of my particular brand of religion," is a sign of desperation, not rational reasoning.

Utefan60
Salt Lake City, UT

lost in DC, I think you confuse hate with free speech. Everyone has the right to their free speech. As a citizen I have the same right to counter that free speech if it offends me.

Many religious beliefs in the world offend me, as do many political beliefs. Just because I say I don't like what is said doesn't mean I hate the person who says it. Nor am I suppressing their religious freedom. As it is said many times. Love the bigot, hate the bigotry!

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

wrz: "Interracial marriage is fine so long as it's not with mother, dad, brother, sister, aunt, a close cousin, a minor, someone of the same gender, a tree, a squirrel, and many other combinations that might enjoy a loving relationship."

No sooner than I recover from the "what if I want to marry a horse" post by another writer than you favor us with incest, trees and squirrels. Awesome.

You can, with zero difficulty, prove in a court of law that incestuous marriages have clinically proven harmful effects. Similarly, you can successfully argue in court that trees, squirrels, horses and minors have no ability to provide informed consent to a legally binding marriage as adult US citizens.

What I find fascinating is that you actually think that scenarios involving marriages with trees, squirrels, horses and minors has any bearing (other than comic relief) on the issue of why committed same-sex couples are denied the marriage rights that you take for granted.

Utefan60
Salt Lake City, UT

@wrz
Phoenix, AZ

What scares me about your comments is I don't know what religion you are? I don't know what is a sin in your eyes or not? If you subscribe to Warren Jeff's religion then the "sin list" will be different and so will the hell you talk about.

So I don't want the thousands of religions of this world to tell me which sins I can or cannot do. I believe in my religion, but I don't want it to control others.

Also you come from a State, (AZ) that recently passed a law that was universally bashed by all sides of the debate. That law in most peoples eyes was a moral sin and an outrage. It didn't depend on what religion they were, it was seen as mean and heartless. Sometimes things done in the name of religion are just wrong!

Midvaliean
MIDVALE, UT

If you are leaning towards being a libertarian, you will need to get over the fact that you won't like anyone in the party. Don't persecute even though you hate them.

higv
Dietrich, ID

@hutterite I already am diverse and intend on staying that way.

Tekakaromatagi
Dammam, Saudi Arabia

@Ranch:
"Re: the baker, florist and photographer. They are welcome to believe "sincerely" that same sex marriages are a sin. They are in business, however, to make money."

I see a troubing trend. Two years ago when people were talking about Bain Capital and Mitt Romney, you were condeming him for having laid people off. Wasn't Bain Capital in business to make money too? Why is it not OK for Bain Capital to be in the business of making money?

It is good that Christians have a book written in the Bronze Age. It gives them an anchor so that from week to week they aren't make wild swings from one edge of the political spectrum to another.

Anyhow, it is the height of bigotry and cultural chauvinism to conclude that if someone has different cultural views than you that there is something wrong with them. Clive Bundy has spent too much time out on the range following cattle. I wonder what everyone else's excuses are for their archaic views?

Stormwalker
Cleveland , OH

"Stop hitting me with your Bible!!" is not persecution.

"Sorry, but 'the Bible says...' is not a valid argument" is not persecution.

"This is a constitutional republic, not a theocracy" is not persecution.

"You have a business that serves the public, so you legally must serve all the public" is not persecution.

My marriage does not persecute you.

Holding my partner's hand in public does not persecute you.

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@wrz
"That's the height of prejudice and the depth of depravity to cheer for one aberration of marriage (SSM) and not dozens of others. Strange, indeed, that the SSM proponents can't fathom that concept."

No, we can't fathom that concept, because you support one type that'd been considered an aberration (interracial marriage) and depending on your religious beliefs possibly that another was okay for a while (polygamy) but not dozens of others... yet you can't grant us the same view as you except moving same-sex marriage to the support column. Seems like a double standard. Your concept appears to be "if you support anything other than the list of things I support... then you should support people marrying squirrels" and that's just illogical.

Stormwalker
Cleveland , OH

People who talk about marrying a Tree or a Horse or a Dog or Squirrel or a child seem to have a view of marriage that does not include the concept of "consent" and "partnership."

I suppose that does fit a certain interpretation of "biblical marriage" where a father sold his daughter to another man and the woman was given no choice, had no right to consent to the transaction.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

It's my deeply held religious view that everyone should have the same civil rights. Why is your view more important than mine?

Ranch
Here, UT

The ultimate persecution, Ms. Weaver, is denying LGBT couples the same legal benefits you enjoy. How about the persecution of having your rights voted on? Have you experienced that, Ms. Weaver?

You don't know what real "persecution" is.

Ranch
Here, UT

@Tek;

There is a vast difference between asking a provider of a product or service to provide that product or service (or leave the business) and taking over a business and putting the employees out on the street so you can make a buck. Bain Capital (and it's ilk) is a parasite on our society.

I'm not trying to put bakers, photographers and florists out of business or make them lose their jobs. I'm simply asking that they provide, for me, the same service they happily provide everyone else. Besides, there isn't a single scripture in the bible that tells you not to do business with "sinners" or be in violation of your "sincerely held religious beliefs". Quite the opposite in fact, the scriptures tell you to treat others as you would be treated yourself (Bain also violates that commandment).

Confused
Sandy, UT

I love all you SSM advocates...

You have provided ample examples of what the writer mentions....

His point that you obviously missed was that while the Gay community wants us to be tolerant of their views, they themselves are not tolerant of other views...

In other words.... We should be respectful (whether you are gay or straight)and considerate of others views points even if the are opposite of your own.

What I see in these posts is trying to justify their intolerance of others while advocating tolerance for their views.

Ranch
Here, UT

@Confused;

I'm sorry, but I see absolutely nothing "respectful" at all in denying others the benefits you, yourself enjoy. That, actually, is quite dis-respectful.

Confused
Sandy, UT

Ranch,
That is the question... the question is why can you not respect my point of view, if you want me to respect your point of view?

I am not denying anyone their benefits. You believe they are benefits under the constitution, I do not believe that is what the 14th amendment is meant in the interpretation.

I am not going down the dog, horse trial about marriage. I think that is disrespectful..

But I do have a question for you? Are you as upset about the denial of "Benefits" the Warren Jeffs group wants (Polygamy)? Are you upset with cousins who may love each other and are the age of consent denied "Benefits" by the law?

I am just curious about your answer, because like I said... you want me to respect your views, but you seem to not want to respect my views.

Stormwalker
Cleveland , OH

@Confused:

Personally, I am ambivalent about polygamy. The concept does not offend me in any way. Legalizing and regulating those relationships would give public scrutiny and give protection to all members, where now it all tends to be hidden.

In some states cousins, who are of legal age, may marry. If they move to a state that would not allow their marriage it is, never-the-less, legally recognized as an existing marriage.

Respect. Yes, it does go both ways. Yes, I understand you may be offended by my relationship. However, if "my side" prevails, your life will not change in the slightest.

If "your side" prevails, it will have real impact on my relationship and on gay and lesbian couples and their children all across the country. It will also impact gay and lesbian young people, who will continue to be told by society that their relationships are second class and disposable.

Regardless of how much you say your respect me, the impact of your position goes beyond disrespect and becomes actual injury.

Ranch
Here, UT

@Confused;

Actually, I do respect your point of view. That said, your point of view applies to you. If you don't want a same-sex marriage then don't have one - you have no business telling others how they must live. Polygamists are already allowed to marry, one person. If they want to marry more than one, I'm fine with that as long as they're consenting adults - but then arises the issues of inheritance, social security, etc. All of that has to be dealt with. Those aren't issues with LGBT couples (two people) marrying.

You are perfectly welcome to think anything you want; you're not welcome to deny me the right to marry the person I love.

to comment

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