Quantcast

Comments about ‘Possible outcomes plentiful in appeal of Amendment 3 ruling’

Return to article »

Published: Sunday, May 4 2014 8:04 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
GingerAle
North East, OH

RedShirt

I did the experiment. You didn't like the results so you changed the rules. I played again, and again you object to the simple conclusion.

According to over 50 courts, starting with the Massachusetts Supreme Court a decade ago and now the US Supreme Court and several dozen federal district courts there is no legal difference between Same Sex and Opposite Sex couples. This has been proven in court case after court case across the country.

My wife and I are a couple. We have a home, pay bills, are raising our kids. We go to church, I volunteer at the school and help with Girl Scouts. We have 2 cars and worry about retirement as we save to buy a house. We have friends and family and are part of the community.

We adopted our kids instead of creating them together, biologically. That is the only difference between us and the couple next door - a hetero couple who have 2 kids.

Prove we are different. Not with a bogus "thought experiment" - actually prove that our relationship is not equal. Some fine legal minds have tried and failed. Good luck.

USU-Logan
Logan, UT

@GingerAle

You don't need to reply RedShirt series' sophist posts. His logic is totally deceiving: same sex couples are not the same as hereto couples; therefore, they should not be equal.

Base on his so-called "logic", men and women are not the same, they should be treated equally under the law either.

I mean, if his argument or "experiment" is so compelling, why Mr. Schaerr did not use it in court? Is it because his argument is irrational? Or is it because his experiment is irrelevant?

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

To "GingerAle" if I read your responses correctly, you agree that a gay union is not the same as marriage between a man and a woman.

Through your examples, you have left out the fact that on the island with the gays that the rates for physical and emotional abuse are much higher. Then, according to the census only 27% of lesbians and 14% of gay men had children. That means that the longer you carry out the experiment, you would run out of kids or else end up with too much inbreeding to carry on.

First, from a biological sense where there is not a natural way for a gay couple to conceive a child. Which leads to the fact that 2 women or 2 men are not the same as a man and a woman.

We can also go into the differences that exist when a man and woman marry that are different than when a gay couple is united.

Try as you might, you can never prove that a gay couple is equal to a hetersexual couple.

To "USU-Logan" FYI men and women are not treated equally under the law. Talk to any divorced man.

USU-Logan
Logan, UT

@RedShirt1701

Your so-called "logic" is like 100 years ago, someone argued: since men can vote, but women can not, they are not equal, therefore, men and women SHOULD NOT be treated equally under the law.

Fortunately, Mr. Schaerr is smart enough not to bring such argument to the court, because he knew it would only fail miserably.

And BTW, I don't know how many RedShirt ID you have, RedShirt, RedShirt1701, RedShirtMIT, RedShirtUofU, RedShirtCaltech..., you can keep on posting your comments as many as you like. but I don't have time to debate on your "logical" argument. This is my 4th and the last comment on this article. Bye.

Really???
Kearns, UT

@RedShirtUofU

Are you comparing me more to Mother Teresa or Hitler? I find it interesting that you would insinuate that I am rebelling against God. I don't think you know who I am, nor do you understand my heart. This, you see, is the true problem that we are facing with this issue.

I have prayed about who I am for years, and I did not receive the answers I wanted for far too many of them. It wasn't until I asked God if he accepted me the way that I am that I finally found the internal peace that was missing for too long. You see, I received inspiration how to live MY life the best way I can with the cards I have been dealt. God's not going to inspire my neighbor or some stranger who reads the same newspaper about how I should live my life.

OneWifeOnly
San Diego, CA

@GingerAle--Two Thumbs Up!
@Redshirt--I Love the desert island thought experiment!

Tiago
Seattle, WA

GingerAle -- I enjoyed reading about the island and how it turned out. It sounds like a nice place.

Really??? -- I appreciate your testimony. I hope the people who do know you are more supportive than people on these comments who don't.

For anyone interested in better understanding and having empathy for the complex reality of same-sex attraction, I encourage you to check out a new series on youtube you can find if you search for "ldswalkwithyou." They are stories of faithful LDS families dealing lovingly with LGBT family members.

GingerAle
North East, OH

RedShirt

You keep changing the subject, your name, and the rules of your thought "experiment."

Straight and gay relationships include love, trust, mutual attraction, partnership, companionship, and desire for happiness.

You seem to focus on "parenting," which has nothing to do with being a couple. Even Utah marriage law is separate from Utah family law.

Creating a child is a biological act, nothing more. Teenagers, drunks, drug addicts, murderers, strangers sharing a physical moment, even a couple on the brink of divorce. All can make a baby.

Parenting - actually raising a child to be a successful and happy human - requires time, attention, love, consistency and commitment. It can be done by a single parent, but works best if shared by two parents and the gender of the parents does not matter.

Same-sex relationships are equal and equivalent to opposite-sex relationships. Same-sex parenting has one minor difference, which on the whole is the least important part of parenting.

Again, your thought exercise is not an experiment. It starts with your conclusion and goes in a circle while ignoring reality. It proves nothing.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@Redshirt: You're asking the wrong question. First of all, no marriage is equal to any other marriage. A marriage is whatever two people make it. Everyone is different, so every marriage is both the sum and the product of that difference.

Zsa Zsa Gabor, Lana Turner, Jennifer O'Neill, Larry King, Liz Taylor and Mickey Rooney were married a total of 50 times, each of them 8 or 9 times. None of those marriages were the equivalent of my one marriage of 30-something years so far, and counting.

The correct question is, can we tell people whose only possible romantic affinity is to someone of the same sex that they shouldn't be able to marry their sweetheart? Marriage is much more than sexual activity. (Ask anyone who's married!) No marriage survives without an abiding love for each other. We Quakers believe that that love is God's love, the universal source of all love, and let no man set asunder, etc.

What Courts are seeing now is that once you consider religious doctrine with neutrality, the legal basis is pretty clear. There's no fundamental legal reason to prohibit same-sex marriage.

TrihsDer
NEO, OH

@RedShirt: "Prove to us that the union of 2 gays is 100% equal to the union of a man and a woman."

Prove it isn't. You make a claim here, that a gay or lesbian couple is somehow not equal to a hetero couple.

You make the claim, then do nothing to actually back it up. You just make the claim.

You also conflate "marriage" with "parenting," and then confuse the act of parenting with the act of procreation. The former takes extensive commitment, the later requires genitals and (fortunate or unfortunate) timing.

Please demonstrate, with something beyond unsupported assertions or religious verbiage, that Same Sex couples are not the legal, social, and emotional equivalent of Opposite Sex couples.

Then please demonstrate, with something beyond unsupported assertions or religious verbiage, that Same Sex couples are not able to provide a healthy, stable, nurturing home to raise children into healthy, balanced, happy adults.

Thank you.

RedShirtCalTech
Pasedena, CA

To "TrihsDer" that is easy, just remember I am speaking in general terms. On a basic level, you have the biological differences. Men are physically different than women. If you want to go deeper, read the book "Men are from Mars". The psychological, emotional, and communication differences between men and women is quite different, and must be overcome to form a successful marriage. If you have 2 men or 2 women, you don't have the same challenges. Marriage is about more than children.

To "A Quaker" yes, we should tell gays that they can't be married. They can have a union that has equal protections, but no, they are not married.

To "GingerAle" actually I have not been changing the subject. I have only been after one thing from you and people like you. I want you to prove that gay marriage is 100% equal to hetersexual marriage. The experiment was intended to make you think about the differences and the basis of society. I can't make you think and respond to something you don't want to.

To "Really???" I am comparing you to neither. Being loved by God is a given. Loving and obeying god isn't.

TrihsDer
ISS Enterprise, OH

@RedShirtCalTech:

A glib pop-culture title as a "reference"? What's next? Dr. Phil?

Be that as it may, I read that and found I identified more with the Venus than Mars, and always have. It gave problems when I tried to be in OS relationships, and it caused some conflict in my over-all much happier SS relationships.

In real-world relationships - not thought experiments - the differences exist in both hetero and same-sex relationships and must be overcome to form a successful partnership.

Besides... so what? A successful relationship is successful - it works for the two people involved. Some never have a cross moment, some spend 50 years bickering and love each other dearly. Some have every interest in common, some seem to have no connection to each other. Both can be happy or miserable.

@GingerAle answered your thought experiment very carefully and thoroughly. She just didn't reach the conclusion you were trying to force.

Please demonstrate, with something beyond unsupported assertions or religious verbiage, that Same Sex couples are not the legal, social, and emotional equivalent of Opposite Sex couples.

So far you have ignored that.

MtnDewer
Salt Lake City, UT

Redshirt

Legally equal:

1 man = 1 woman in our laws.

So, 1 man + 1 woman = 1 man + 1 man = 1 woman + 1 woman.

Simple math.

Socially equal:

This has passed the over 50% acceptance threshhold and so more people accept their equality than reject it. Those who still reject it are dying off gradually and it will soon be a totally acceptable assertion that they are equal.

Emotionally equal:

Both same sex couples and opposite sex couples want to commit to each other legally. The statistics that I read the other day is that 26% of heterosexuals are married. That is probably about the same % of gays that want to marry. Emotionally, both fall in love, some want families and some want companionship. I don't think you can make any comparisons between the two without giving gays marriage for a while and see if they are not just as good (or just as bad) as heterosexuals have been.

Peace

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@RedShirt: You and your church are free to tell people (gay, straight, conservative, liberal, tea party, other religions, whoever) anything you want. It's a free country and your right of free speech is protected. As is your right to exercise your religion. They're both in the First Amendment, along with freedom of the press.

But, so is everyone else's. My right of free speech is equal to your right. My right of freedom of religion is equal to yours. It doesn't matter if you consider me a heretic or I consider you a Philistine. That's also our right.

But, when it comes to deciding the orderly exercise of individual rights, and interpretation of our Constitution, that's neither of our rights. We can't ban each other's religions, and we can't petition the government to adopt either of them. And a good thing that is, too. As for interpreting secular law and how that applies to Due Process and Equal Protection, that's up to the Court.

May God guide them to a decision that honors God's Light and Love equally in every person, regardless of their religious affiliation or lack thereof.

TrihsDer
ISS Enterprise, OH

@RedShirt

A Thought Experiment:

The Love Boat runs aground on Gilligan's Island. Wacky hi-jinks ensue and all radios and lifeboats are destroyed, leaving no hope of escape or rescue.

The Castaways realize there are 100 straight men and 100 straight women on the island and begin to couple up and, eventually, have children.

Fifteen years later the oldest children have matured and are starting to pair up. As time goes by the adults realize that 95% of the children are forming opposite-sex pairs, but about 5% are in same-sex couples.

Do the adults:

1. Punish those children until they conform?

2. Kill the same-sex-attracted children to protect the integrity of the community?

3. Deny them food, water, and shelter for the benefit of the 95% who are obeying the rules?

You must decide what these adults should do to protect the 95% of their offspring who are in traditional relationships.

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

To "MtnDewer" but 1 man is not equal to 1 woman within the US laws. One prime example is the Draft. Men are required by law to sign up for it and women are not. Divorce laws are set up to favor women. Many of the latest convictions of women who sexually abuse minors have shown us that women don't receive as harsh of punishments as men for the same crime. Men can walk around bare chested in public and women can't.

There are many laws that apply to one gender and not the other, so even within the law they are not the same.

To "TrihsDer" I can tell you have not read the book Men are from Mars. Yes it was popular at one time, but that doesn't mean that the points it makes are any less valid. It was written by an expert in relationship counciling. It is as valid as any AGW study.

In your experiment, lets imagine what would happen if on that island they found a herbal remidy that balanced the brain chemistry of those with same sex attraction and eliminated it all together. Gays are not punished.

Trihs Der TalCech
ISS Challenger, OH

@Redshirt1701

You didn't follow my rules. You twisted things and didn't give the answer I wanted...

Silly, right? You called it a thought experiment, when Ginger played you were all offended because she actually thought and came up with an answer.

There are differences between men and women. But in many parts of the world men and women can go bare-chested and it is not an issue. In some countries men and women are drafted, in others women don't serve in the military at all. Many "gender differences" are cultural, none have to do with SSM. And some countries officially define marriage as 2 people, regardless of gender.

Yes, I read "MAFMWAFV." Spent time studying it because I did not, in many ways, fit the stereotypes he presented. The latest studies in brain imaging show that gay men's brains often elicit results closer to that of women, which may explain my dilemma.

I got more from "The Five Love Languages," and after two decades still find "The Color Code" a good relationship resource. Both look at personality devoid of gender stereotypes and I find that much more useful.

MtnDewer
Salt Lake City, UT

"One prime example is the Draft. Men are required by law to sign up for it and women are not. Divorce laws are set up to favor women."

========

Haven't been around divorce court very much lately? They are NOT set up to favor women, but are set up to favor the one who stays home or has given up their career to take care of the children. That can also be the man, believe it or not. That is why there is alamony payments, etc. If both are working and there are no children, it is an even split. Custody cases are again usually given to those who are taking care of the children the most and that too can be the man.

Right now there is no draft. Men are still signing up at the draft board, but if, and I hope this never happens again, that we need the draft, I believe that both men and women will be drafted. Each will be able to serve where they are best suited. That might mean that because most men are stronger than women, they will be serving on the front line. But women have served there too.

Jimmytheliberal
Salt Lake City, UT

@Red Shirt...Continue grasping my friend. Eventually you may come up with something logical to post rather then spewing your particular religious ideology. By the way. Religious ideology is irrelevant in a courtroom! Equality will soon arrive for all rather then a select few.

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

To "MtnDewer" so, you agree that right now, under the law men and women are not equal, the Draft is sufficient proof of that. It doesn't matter what you say you hope for in the future, the fact is that there is inequality in the draft laws.

I noticed that you ignored the decency laws and the rulings against women that sexually abuse minors.

If what you say about divorce is true, why is it that so many news articles, and law web sites state that divorce laws favor women? Based on what is available on the internet, what you say has no basis in reality.

To "Jimmytheliberal" you are the one who needs to keep grasping. Despite what your ilk claim, gay unions will never be 100% equal to marriage between a man and a woman.

to comment

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