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
MtnDewer
Salt Lake City, UT

Redshirt,

Find out who goes into poverty the most often when there is a divorce with children and report back...hint - It's the one who has the children...

That is a fact.

Trihs Der TalCech
ISS Challenger, OH

@Redshirt1701 said: "Despite what your ilk claim, gay unions will never be 100% equal to marriage between a man and a woman."

To quote a great Spanish swordsman "“You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

To date, you have claimed almost incessantly that gay unions will never be 100% equal. And, to date, you have not backed your claim with any facts or information to support your position.

You tried to show that "marriage" equals "procreation" and failed utterly. The rate of single mothers in the country is proof.

You tried to show that "marriage" equals "parenting" and we find that, while Gay and Lesbian couples make fine parents, the state of Utah separates marriage law and family law and in no place requires married couples to parent or parents to marry.

In fact, the only thing you have done is demand others answer your question and then ignore their answers.

So: Prove that Gay marriage cannot be equal to hetero marriage.

Redshirt1701
Deep Space 9, Ut

To "Trihs Der TalCech" I don't think you understand what equal means for something to be 100% equal that means that in every way things are equal.

Gay marriage involves 2 people of the same gender. That is not equal to 2 people of opposite genders. They are not the same biologically. Next, you have the psychological differences. Psycholgically a heterosexual couple is different because typically men look to fix and solve problems, and women need to release their emotions related to problems. In a marriage between heterosexuals they must work to overcome the psychological differences. When you have 2 men or 2 women, you typically don't have that.

Again, prove that gay unions are 100% equal to heterosexual marriage. Why can't you do that simple thing. I have proved that they are not equal biologically and psychologically. You just keep insisting that they are equal. PROVE IT.

MtnDewer
Salt Lake City, UT

redshirt: "
Gay marriage involves 2 people of the same gender. That is not equal to 2 people of opposite genders. They are not the same biologically."

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

Older couple marriage involves 2 people who are unable to procreate. That is not equal to 2 people who can procreate. They are not the same biologically.

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

Now put in infertile couples.

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

Gays are only asking for the same marriage benefits that an older or infertile heterosexual couple has. And if it is the same as a fertile heterosexual couple - so be it! If a couple is raising children, whether or not they are heterosexual, they should be able to protect those children using our marriage laws to provide the most stable environment with all the benefits that any married couple can afford to those children. Can you, Redshirt, tell my why those children should not have those things?

Why shouldn't a gay married couple have the same benefits and privileges that an older couple has? What is their difference that makes the heterosexuals so special? Don't say how they have sex, please...many older couples don't even worry about that small part of their lives and yet we allow them to remain married.

A Quaker
Brooklyn, NY

@RedShirt: You have "proved" absolutely nothing. But, for the sake of argument, let's say you were right. So, what?

Here, in this America, we start from the premise that it's a free country, that people can do what they want as long as they aren't hurting anyone. We all have that gift of liberty, as well as guaranteed individual rights.

The question is, if you want to criminalize same-sex marriage (and the Utah statutes pretty much do just that and will jail or fine a clergyman who conducts one), you have an obligation to show that it victimizes someone.

Not long ago, we had a slew of antisodomy laws on the books. While they're still on the books in many states, the Supreme Court ruled that private sexual conduct between non-consanguineous consenting adults was not a matter that could be criminalized, and they voided all those laws. No victim, no crime.

If SCOTUS ruled that sodom-y is a Constitutionally protected personal choice, why on God's good Earth do you imagine they're going to rule that marriage isn't?

RedShirtCalTech
Pasedena, CA

To "MtnDewer" but the hetersexual couple that is infertile is biologically and psychologically the same as the fertile couple. The women were born with women parts, and the men were born with man parts. They are indistinguishable.

Having children or the ability to have children is not, nor has it been a requirement for marriage.

I have never said that gays shouldn't have protections. I will say it once again. They can have their unions, just don't call it marriage because it is not the same as marriage between a man and a woman.

The question is what makes gays so special? Polygamists are not given the same rights as gays, why punish them and their children?

To "A Quaker" why do you liberals insist that anybody who opposes gay marriage wants to criminalize it? Give them rights, just don't call it marriage because it is NOT THE SAME as heterosexual marriage.

SlopJ30
St Louis, MO

"Give them rights, just don't call it marriage because it is NOT THE SAME as heterosexual marriage."

So what it comes down to is using the word "marriage" in a way that makes you uncomfortable? You'd "give them rights," presumably meaning that a union would differ from a marriage only in the orientation of the people involved. So, whether someone calls it a marriage or a union, if the legal effect is the same, why the petty clinging to a word?

"It's OUR word and THEY can't use it!" is what I'm hearing. Not much of a legal leg to stand on, I'm afraid.

Men and women have the same legal rights in the 21st Century, yet no-one would claim that they are the same. A 21-year-old has the same rights as a septugenarian, yet they are manifestly not the same. Your shrieks of "gay unions and straight marriages are NOT THE SAME" is true from certain standpoints, but irrelevant. My marriage isn't the same as my neighbors' marriage, or even, yes, plural marriages, yet I don't have a problem with any of them calling their relationship "marriage."

Trihs Der TalCech
ISS Challenger, OH

@RedShirt

My first wife had crippling depression, extreme agoraphobia and charts social anxiety. She is the reason I read "Men are from Mars, Women are From Venus," "The Five Love Languages," "The Color Code," "Walking on Eggshells," "Co-Dependent No More," "Alcoholics Anonymous," "Man of Steel and Velvet," and a 15 or 20 other similar books.

Her mental illness meant she rarely did what "normal" people do in the pop-psychology relationship books.

We dealt with extreme mental illness that had impact on me, my daughter, my step-son, my wife, our relationship, our roles in the relationship. In other words, our marriage was not like other marriages.

Your demand that things be "100 percent the same" is as artificial and mistaken as your Gilligan's Island Thought Exercise that you insisted could only have one answer.

Yes, I have known hetero couples who fit the image you outline. I have known many who don't fit it at all and who have constructed a very satisfying relationship that works for them.

Opposite-sex marriages aren't equal to each other. Your criteria fails in the face of reality.

to comment

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