Comments about ‘LDS Church issues statement regarding overturned Utah marriage amendment’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, June 25 2014 4:21 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
RedWings
CLEARFIELD, UT

Tyler D -

Thank you for your post.

While we may disagree on the SSM issue, the reasons for the rapid change in public opinion, and other issues, I appreciate you assessment of a possisle SCOTUS 5-4 ruling and its implications for the future. And I appreciate the reasoning behind your comment.

It is possible to those who disagree to find understanding and have concern for each other's opinion and rights. Hopefully this will be the path moving forward....

Eagle78
Salt Lake City, UT

Politics should NOT be influenced by religious beliefs. It is ridiculous that this continues to be a "problem" for people. If the LDS church firmly believes that marriage is only between a man and a woman then fine. They are allowed to believe what they want, and practice that belief. What is just flat out wrong though is trying to make those beliefs a law that everyone else must follow. Don't allow gay couples to get married in the temple if you don't like it. That is your right. Stop trying to stand in the way of the rights of others thought just because they don't fit with your religions world view.

Gay marriage is going to happen. Sooner or later what is right, fair, and just IS going to win out from coast to coast. Be on the right side of history (for once), and just leave people alone. Keep your practices, and beliefs to yourselves which is where they belong.

Dutchman
Murray, UT

Even if SCOTUS eventually rules in favor of the states allowing each to define marriage as they see fit those states that continue to ban same sex marriage will cave in and lift the bans on same sex marriage because of threats and boycotts. Even Utah would capitulate for reasons of maintaining economic development.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

It gets brought before the judges twice and they're told no both times. Are they just going to keep asking again and again until they get the answer they want?

RedWings
CLEARFIELD, UT

Eagle78 -

My political opinions are informed by my religious beliefs. My religion is a part of who I am - I can't separate the two. It is really disturbing to me that you would advocate discrimination based on religion. Freedom of Religion is the first of the rights listed in the Constitution.

How is it less wrong to make beliefs about homosexuality and immorality part of the law, and make those who disagree follow? This is the core hypocrisy that the Left advocates.

It would be great to know that the state will never force the Church to allow gays to marry in the Temple. I see that as a real threat with the forced acceptance of the gay lifestle. We have hit the slippery slope and have started downward....

Tex-Ute
Dallas, TX

I think everyone needs to take the emotion out of the debate and focus on the law. This would not impact the church stance, doctrine, acknowledgement or ability to excommunciate those that do not adhere to its policies. It does affirm the principals that this country was founded on of freedom and liberty will be upheld for all. History shows progress and equality always wins in this great country. Lets not forget its the same principals and protections the Mormons benefited from in the late 19th century. Ironically they were persecuted for their view on marriage at the time (Plural Marriage). If anything if they wanted this lays the groundwork for repealing the 1890 Manifesto and reverting back to their original doctrine.

Either way we all benefit when minority rights are protected. You never know when you might be on the other side looking for the same.

SqueezySprings
Provo, UT

I hope all the lgbt activists show the same support when the polygamy, polyandry and beastiality communities start actively pursuing their rights. I mean who cares if a person has more than one spouse, right? They're not hurting anyone and it's their choice. So what if the guy down the road would rather have sex with his dog instead of a human. Give him the right to marry Princess the dog. Why not let everybody have their freedom to do as they feel.

rogerdpack
Orem, UT

The supreme court taking this up has some relevance, since I thought in their ruling against Prop. 8 at least one justice said that the federal courts had no business deciding these things, so...here's hoping, it's basically the last hope...

happy2bhere
clearfield, UT

As far as the LDS Church is concerned, secular marriage laws are amendable according to particular jurisdictions or countries requirements. For instance, in England, it is a law that all marriages have to be open to the public. Therefore, no one can be married in an LDS Temple only. So the Church allows the marriage to first take place in a chapel, open to the public, and then after the secular marriage, the couple goes to the Temple a day or so later for the sealing. I don't think any change in secular marriage law will have any real effect on the Church. What will be interesting to see is if some advocates of same sex partners, much like that woman recently excommunicated for advocating women getting the priesthood, start a campaign that same sex couples should be allowed to be sealed in a Temple. Some might say, never happen, but then look how fast SSM has come in only a few years. I'm sure the Church will stay strong and hold to the true principles of marriage, but it is a fight I see on the horizon.

Tex-Ute
Dallas, TX

@SqueezySprings

A dog or any other animal can't consent nor can they enter into a binding contract. So their rights are already protected. As far as plural marriage goes this can set a precedent for those who want to practice it. In all fairness as long as its not abused as it was with Warren Jeffs and other like him. Example of that is how Utah did not file charges against Kody Brown and his four wives. Shurtleff had assured the Browns they wouldn't be prosecuted under his policy that consenting adult polygamists won't be charged as long as they're not committing other crimes.

Eagle78
Salt Lake City, UT

@Redwings

The difference here is that by making gay marriage legal they are not forcing anything on you. You are not suddenly obligated to be gay because it's now legal. You are not suddenly obligated to agree with that life style. It ultimately has little, to no impact on your life. On the other side of that coin if the LDS church has its way it DOES impact the lives of many people. There is no "leftist agenda" here. Discrimination is discrimination and it isn't any less vile just because you try to hide it behind "Freedom of Religion". It doesn't matter what party you support either. Wrong is wrong.

The tragic thing here is that the LDS church actively campaigns in a field that hurts people. There is absolutely nothing Christ like about denying your fellow man something as beautiful as marriage simply because you disagree with who is getting married. The Church talks about respect and love, but at the same time ignores how many people's lives they negatively impact because they feel that there is something wrong with them. Of which they have absolutely no proof other then "because God said so."

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

It's very simple.

Cost. Vs. Gain. Cost: To continue to work to deny LGBT Americans marriage.

'Price tag for defending Amendment 3 to reach $2 million' – By Lisa Riley Roche – Deseret News – 12/27/13

'SALT LAKE CITY — The price tag for hiring outside counsel to defend Utah's voter-approved constitutional amendment on marriage is expected to be close to $2 million, money that key GOP lawmakers are willing to spend.'

'Study: Gay weddings could bring $15.5 million to Utah economy' - By Lindsay Whitehurst | The Salt Lake Tribune - 04-24-14

'The analysis by the Los Angeles-based Williams Institute is based on average nuptial and tourism costs, as well as studies from states that have legalized gay marriage.'

The factual effect that LGBT marriage has to our Heterosexual counter parts is, zero.

Unless you count children put up for adoption that would have a better chance to live in a two-parent house hold.

DanO
Mission Viejo, CA

Red Wings, nothing in your 1:33pm post is factual. The adoption case in MA was the Catholic Charities who did take tax money for their adoption service. There was nothing about LDS Social Services. Also, religions will not be forced by states to change their policies. There is plenty of precedent upholding the First Amendment rights of religions to be as exclusionary as they like.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@redwings
Please do site your sources for your claims about MA. You are stilted to your opinions but not your own made up "facts"

samhill
Salt Lake City, UT

The only reason the notion of homosexual "marriage" has gained any traction at all in the last 10-15 years is because of the reciprocal diminished and devaluation of marriage in general.

The commitments fundamental to marriage have been the foundation of family life for millennia. The reasons were once obvious to almost all people. But, with the erosion of many other critically important societal values, so has recognition and understanding of the vital role of marriage to family and of family to society.

It's a societal degenerative process that's been predicted for ages, but the speed and breadth of the deterioration during just the last decade has been astonishing to me and has me dreading the coming years.

Duke of Earl Grey
Salt Lake City, UT

The question of whether a family with opposite-sex parents is a better setting for children than a family with same-sex parents seems irrelevant to the legal issue at hand, because same-sex couples already do raise children, and will continue to raise children even if their unions are not recognized as marriage. So the question should be, which is better for their children, that their parents are recognized as married or unmarried? Because either way those children won't be raised by a man and a woman, sorry.

Maudine
SLC, UT

@ samhill: The reason same-sex marriage has gained so much traction so fast is because people have come to realize it is not the end of the world that so many opponents like to claim it is.

As the Prop 8 case made its way through the courts, the truth of the opposition came out - namely, that the reasons given to oppose same-sex marriage have no foundation in fact.

Since there is no logical, legal reason to oppose same-sex marriage, people have stopped opposing it.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

Entitled not stilted. Sorry

Dad
San Antonio, TX

RFLASH: "If God's intention was to make us all the same, then He would have done it! I have lived with myself for fifty years and I think I have a right to say that God made me just the way He wanted me to be! "

With this logic, you're essentially saying that God made us the way we behave. So is a person misbehaves and decides to kill another person, God made them that way? (I get there are those who are mentally ill - I'm not talking about the exception) You do not understand this fundamental truth; just because you are a creation of God, does not mean He condones everything you or I choose to do. Justify all you want but one, on God's side, is the majority.

I feel for those that have homosexual tendencies. I don't know how hard that would be to overcome, but any temptation can be overcome. The Lord will always live the sinner and hate the sin and that is how people who proclaim follow Jesus should be.

Eagle78
Salt Lake City, UT

Maudine hit the nail right on the head. There is no logical, legal reason to oppose same-sex marriage. "Because our church says it's bad" just isn't good enough. You can not deny a substantial group of people the same rights you give yourselves simply because you think they're "icky". Comparing same-sex marriage to something like beastiality is as ignorant as it is offensive.

It does my heart good though to see that progress gets made even when hateful people try to stop it. The "White Only" signs got torn down eventually, and someday this mess will be behind us as well.

to comment

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