Quantcast

Comments about ‘Court allows Utah more time to file gay marriage recognition appeal’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 26 2014 1:00 p.m. MDT

Updated: Wednesday, Aug. 27 2014 3:11 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Understands Math
Lacey, WA

Yeah, I figured this would happen, as the courts have granted the state extra time every time they asked for it.

It will avail them nothing. The appeals court will also declare that the state must recognize the legal marriages.

firstamendment
Lehi, UT

That's very kind of them, to let the People have more time to have a voice in the future of our children. :) The right to effectively vote or have a real voice on this is critical, because it's a critical issue.
There is no reason for us (the government) to involve ourselves in promoting homosexuality. Gays are free to vote, work, love, visit, etc.
If there is discrimination in the workplace etc., in gay bars (Black, Asian, overweight, and others are routinely discriminated against in gay bars some are still segregated, some won't hire Blacks, some make Blacks go to the end of the line etc)) etc. then there are already laws against that.

Associating homosexuality with the Civil Rights movement is shameful, and offensive to many of us, especially those of us who had slave ancestors. It has nothing to do with that. It's sexuality, gays are FREE.

MARRIAGE, on the other hand, legally sanctions, upholds, and enforces relationships that are crucial for the survival of Humanity. Homosexual relationships need not be enforced. And, honest research shows that promoting homosexuality is harmful for our children.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

It's for naught. Delay the inevitable is all they've got left.

firstamendment
Lehi, UT

It is sad that our Country has reached a point where Government by the People has perished from the earth. There is no valid argument in support of demands for gay marriage. And it is so wrong for people to sue, bully, pressure, bribe, etc. governments, judges, etc into legally enforcing homosexuality against the better judgment of the People (the tax payers, who will be forced to promote it). Sexuality is not race, religion, gender, etc. Gays should be loved and protected, just like everyone else, maybe even more than others, but Judge Vaughn made it clear that legally promoting homosexuality through marriage is not about civil rights, visiting rights, insurance rights, or any rights. Gays can already vote, visit, drink water where they want, etc. (unless they are Black, or overweight, or Asian, etc. since gay bars discriminate, segregate, etc. without being fined)

But, as Vaughn pointed out (after he took the rights of Californians to truly have a voice, or a vote, on their future), gay marriage is about mainstreaming homosexuality, and his justifications for defying the people were his opposition to "conversion" therapy and wanting to promote homosexuality through "social meaning." It is not about rights.

Henry Drummond
San Jose, CA

After listening to the oral arguments in the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals over Wisconsin and Indian anti-Gay Marriage laws, I'm convinced the State of Utah is going to need more time to prepare their appeal. A lot more time. A whole lot more time.

Clarissa
Layton, UT

JOY! I'm very happy about Utah getting more time. Great Job, Utah!

netsrik
Draper, UT

This is ridiculous. They've had plenty of time. They really need to just give it up and quit wasting the taxpayers money. All they're doing is hurting children.

nycut
New York, NY

Oh great, another opportunity for more incoherent comments about what marriage "is"-- about what gay people "should"-- about what (their version of) god "says."

So much bother over somebody else's life. Absurd really, here in the land of freedom and liberty and equality.

Some people are gay, which means they are romantically and sexually attracted to members of the same sex and live their lives accordingly.

Some people think it's a sin, which is completely irrelevant.

When all the kicking and screaming is over, guess what?

Some people are still gay, which still means they are romantically and sexually attracted to members of the same sex and still live their lives accordingly, which *includes* legally marrying the person they want to for the whole range of reasons people get married, in the exact same courthouses, in *all* the states in the land of freedom and liberty and equality.

And some people will still think it's a sin, and it still won't be any of their business.
But hopefully it will be a lot more peaceful around here.

Br. Jones
East Coast, MD

Good. Regardless of how the appeals court rules, let Utah never say that lack of time to file was a contributing factor.

Jeff Harris
Edmonds, WA

Faced with certain defeat, Sean Reyes and the state of Utah seem to make gay families miserable for as long as they possibly can. Their motives are transparent. While animus toward gay people is aided and abetted by the state, the federal government will ultimately step in to correct that, as the district court and 10 Circuit Court have done already. It's only a matter of time. The only thing Utah will gain is a reputation for being mean spirited,

FatherOfFour
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

What do they plan to add that they do not already have in there? Why do they not already have their case together? If they have a good case (and they should with the AG bringing in expensive outside attorneys) then why do they need an extra month? The plaintiffs have already stated that they are ready. They have their case together and ready to go. I will bet you that the case the state presents in October will be the exact same case they have now. They just wanted to push it off for another month.

mufasta
American Fork, UT

That is the right decision. The court is picking two cases that have the most merit to hear; Utah and Virginia. Once these two cases are settled, the precedent will be set and we will not wrestle with this issue any longer. I am glad they are taking the time to make a measured and adequately considered decision.

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

re: firstamendment "And it is so wrong for people to sue, bully, pressure, bribe, etc. governments, judges, etc into legally enforcing homosexuality against the better judgment of the People (the tax payers, who will be forced to promote it)."

Who is being forced to become homosexual?

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

@firstamendment
"Associating homosexuality with the Civil Rights movement is shameful, and offensive to many of us, especially those of us who had slave ancestors."

It's only offensive to those who do not believe that LGBT people should have access to the same rights the rest of us have.

"then there are already laws against that. "

Only around half the states (and some cities/counties/municipalities) have such anti-discrimination laws in the workplace on the books. Salt Lake City and County I believe do (along with some others), but the state of Utah as a whole doesn't, so depending on city/county those protections may not exist.

"And, honest research shows that promoting homosexuality is harmful for our children."

Honest research shows that a serving of chocolate each day is good for you. Honest research means "research that agrees with me" right?

"There is no valid argument in support of demands for gay marriage. "

The courts seem to believe there's no valid argument in support of demands to ban gay marriage.

" Gays should be loved "

Yes, which is why I'm not interested in them having second class citizen status.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

What is the rush? When 98.6% of the nation does not practice same-sex sex, why should we be forced into making a quick decision? The majority of Utahns told us that marriage and same-sex sex are not the same thing. The 1.4% of the population who feel differently want a quick decision. Why are they not willing to thoroughly study the issue? Why are they so adamant that they have the answers? Is society totally wrong? Are the 98.6% of the nation who reject same-sex sex as the definition of "marriage" wrong or are the 1.4% who practice same-sex sex the anomaly?

mcclark
Salt Lake City, UT

@First amendment---So your argument is "its our club, and we don't want them in it"?

Lane Myer
Salt Lake City, UT

firstamendment

Lehi, UT

"That's very kind of them, to let the People have more time to have a voice in the future of our children. :)"

-----

What do your children have to do with this? How about the future of the children who are being raised by a gay couple? Would you have them in this limbo as long as you can? Why not get this settled?

*****
"There is no reason for us (the government) to involve ourselves in promoting homosexuality. "

-----
The government does not promote homosexuality. It has been a legal act for years. Our government just allows all to pursue their own happiness in their own way without forcing your beliefs on those who do not want to follow them. That is not promoting homosexuality, but following our constitution.

*****
"MARRIAGE, on the other hand, legally sanctions, upholds, and enforces relationships that are crucial for the survival of Humanity."

----

No, marriage does not enforce relationships at all. You can be married to someone and never see them. You will not be forced by the government to divorce. Marriage is different for each couple. That is what is great about America - we all can have different ideas and live together.

Jeff29
Draper, UT

I think it's interesting how so many people are getting overly excited about what a Circuit Court does regarding this issue. Regardless of what they rule, this will end up at the Supreme Court (with a stay on any lower court rulings). Then depending on what Justice Kennedy had for lunch that day, State laws prohibiting gay marriage will be deemed unconstitutional, or the issue will be deemed a state's rights issue and each state will be left to determine how to define marriage.

Kennedy has a history of being "liberal" on issues dealing with sexuality and "conservative" on issues related to state's rights, so I think it's very hard to guess what the outcome will be. Personally, I believe this is a state's rights issue and that invoking the 14th amendment is a stretch at best. I personally oppose same-sex marriage, but fully support the rights of the citizens of any state to define marriage how they wish (hopefully through a transparent, democratic process).

My question for those who support same-sex marriage is will you support whatever decision is ultimately made by the Court?

Understands Math
Lacey, WA

@MikeRichards wrote: "What is the rush?"

Justice delayed is justice denied.

"Is society totally wrong? Are the 98.6% of the nation who reject same-sex sex as the definition of "marriage" wrong or are the 1.4% who practice same-sex sex the anomaly?"

Please show me an opinion poll where 98.6% of people are opposed to same-sex marriage.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ firstamendment

"And, honest research shows that promoting homosexuality is harmful for our children."

No it doesn't.

to comment

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