Becker calls for new domestic partnership registry

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Anonymous
    Oct. 13, 2008 8:44 p.m.

    this is great! Thanks slc

  • Anonymous
    Feb. 25, 2008 10:16 a.m.

    "It doesn't matter that it won't hurt the institution of marriage or that your neighbor is a good neighbor. Why should our tax money be used to pay benefits for someone's gay partner of the month?"

    That's laughable. If you want to play that game, the better question is why should childless gay couples have to pay for your swarm of kids to get an education?

  • Michael
    Jan. 16, 2008 1:07 p.m.

    Evidently mormons feel that only they should be treated fairly and that others who are different in one way or another should not. Your so-called "Christian love" is nothing more than hypocrisy. As a gay man, I say this: "G-D made me. G-D made me gay. Did G-D make a mistake?" Were I to find one man to love, I would want to be registered in a civil union.

    Perhaps a better solution would be to dissolve the "institution" or marriage completely and call it "civil unions" for one and all. That way, everyone is treated equally.

  • tslpsych
    Jan. 16, 2008 12:18 p.m.

    I loved Rocky! What a great American, and a wonderful Mayor he was. Only bigots have a problem with two loving adults having rights of survivorship, mutual cohabitation, and medical/death benefits. I wonder which group of responders here would have thrown a fit back in the 60's when blacks were allowed to sit in restaurants, anywhere on a bus, or drink from the same fountain. Ignorance and religious stupidity go hand in hand.

    The new mayor did the moral thing. The opposition are the immoral ones here.

  • LauraW
    Jan. 16, 2008 11:54 a.m.

    It's surprising to see Salt Lake City move toward this. It gives me hope Columbia, South Carolina may one day crawl out of their Inquisition period.

  • Ello
    Jan. 16, 2008 11:16 a.m.

    Too bad Christians are nothing like their Christ.
    Mormons are included in that one.

    When policy is based in religion, it produces inequality (See Muslim cultures for proof.
    Christians are not exempt from that little bit of truth.

    I hope that we can all put our definitions of God away real soon and just start living and loving.

  • Big Steve
    Jan. 16, 2008 10:52 a.m.

    Of course same sex couples, should be allowed to get married. Why should us hetrosexuals have all the misery!

  • What would Jesus do?
    Jan. 16, 2008 10:50 a.m.

    It's clear to see that the religious have no compassion. No wonder Christianity is losing to secularism because Christianity no longer follows the teachings of Jesus.

    Being gay isn't a choice. You are born gay. People are born gay in SLC. It's not an outside phenomenon. The high young male suicide rate in UT should tell you this. Don't they have just as much right to live, be happy, and have equal rights as a religious bigot?

    Property prices? Ten kids and no money kills the neigborhood. parents too busy at church to monitor the activities of their spawn ruin the neighborhood. Neighbors who can't let other people live their lives free from hate and discrimination ruin the neighborhood!!!!

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 15, 2008 12:54 a.m.

    Surely you all know that this registry wouldn't actually be paying for anybody's insurance benefits.

    As for people taking advantage of it "Chuck & Larry" style, the registry would actually help curb that kind of abuse.

    Some businesses choose to provide domestic-partner benefits because people-friendly policies like these help them compete for and retain well-qualified workers.

    How can an employer tell when an employee is "faking" in order to get benefits for his "Chuck & Larry" roommate? Until now, there's been no simple way for an employer to verify a domestic partnership.

    The registry would make it easy for employers who choose to provide domestic-partner benefits to determine which employees qualify. Employers which do not choose to provide these benefits would not be affected.

    That's all there is to it.

  • Eddie T to "To: Acceptance But"
    Jan. 14, 2008 6:33 p.m.

    You wrote: "Do whatever you want behind closed doors, but don't take away my tax dollars to fund it! Insurance rates were high enough without adding STDs."

    STD rates would actually go down if anything. I mean the state is rewarding someone for being in a committed monogamous relationship. Do you mean to imply that homosexuals don't have sex without the express permission of the city government?

  • But if you were a
    Jan. 14, 2008 3:35 p.m.

    Homosexual you COULD NOT WBM5! It's interesting that people like to deny that homosexuals don't have as many rights! Homosexuals are attracted to the same gender like you are attrated to the opposite gender. That's a big difference! And further, they are NOT allowed the same rights as those couples.
    Whether or not you agree with the lifestyle doesn't matter. That is a fact!

  • What ever
    Jan. 14, 2008 3:10 p.m.

    San Lakeisco, Utah.

  • anonymous
    Jan. 14, 2008 2:34 p.m.

    Why is it assumed that any anti gay or negative statement on here is made by a member of the LDS faith? I'm sure that some of it is, but believe it or not there are people who live in SLC or Utah who are heterosexual, who are also opposed to this domestic partnership registry, and therefore may have actually posted some negative hateful comment on here. I know it's hard to believe, but there are some non mormon straights in Utah who also strongly disagree with this.

  • WBM5
    Jan. 14, 2008 12:53 p.m.

    Hey everyone has the same right to get married. No one is preventing anyone from this. Some people just don't want to play by the rules. You have the right to marry someone of the opposite sex: the same right I have and everyone else. No one has denied anyone from this. This has nothing to do with religion.

    Stop trying to change everyone. I don't wanted to be converted by you. I don't want to buy into your "religion", of what ever anyone does is ok. I don't have to accept what you say. I really wish people wouldn't be so 2 faced. STOP FORCING me to your way of thinking.

    People who want these benefits can get them. Go to work and provide for yourself! I don't sit around and demand others to give me something. I work for what I have and so did my ancestors and I appreciate what they did. And I don't mean Utah pioneers. I mean the people who have fought and died so I could join which church I wanted, I could live anywhere, I could vote, I could own land. And I could marry any person of the opposite sex!

  • RE: Buhler supporter
    Jan. 13, 2008 10:12 p.m.

    What does this have to do with religion. This issue is a nightmare for employers and business owners, and many others. Stop trying to paint the issue as Mormons against gays. If that was the case all the other states would have passed these measures without issue. Instead similar measures have been defeated in other states, including mine, that have very low LDS populations, but many that see how wrong these measures are, in so many ways.

  • Skeptical
    Jan. 13, 2008 5:07 p.m.

    Has anyone seen the movie Chuck and Larry? I wouldn't put it past some people to try to take advantage of the situation. I feel this is opening up a can of worms

  • Buhler supporter
    Jan. 13, 2008 4:48 a.m.

    The people of SLC made their choice, if you are an angry Mormon who lives in SLC who is upset about this, all I can tell you is that you had your chance and if all the Mormons had gone out to vote we could have won. I did my part, did you do yours?

    Also we can vote with our feet and with our money. We can just as easily move the financial and cultural center of Utah a few miles to the south to Sandy, at least there we won't get the locals angry because we have the gall not to live next to where we work. And the only tax on drivers who live outside of Sandy will be traffic tickets, which aren't nearly as bad as South Jordan.

  • sadness-
    Jan. 12, 2008 2:49 p.m.

    You have your god and the right to believe in it; and thus you can consider your marriage to be an institution of god.

    I don't believe in god and don't have to; marriage to me is one person sharing there life with another through legal (remind you church and state are supposed to be separate) bounds. So I can have children and raise them in a way that I see fits a humanistic perspective- this includes treating people with respect and dignity. Something that many utahns are proud enough to deny people of.

    I still can't believe that people are arrogant enough to think that one book, or in this case two books, should control their, and worst of all, my life. To me they are just books, poorly written ones at that.

    This country was founded on the idea of freedom, not god. Don't try to force me or people of humanistic lifestyles do believe in your crap. NO MATTER WHERE WE LIVE! You sure don't see us doing it to you- we are merely trying to live our lives, and you don't see people of alternate lifestyles criticizing you for being socially regular.


  • Intolerance?
    Jan. 11, 2008 10:27 p.m.

    Quite frankly, I don't care who is gay, who is with who and what not. If I have a relationship with someone, I really don't care what others may think of it because in the end, it's between the two people anyways.

  • You Don't Get My Point?
    Jan. 11, 2008 5:33 p.m.

    There have been people above saying that being homosexual is like committing adultery. Adultry is cheating and homosexuality is who a person is attracted to. I think you have an issue of changing the subject when it is uncomfortable.
    You are also wrong about "liberal Christians". Our ranks are increasing, but you may not realize it. I guess it depends on what you say is liberal. Maybe I should say "thinking for ourselves" is increasing instead totally following a book that is thousands of years old. All the prophets had their strong points for their time, but not in every way for now.
    But I realize you will think what you like no matter what I say.
    Oh whatever you think about "Divorce Rates" which has nothing to do with this topic. I'm glad that you and your family has been lucky enough to not be affected by divorce. Good for you!
    Good Luck

  • How do you know they
    Jan. 11, 2008 5:22 p.m.

    Are not? The gay people I've known haven't told me one way or another whether they are for "plural marriage" or not! That may be because this is a different issue. Sure, some woman may be happy in those types of relationships, but not most. Every woman I know would not. And let's not forget all the problems that are within these types of relationships. These are separate issues than gay rights!
    I guess I am a "buffet Christian" and that's ok with me. Things that don't make sense in today's world anymore such as slavery, inequality to women, blood sacrifices and many more things (all in the Bible) are not part of my and probably your Christianity. Time to evaluate what things might be part of yours that doesn't make sense in today's world.

  • Agree with Equal Rights
    Jan. 11, 2008 4:24 p.m.

    To Those (Again)...Not all those practicing plural marriage are forced into it. If homosexuals want equal rights then they need to be tolerent and accepting of all unions.

  • madder than ??
    Jan. 11, 2008 4:22 p.m.

    Jimney Crickets man! How did I stumble onto a vile blog like this one. whewwwy! I have never seen so many rock throwing people in all my days of living. You guys couldn't possibly be a bunch of holier than thou deitys? No way!

    Have fun throwing mountains at each other. As for me, I will keep searching for a nice religion with nice people.

    Much of what you ALL say has little sense about it.

  • To Those (Again) again....
    Jan. 11, 2008 4:15 p.m.

    There are consenting adults in "plural marriages". Now if you want your rights as a homosexual, then don't be a bigot toward those that want more than one partner. Not all women are forced to enter into this practice.

  • No Personal Experience
    Jan. 11, 2008 3:53 p.m.

    So your scientific study, sampling friends and family is indicative of America? Few of my friends and family are divorced, therefore Americas must have a low divorce rate. Sounds like your study is a denunciation of the people you associate with. Bottom line, the 50% study was bogus and skewed to advocate a social agenda. Dont take my word for it, take the time to study it.

    As for being Christian, I find it ridiculous that you claim to be one and yet advocate behavior that has been rejected as sin since the beginning of Judeo Christian thought, by numerous scholars, priests, rabbis, prophets, etc. Just because some men/women advocate it as proper does not change its nature in the eyes of God. And there are not a lot of you (liberal Christians), and your numbers are dying.

    Personally, I dont care what you do. However, I have problems when you say we have to accept radical changes to the nucleus (traditional family) of a good society because you cant have special rights.

  • Wow!
    Jan. 11, 2008 3:51 p.m.

    You know what kills me? Is when I read these BUFFET CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS.

    For example " I AM CHRISTIAN AND I AM GAY?"

    Time out! Seriously time out. Buffet Christian you are!

    Marriage between a man and woman is sacred to God. Sexual deviations are unacceptabel to God. Its in your Bible and its in mine. Last time I checked the Bible, which was written by God's messangers HIS PROPHETS, contained GODS WORDS.

    I think Romans ( NEW TESTAMENT) says it pretty clearly.

    For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

    And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their aust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

    So tell me my BUFFET CHRISTIANS how can you do this? Yes we are all weak and fall short of the glory of God but to glory in your sin? For shame.

    It is wrong to SIN ( actively Gay). It is not wrong to be tempted.

  • Carol P. Warnick
    Jan. 11, 2008 3:07 p.m.

    We should keep in mind that laws are made by our state legislature which govern and protect the people of Utah. If you are concerned about what is happening in Salt Lake let your elected legislature people know of your feelings and when you do use your name. What concerns me in reading all these comments is that people haven't used their real names. If you feel strongly about something be willing to stand up and not be afraid to defend what you believe and not hide behind another name. I feel marriage is sacred. I don't condemn those who have sexual problems. But I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The Bible makes it clear it wasn't meant to be any different than that.

  • What's Next? Compassion?
    Jan. 11, 2008 3:01 p.m.

    The ignorant part of me says: What's next? Benefits for Drinking Partners, Gambling Partners, Sunday Golfing Partners? But the compassionate side of me that has seen: 1. That my gay cousin loves her partner just as much as I love my wife. 2. The outrageous costs that I pay for health coverage. That side of me says that perhaps we need to develop a system that allows these same-sex couples to get a break somehow. And not just same-sex couples, two (three, four, five, etc.)people who are healthy to join together in a group to get effective health care at a lower cost, because single coverage for one person (or one family for that matter) is ridiculously expensive. I do feel that if same-sex couples are allowed to get health-coverage together, that care for STD's aren't covered to encourage monogamy and safe-sex(If there is such a thing in a homosexual relationship).

  • To personal experience
    Jan. 11, 2008 2:43 p.m.

    Adultery is adultery = infidelity to one's spouse.
    Fornication is pre-marital.
    Homosexuality is homosexuality - we all know what that is.
    Lust is lust. Pornography is pornography and it's also infidelity or immorality (either by the viewer or by the participants).
    A pedofile is an abuser of children and there are many more terms that I could go into but don't need to. - - - A homosexual act isn't necessarily a homosexual as well because a heterosexual CAN commit homosexual acts. A Christian can do non-Christian acts and a non-Christian can do Christian acts. A homosexual act committed by an un-married person is what it is. It's not adultery because adultery is committed by one who is married. - - -So what??? I don't see your point. "people in biblical times" "didn't understand" isn't legit with me because a prophet of God like Moses or Abraham or a person like Jesus or Paul or Peter or John and so forth all ultimately said the same things and knew God. Evil has always been evil and good has always been good. Different commandments have been here at different times, but I don't understand your point.

    Jan. 11, 2008 1:58 p.m.

    To respondents of Hard Acceptance:

    "Dont forget that the Savior told the woman to go and sin no more."

    "It ought to be taken into consideration that Christ then said, "go thy way and sin no more"

    This is what Christ said to her, without ignorance taht she'll never sin again. Him, knowing every bit that she'll never NOT sin again did not discount His compassion and lack of comdemnation towards her, as this charge given by Him is not given to her through anything but His pure love.

    The feelings generated from Christians who readily wanted to take the role of Christ and Savior towards the "Gays", are not only crossing the line of their supposed superiority over their fellow beings, but are influenced under some grand delusions that they have event a hint of power to impose such judgements on their fellow sinners.

    They're your fellow sinners, just like you, sinners, no less, no more. And Christ doesn't care if you sin through your chosen poison that you've kept secret, or through the poison others have chosen that are exposed.

    Back to the same question

    Are you HIGHER than Christ, that you should condemn, when He does NOT

  • I have personal experience
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:43 p.m.

    That the divorce rate in the U.S. is around 50%. I'm sure it varies from study to study. But I've kept track of my family, friends and associates and it's close to that! And what does that do with gay people anyway? If they want to commit to one another they would be reinforcing those type of committed relationships.
    As far as the person above that thinks that being gay is a sin like committing are wrong. If you love a person (even if they are the same sex) and you commit only to them, that's not adultery. Adultery is ANYONE that has already comitted and is with another. You do have Biblical passages to back you up on homosexuality, but there are many who know that people in Biblical times didn't undertand this just like they didn't understand the evils of slavery and 2nd class citizenship of women.
    And by the way I am a Christian (among many Christians) who believes this.

    Jan. 11, 2008 12:43 p.m.

    It ought to be taken into consideration that Christ then said, "go thy way and sin no more". He didn't just sit there without calling the adulterous woman to repentance. Nor did he say in that occasion, "come follow me". It was one instance where he said, "go thy way" and "sin no more". In that sense it was a warning to her and a direct commandment. Don't harp on your own people either because you're one of them and you have just as much responsibility as anyone else and just as much capacity as anyone else in your church to live by the principles that you know to be right and that ultimately bring you the most happiness. The church you belong to has handicapped people in it (spiritually and physically). It has widows and people who are sick (spiritually and physically). You and your church's members are imperfect beings in a perfect organization with a perfect God who leads it. "As I have loved you, love one another." Christ told the adulterous woman to "go thy way and sin no more" because he loved her.

    Jan. 11, 2008 12:40 p.m.

    A little touchy arent you? People will disagree over a tic-tac-toe game, of course theyll disagree about a subject this hot. Dont forget that the Savior told the woman to go and sin no more. The scriptures are packed full with the message of forsaking sin as well as love and mercy. Remember, you are the light of the world, this is your chance to stand up and blaze not hunker down underneath the bushel. Christ sent his apostles out into the world to preach the gospel and call repentance and love, not acceptance, He never preached acceptance of sin. How does standing up for the sacredness of marriage alienate me from the body of Christ? You advocate the gospel yet you will not defend it and even go so far as to turn it around and say we must embrace sin. We must be reading from different Bibles. I dont advocate violence towards those who dont agree with me. I dont want them silenced. Please dont infer, because I disagree, that I hate.

  • Rainbow Destroyer
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:25 p.m.

    I never said you have to sit and maintain silence, sit up and shout, thats what makes America great, just keep in mind I have as much right. Me being Christian does not force you to maintain silence. That idea is absurd as evident by your rants. Inalienable rights and equality before God is a Christian notion, keep that in mind when youre crying about squelching speech. Im not forcing any of your rights away. I just dont think you should have special rights.

    As pointed out by an earlier post, the 50% divorce rate is a myth. The study compared the number of marriages in one year to the number of divorces for the same year. To use the number of divorces for couples who have been married for numbers of years will skew your data. I cant post a URL but you can google it, it wont take long. Michael Medved wrote an article about it as well as others.

    Christians wont disappear and we outnumber you 100s to 1 so you deal with it.

  • Franky
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:50 a.m.

    I may not be too comfortable with the policy, but I too am glad to see a Politician follow through with a pre-election promise. And if the majority of voters elected him then even better to see the local voice being heard. I can respect that entirely.

  • O.K. "Rainbow Wrecker"
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:33 a.m.

    Don't let this law bother you then. And may I suggest you get your statistics right. 50% divorce rate is very real! It's interesting how people that don't want to see the truth twist issues to meet their own phobias. I might also suggest looking for help accepting the "real world". In it, we have a large variety of people. This is not going to change (gay people and others aren't going to disappear) and you should learn how to deal with it!

  • Anonymous
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:27 a.m.

    To Ing,

    You stated,"Why do so many people want a *secular* government to do what they think God wants? The place where everyone agrees on what God wants is a church congregation (or maybe Iran), not a democratic republic".

    Maybe you missed God's teachings in regards of the free agency that He had given you? Is that just hearsay, or is that something He had endowed upon every creed on earth?

    Perhaps you're not happy with God's decision to make men as a free agent, and you wish to fix God's mistake?

  • To Rainbow Wrecker
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:21 a.m.

    You stated, "Please dont try and guilt me into believing that being a Christian and loving my neighbor requires me to meekly sit and maintain silence as you try to force radical change to the community I live in."

    Huh! Yet you being a "Christian" forces others who are not of your way of thinking to meekly sit and maintain silence, and try to force away rights that our God given and constitutinal rights in the community I live in.

    Who do you think you are that you have feel you are required, and others don't???? Diss!!!

    Jan. 11, 2008 11:12 a.m.

    The law of the bible states that, light attracts light, and darkness attracts darkness. This law is not and will not deviate, no matter who you are, or what one's beliefs maybe.

    Therefore, for those LDS members who are so bigotted and indignantly self-righteous, are now coming to the fore on this issue brought forth by Becker, then it's no wonder that the LDS church will continue to attract the crap (or darkness) that belies and accompanies such actions and attitudes.

    I am truly embarrased and ashamed that I joined the LDS church, to be amongst those who would actually, gladly, and with righteous contempt, throw that stone that Christ had offered to those who are free of sin, even though, they would've lived the law to kill that woman adulterer/prostitute.

    You may not literally throw a stone, but your words and your ill willed hearts are just as damaging to the very Christ whom you professed to follow.

    Remember, He felt the very pain you had executed upon Him by your darkness within your mind.

    Christ said to the woman,"Neither do I condemn thee".

    Are you HIGHER than Christ, that you should condemn, when He does NOT?

  • Re: So Sad
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:12 a.m.

    My heart goes out to you. I dont think you need to feel this way. There are a lot of good people in Utah along with some yahoos (on both sides). If I meet you in the street, Id give you props and tip my hat. What you do on your own time and in your house, I dont care too much about. My problem is that this issue is now public and youre asking for my acceptance of a behavior that I believe to be wrong. Much love to you from me, but I cant back down because this issue is bigger than just us. Your neighbor in Christ.

  • Great and Spacious
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:10 a.m.

    Welcome to the "great and spacious building"...err I mean Salt Lake City.

  • Reality vs. teachings
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:05 a.m.

    Have you ever noticed when you read old writings you find things that people used to be as "evil" or a "sin" can be common place today?
    There are many things, but one of them has to do with equal rights for women. People thought of women as lesser than a man and so they said the "God" made certain rules about them.
    Why is it so hard to realize that gay people are in the same type of situation? They were not understood for thousands of years so "God" made rules in some writings. Some people don't undertand gay people still today so they write about it warning others of the "evil" that is coming upon us.
    Sorry, your "prophecy" like this doesn't interest me or much of the world now. Gay people will (and are)getting their rights like everybody else. Deal with it and get yourself into the 21st century.

  • Word
    Jan. 11, 2008 11:04 a.m.

    The Bible is not ambiguous in regards to the topic at hand. Eph. 5:5, 1 Timothy 1:10, Heb. 13:4, Revelations 21:8, 22:15, - The word adultery is not an ambiguous word - it means what it means - "unclean" is not an ambiguous word. Jesus Christ compared planting seeds to levels of heaven. Some fell by the wayside, and were eaten by birds, others feel onto stone that didn't have enough soil so they grew at first and then died because they 'had no root', others fell into thorns that choked them. Some, however, fell into good ground and became fruitfull. - - - Jesus compared the seed to his word and the soil to faith and works. He explained the parable clearly. Mathew Chapter 13 can be read by anyone and should be read. Hermeneutics is the study of the interpretation of scripture, but the scriptures are very straight-forward, and some things are simply put plainly and there is no ambiguity about them. I hope to all a good day in doing what you know you need to do.

  • Ing
    Jan. 11, 2008 10:33 a.m.

    To "Skimmer": Good point about the democracy/republic distinction; but if you really want to get technical, you should probably say we live in a representative democracy, not just a republic. The rest of your post makes no sense. If you think SLC is on its way to becoming one of the most wicked cities in the world, you need to get out more (or maybe watch the news).

    To "What?": You make a good point. I don't know that Becker is pandering to anybody, but his proposal isn't likely to go anywhere if it's prohibited in the state constitution, no matter how much sense it makes. Someone will challenge it, the courts will rule according to the constitution, and lots of time and money will be wasted.

    There's an amazing amount of nonsense in some comments. "If we all became gay" and "I could be partners with my cat" and "God says...." Becker's proposed ordinance won't make anyone gay who wasn't already. Why do so many people want a *secular* government to do what they think God wants? The place where everyone agrees on what God wants is a church congregation (or maybe Iran), not a democratic republic.

  • To Those (Again)
    Jan. 11, 2008 10:31 a.m.

    That consider "plural marriage" the same issue of gay people wanting to committ. IT IS NOT THE SAME. Plural marriage involved three or more has a whole set of different problems it has been shown to cause. There are some good, kind people in I'm sure. But let's look at all the evidence that it causes hurt for most women, abuse for some women and young girls, under-age marriages and financial hardship! These are not the same issues we are talking about between TWO consenting ADULTS.

  • Proud Salt Laker
    Jan. 11, 2008 10:10 a.m.

    Thanks, Mayor Becker! My husband and I are both thrilled that our choice for mayor is already following through on an important campaign promise. We are so happy for all of those this registry will help. I'm proud to be a Salt Laker today!!

  • Rainbow Wrecker
    Jan. 11, 2008 10:01 a.m.

    I don't agree with this stupid law so I'm a homophobe. I can disagree, stand up for what I believe is right, and still show people respect. Please dont try and guilt me into believing that being a Christian and loving my neighbor requires me to meekly sit and maintain silence as you try to force radical change to the community I live in.

    The 50% divorce rate is a myth that continues to be passed around like a bad version of the flu. Traditional marriage is a time-honored institution that has served our society well. Its not marriages fault that some people cant live up to its ideals. Watering it down or undermining it in any way has dire affects on a society, ask Scandinavia.

    The rights that this law grants can be easily accomplished with a decent lawyer. This is another ruse to try and get me to accept homosexual unions. If you want to be gay, cool, do your thing, but dont try and force me to accept it or tell me that its your right. Today the Domestic Partner Registry, in five years marriage. Time to draw a line in the sand and stand watch.

  • Yuck
    Jan. 11, 2008 9:11 a.m.

    icky stuff.

  • What?
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:57 a.m.

    Why is it that no one seems to care that this whole proposal is unconstitutional? You're all arguing about something that is never going to happen because the Utah Constitution forbids it. Becker is just trying stir things up and pander to his liberal base. You're just taking is bait and wasting your breath (or key strokes anyhow).

    Utah Constitutional Amendment 3 to the Utah state constitution designed to define marriage in the state of Utah. It passed in the November 2 2004 election.

    The amendment reads as follows:

    1. Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.

    2. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

  • skimmer
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:46 a.m.

    Just skimmed through 140 comments. Same arguments we hear all the time. Just a couple thoughts in response to some of them.

    We live in a Republic, not a democracy as someone stated above.

    Gays have just as much right to marry as anyone else, just not other gays. A hetero male cannot marry another male, why should a homo male? In fact, a single homo male has more right to marry than a married hetero male, since the latter is already married he can't marry again.

    Just glad for amendment 3.

    I sort of remember rumors of early LDS church leaders prophecying that SLC would become one of the most wicked cities in the world; looks like that prophecy is well on its way to being fulfilled.

  • Pamela
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:36 a.m.

    As an active memeber of the LDS Church I for one welcome this domestic-partnership registry. I whole heartedly agree that marriage should be between one man and one woman, but I beleive that everybody who is a consenting adult that wants to be commited to each other should have the basic rights that this registry is referring to, ie medical benifits, hospital visitation, medical coverage etc. Wake up Utah you need to love your neighbor as yourself be kind to each other, if you follow what President Hinkley is trying to teach us in his book "Standing up for Something" you would all learn to quietly stand up for your beliefs, but also respect other people for having different beliefs and lifestyles. We would all do well both mormon and non-mormon to respect each other.

  • ski house
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:27 a.m.

    I live in Chicago and own a vacation place in Deer Valley so I visit Utah pretty often. I never understood why Mormons are so primitive in their views of women, gays and minorities. I think the LDS Church is intentionally creating fear of difference so folks keep tithing.

    Wake up Utah, it's the 21st century. Or do you enjoy LDS being a national joke forever?

  • Liberace
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:02 a.m.

    What I get a kick out of is those individuals who want to be both gay and Christian. If they can pull that off I think that would be the newest, hippest thing to be. yay

  • Birdman
    Jan. 11, 2008 8:01 a.m.

    First, thank-you Jtandaj for your endorsement of the LDS community as Christians. We all appreciate that.
    Second, why are you naming them as the outspoken group bad-mouthing Mayor Becker and this proposal? Are they an easy target for you, or do you have your own prejudices that need to be considered? I've noticed that many of the comments read here come from those outside of Utah who have no affiliation to the state or this "bigoted religion" of which you refer.

  • lawabiding
    Jan. 11, 2008 7:34 a.m.

    I am not a bigot - I am a law abiding citizen. Marriage is a God given right between a man and a woman. Homosexuals, Polygamists, etc. are breaking the law. They will try to place blame on those who uphold the law because they know in their hearts they are breaking the law and cannot/don't want to admit it. THey will use every excuse in the book to promote their unlawful way of living. They were not born that way - they made a choice to live that way - wrong choices bring consequences.

  • jeanmarie
    Jan. 11, 2008 5:38 a.m.

    This works for elderly cousins, too, who have lost their spouses and need to live together in order to survive on limited incomes!!! Yea!

  • simple truth 2
    Jan. 11, 2008 3:01 a.m.

    Compare the responses here to those responding to Robinson's "Duck if You're Mormon" article elsewhere on this site.
    The hypocrisy of the LDS community, which only objects to bigotry when it is directed against Mormons, helps explain why LDS are the most despised group in America.

  • Jayson
    Jan. 11, 2008 2:22 a.m.

    As a faithful member of the LDS church all I can say is there are some real knuckle heads allowed to post there substanially bigoted views on here. Also if the state constitutional ammendment cited towards the top actually got passed I can say with certainty that it will at some point be deemed unconsitutional based on the merits that the founding fathers never intended for the rights of any individuals to be trampled on purely due to their sexual orientation.

    To actually believe that just because someone chooses a life style not in line in with the teachings of Christ should somehow make them ineligible for certain earthly things is just about the dumbest thing I have ever heard. But hey whatever, I hope you all enjoy explaining to your creator why you not only hated the sin but also chose to hate the sinner as well.

  • hopeful
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:58 a.m.

    Ralph always told his audiences that advancing human rights and seeking social justice was a top priority. He also made it clear that this was something he would do as soon as he was elected.

    We, the people, knew this and voted accordingly.

    Salt Lakers should feel terrific knowing we are a unique, closely knit and diverse group, working together to heal and repair our city. Once again it feels good to live here. Thanks to all of you who voted for Ralph, and to Ralph for keeping his promise.

  • Bigotry?
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:47 a.m.

    The definition of Bigotry is " stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. "

    Is it wrong to be a bigot? Not if your bigotry is in line with positive law and NATURAL LAW.

    Truly rational humans have come to the understanding that there are absolutes in life. I know there is absolute good and there is absolute evil. Our actions either lean toward one or the other. If it wrong to be a bigot then toward an action which you know to be wrong?

    I am not expressing that we should be un-neighborly to those who choose poorly, but I certain do not believe we should cheerfully accept such behavior as normal or something we want in society.

    I suppose someone will argue there is no God and hence no absolutes, but if you truly understood the complexity of the solar system and life then you would have to at least accept a SUPREME BEING of absolutism.

    Plato, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Voltaire, and many men more intelligent than I rationally believed in God. Is your unbelief more logically founded than thier belief? Prove it.

    Amen for ammendement 3!

  • Equal Rights
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:12 a.m.

    If homosexuals want to be able to marry and have the same rights as hetrosexuals then we need to give a voice to those who want to practice "plural marriage". They aren't hurting anybody. They have chosen, just as gay people, to live that lifestyle. If a woman or a man wants to enter into a healthy, loving relationship with more than one partner, what right do we have to take that away from them? If we are going to go against the natural way then everyone should have the right to live the lifestyle they choose.

  • thank you
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:11 a.m.

    Jason, you are a beacon of what a true LDS and god fearing person should believe.

    That regardless of god, people are equal. I wish your fellow members and other bigoted individuals could recognize the double standards they live in and open their eyes to the reality of this situation. Nothing has been done to them by this, only a step toward treating humans, well, as such.

  • Anonymous
    Jan. 11, 2008 1:08 a.m.

    I can't believe the bigotry. I can't believe people consider being homosexual as a struggle. I can't believe that you were willing to put STD's, your tax dollars, and homosexual in the same sentence.

    What a sad world in utah, and elsewhere, that all beautiful people on this planet must abide by your god- elicited in a book poorly written thousands of years ago.

    I can count on my evolved fingers the double standards here:
    first and foremost, the god mentioned in the "bible" and "book of mormon" loves all of his sheep.
    second, no sin is greater than another other than murder (how many sins have you repented for today)
    third, this country is based on freedom; especially freedom of religion, which means god or no god.

    today is bittersweet. People in SLC are gaining necessary steps towards being treated equally- People are hateful, spiteful, and bigoted towards a group of people that has absolutely NOTHING to harm them.

    self righteousness and hate is alive and well in Utah

  • shocked
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:59 a.m.

    I am both shocked and astonished that this back biting bigotry has been allowed to continue. The DMN claims these comments are monitored for abusive and offensive content. I fail to see how a good deal of the comments above have not fallen into that category.

    I am truly sad that we in the LDS community are so poorly representing ourselves here. Whatever belief one or another of us hold should not in turn deny basic rights to others because they believe differently. For as much as we would like the stereotypes of our religion to be looked passed and for people to truly understand who we are and respect us for our beliefs, we too quickly jump to stereotype, ostracize, and berate those around us whom are different.

  • capn
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:39 a.m.

    i dont think that speaking i'll of the homosexual community helps. i am not of homosexual orientation, but i cannot help but feel sad for for the homosexual human beings that are reading this. the hatred that some of you have portrayed in your comments, i hope that those of you speaking i'll of the gay community are not associated with the lds church, are you? love thy neighbor as thyself.

    -jason, a member of the church of jesus christ of laterday saints-

  • Harry
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:38 a.m.

    Finally! Dumbledore can apparate in SLC with Larry Craig through the port key in the City & County building's restroom and be registered!

  • Getting Old
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:19 a.m.

    Ok, yes, there are more pressing issues in our state. Unfortunately, most of those issues are left to the legislature to resolve. And of course, they are more concerned with repressing homosexuals and ensuring that people can carry guns on campus. Ensuring equal rights for the people of this great city is one of the many reasons that I voted for Mayor Becker. THANK YOU!!!!

  • TO: He that is Free from Sin
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:17 a.m.

    1st: HUH??!!??
    2nd: No, I'm not, but do you have to fork out your hard earned dough for mine? That's what this is really about!

  • MY SLC
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:16 a.m.

    I know a woman: and she has a new man married to her every 2 years and this has been going on for years. I don't want this life style around my kids.

  • To: Acceptance But..
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:15 a.m.

    I agree whole heartedly! Do whatever you want behind closed doors, but don't take away my tax dollars to fund it! Insurance rates were high enough without adding STDs.

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:14 a.m.

    Concerned: Don't worry; even gay people are smart enough to figure out the arduous and complicated process by which babies are conceived.

    If, as you fear, Salt Lake City's domestic-partner registry turns everybody into homosexuals and causes Utah's fertility rate to plummet to dangerous levels, there are ways we could cope.

  • abigail
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:06 a.m.

    Hurry, LDS church and build those high rise apts downtown. When they are completed, we will have classy people living downtown once again. Maybe we can take the Capital City back and clean things up.

    I know a gay man and he has a new man living with him about every 6 months and this has been going on for years. I don't want this life style around my kids.

  • Look on Ebay
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:03 a.m.

    Maybe SLC can find a good handbasket.

  • Liberace
    Jan. 11, 2008 12:00 a.m.

    Amen Concerned.
    By the way, I'm quite interested in entering into a domestic partnership with my cat. She has a warm personality but can't pay for her own health care. (no opposable thumbs you see).
    Do you think there is anyway I can lobby for some benefits. It's only natural don't you think? We deserve it. Two consenting creatures like us. Sure it's technically not a biological match, but I didn't have a choice in how I fell in love! (and, also I can't afford a vet).
    Also I think I am a wonderful example for children. Im sure there are many out there who are like me and were confused and awkward growing up (like every adolecent) and could be easily persuaded that they are diffenent, and diverse. Like me!

  • Acceptance but...
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:58 p.m.

    Sure, I accept that there are those who want to choose a certain lifestyle. Fine. But why do my taxes always have to fund that? Was there a vote? Heck no! It'd never pass!

    Jan. 10, 2008 11:58 p.m.

    He that is free of sin, let him throw the first judgment.

    There are many of you who think you are so righteous when in the eyes of others, yet, behind closed doors, the Lord knows your sins, which He paid with His sweat of blood?

    Which of you who thinks you are so clean and pure, yet your hearts are darkened with stains of sins that He felt your sins when nails were hammered to His hands and feet?

    Which of you, who the world never sees your wrong doings, yet, your real colors have been known by the Lord all along when He had to plead, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do".

    Do you have a forgiving heart, if these "sinners" have offended you? Do you have a loving soul, if these sinners have wronged you?

    Do you only love those who love you?

    Did Christ love you because you are not a sinner?

    Did He die for you because you had obeyed Him?

    Had you lived all that He commanded you?

    Is this who you think Christ wanted you to think and feel to "sinners"?

    Are YOU free from SIN?

  • Interesting
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:55 p.m.

    They said that Becker was the only one that wouldn't be controlled by the LDS church, but which candidates won't be controlled by the ACLU?

  • Good idea!
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:54 p.m.

    Promoting gay marriage (I know this is not actually gay marriage but we all know it is an obvious first step in that direction) will hopefully help decrease overpopulation in the state. And, such a couple's inability to have offspring likewise bodes well for the future of the state. You go Avenues!

  • Hmmm
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:53 p.m.

    I'm still waiting for the punch line to this joke.

  • Stupid
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:52 p.m.

    Stupid hurts. SLC didn't learn from Rocky and now the hurt is going to be in morals and the pocketbook.

  • Homophobe?
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:50 p.m.

    I love how people throw around the word "homophobe" as if it were a fear. I don't fear homosexuals. It's just wrong on so many levels. Must have been a homosexual that coined the term to feel better.

  • I Love Mayor Becker
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:41 p.m.

    Mormons are a peculiar people: One day complaining about being a second-class citizen, the next day forcing a group they hate to be second-class citizens. Isn't there a parable in the bible about that?

  • Nature
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:38 p.m.

    The Bible is misquoted (love one another) in defense of supporting homosexuality.

    Loving someone doesn't mean supporting their lifestyle if one doesn't agree with it. As someone with homosexual tendencies, I can love heterosexuals by being kind even though I don't live their livestyle.

    Nevertheless, I can see that society must promote that which is life giving for it to go on. History, nature, and the design of the human body suggest that homosexuality is not the way to go for survival into the future. Therefore, one can conclude that putting one's desires second to that which is best for the future of all is the wise thing to do. That is why I disagree with governments that support homosexual lifestlyes by allowing them the same support as lifegivers. I can still ride on the same bus and compete for jobs and vote along with everyone else because my rights are already protected by the constitution. Just because the government doesn't recognize my lifestyle the same as marriage, doesn't mean I am less or have less rights. I'm not married in the way that would promote life and the future as a whole, so why should I selfishly ask more?

  • Truth in a sea of doubt
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:34 p.m.

    Thank you for the Words from the Proclamation on the family. As we vacilate back and forth from different ideas, perspectives, and ideologies, this rings loud and clear what the truth is, and concequences of our actions. It is amazing how plain and simple the Lord's words are in comparison to the philosophies of the world. I hope that my family will live in a community that reflects these values.

  • Nice
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:29 p.m.

    If I marry my dog should I take it to AltaView when it has a baby? Does it now have a C-section option? How do I divorce my dog to marry my cat or is it necessary?

    Rocky II is what this is. What is the estimate when he will completely stop working and start protesting? 2 months, 1year? any takers?

  • MY SLC
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:29 p.m.

    To My Two Cents!

    Give me a break! The only reason 2 people are together is to produce? Sure! What color is the sky in your world? My partner and I are home owners, live in downtown SLC, support the arts etc and vote! Go live in your own little piece of Utah that is so conformable and safe for you. Leave the Salt Lake people alone!

  • In Response to Anonymous
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:28 p.m.

    In response to your quote:

    "It doesn't matter that it won't hurt the institution of marriage or that your neighbor is a good neighbor. Why should our tax money be used to pay benefits for someone's gay partner of the month? There's nothing prohibiting them from getting their own job with benefits. They aren't staying home to raise a family."

    The reason why is because gay's partner tax money is used to pay benefits to your divorces, your domestic abuses, and your child's schooling. After all, they don't have kids, why are they paying for yours?

  • Concerned
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:24 p.m.

    How would it be to belong to a movement or a society that the vary nature of it is in a self-destruct mode. If we all became homosexuals and didn't reproduce we would eventually become extinct.

  • My Two Cents!
    Jan. 10, 2008 11:00 p.m.

    The family unit is the basic unit of society. Society has an interest in the family. For thousands of years what formed the basic building block of society? THE FAMILY! From families we have neighborhoods. From neighborhoods we have villages, towns cities. From Cities we have a state and from many states a NATION. Any law that does not encourage society to propogate itself ( have children) in not in the interest of society. This is why most states ban abortion after a certain time because THEY ARE INTERESTED IN PERSERVING LIFE. Deviant behavior such as homosexuality should not be supported in anyway because it does not stand for the propograting of human life.

    But that having been said.... GOD CALLED IT ABOMINABLE BEHAVIOR. We can not support such behavior or anything like unto it. This nation will tremble and crumble some day and the lack of morality in all faucets of life will be one of the reasons why we will be thus smitten. All you of you who doubt will believe when you see the misery of which I speak.

  • Ing
    Jan. 10, 2008 10:55 p.m.

    Hmmm... Interesting that this conflicts with a state law prohibiting such things. Sounds like this could be a mess. Certainly it's got people fired up.

    However, I think it's a reasonable idea on its own merits. Here in Washington state where I live, domestic partners have benefits and such, but heterosexual couples aren't allowed to have domestic partner benefits--it's only for same-sex partnerships, which I think is just wrong, because it denies society's benefits to one group based on sexual orientation.

    At least Becker's proposal applies equally to everybody. I've gone back and forth on the issue of domestic partnerships and same-sex legal unions (or marriage, call it what you will) for a while, but I've decided it's a good thing.

    The freedom of religion guaranteed in the US Constitution means that any legitimate religion can marry who they want, how they want, or deny their rites to anyone if they want, so it doesn't take away the goodness of an LDS temple marriage, or anyone's marriage.

    Equal protection and benefits under the law, that's what it's really about.

  • WC
    Jan. 10, 2008 10:37 p.m.

    HEY SUBURBS! We are a liberal city with liberal values and will always elect liberal leaders. Get used to it.

  • You are very mis-informed
    Jan. 10, 2008 10:13 p.m.

    Sorry that as a young man you were approached by people that were not nice. But this can happen to heterosexuals as well as homosexuals (by each other). You are confusing one way of life by certain people's behavior and that is sad. If I was hurt by someone with certain characteristics I might tend to be cautious of others with those same characteristics, but that isn't reasonable or fair.
    I personally have gay friends. I am not gay myself, but I love them for their personalities and not for their sexual orientation.
    Nobody has "forced" the Psychiatric Association or anyone else to come up with their findings. And God loves all the same (despite what some religions and some books thousands of years old tells you) You need to get help for your bigotry and hatred.

  • Dh
    Jan. 10, 2008 10:13 p.m.

    I'll let God decide between right and wrong but my vote would be no on this topic. My belief is that this is wrong and I too have a right to my beliefs.

    Note that I have done no name calling. Please don't call me names. A "Homophobic" would be defined as one with a fear of homosexuals. I do not fear them, I disagree with their behavior. That is my right also.

  • John
    Jan. 10, 2008 9:49 p.m.

    Marriage is a religious institution, as it should be. In the eyes of God... To declare a domestic partner for purposes of hospital visitation, insurance, declaring publicly that two people are committed financially to one another has zero to do with marriage. Doesn't denigrade my marriage. If it denigrades yours, I am sorry for you.

  • To Ranger Gordon
    Jan. 10, 2008 9:43 p.m.

    "Just a thought" was simply making an analogy! Merry Christmas!

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 10, 2008 9:28 p.m.

    To Just a thought: If people think marriage is about nothing more than putting pegs in holes then the institution is in deep trouble indeed.

  • Just a thought
    Jan. 10, 2008 8:05 p.m.

    Square peg, round hole doesn't work. However, you can reshape things to make it work. You can't make a square peg and a square peg work ever, or two round holes either.

  • Andy Neilson
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:52 p.m.

    What about the rights of a child to have a Mother and a Father?

  • Begger
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:27 p.m.

    What is it like to be so right all the time.

    To be born in the right country
    To be born at the right time
    To be born to the right family
    To be born with the right sexual orientation
    To be born in the one true church

    What luck so many of claim over the rest of the world, yet you complain and whine like you are underpriviledged children, that can only think of preserving their perfect idolized world.

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:26 p.m.

    The Proclamation on the Family should put all arguments to rest once and for all that the LDS Church does not involve itself in politics.

  • Gays duck
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:22 p.m.

    I'd rather live by gay neighbors than homophobe bigots that make themselves known on this board.

    Weren't most of you whining yesterday in the comments section of "mormons duck" about you were being persecuted and made to be second class citizens? Aren't those saying those things about you using the bible also to come to their "moral" conclusions. They fear you, you fear gays.

    Perfect love casteth out all fear. Love one another.

  • The person that replied
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:21 p.m.

    to "so sad" is sad his or herself! We shouldn't compare apples to oranges. Loving someone (no matter what gender) is not a choice. Someone can choose to be celibate ...that is true. But when you say that something is a "sin" when you yourself can love (and consumate that love) with someone of the opposite sex (and not have it a sin) is hypocritical!

  • Re: Question?
    Jan. 10, 2008 7:18 p.m.

    If you build a car that goes forward when it is in reverse, and goes in reverse when it is in drive, is it the cars fault or the makers fault? If being gay is a genetic/metal defect, is it the persons fault or the makers fault? Should we blame the maker for the default? because the person didn't chose to have this genetic/mental defect?

  • Words from the proclamation
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:58 p.m.

    Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creators plan for the eternal destiny of His children.

    All human beingsmale and femaleare created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny.

    We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.

    We call upon responsible citizens (YOU and I) and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

    The LDS Church website has wonderful resources to help anyone struggling with same-gender attraction.

  • A Final Word
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:55 p.m.

    Everyone needs to remember that America, its separate States and every community are bound by the principles of democracy. Theocracy is the antithesis of democracy... evidenced by the history of the three great monotheistic religions (judaism, christianity and Islam). America is a DEMOCRACY, not a theocracy (though many evangelicals try to have us believe otherwise), therefore the issue of domestic partnerships vs marriages is a purely secular issue that have NOTHING to do with religion or personal belief!

    Where the law is concerned in or democracy, marriage has nothing to do with religion per se,' but has everything to do with a principle called the rule of 'contract.' Interesting! Partnerships, whether business or coupling, are also 'contracts.' The courts actually approach a marriage divorce as a partnership (i.e. division of property (real and personal) and income (i.e. alimony) issues), with the exception of children custody issues. Domestic partnerships that end in 'divorce' would simply be handled in a manner akin to a business partnership division of property and income factors, etc.

    Why a secular democracy? Because it's the only social contract with its citizenry that upholds America's Bill of Rights - that defined individual rights under our secular democracy.

  • Question?
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:52 p.m.

    It the registry Equal Rights? or is the registry catering to a genetic/mental defect?

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:46 p.m.

    To Please Explain III, who wrote: "If I were gay, I'd want my neighbor to tell me to repent."

    No, you wouldn't. Believe me, you really wouldn't. Please, save your breath.

  • To So Sad
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:43 p.m.

    You can love someone without being gay. Love isn't something that gratifies itself - it's something that gives. Intimate love between a husband and wife is healthy for them. I know a man who was married in a heterosexual relationship but lived a private life of homosexuality. He has done unspeakable amounts of damage to his wife. Pain isn't exclusive to anyone whether they're homosexual or heterosexual. Infidelity happens to heterosexuals. Children have a right to be raised and fed and provided for and nourished and nurtured and loved by a mother and a father. "Low morals hurt us the same way high morals improve a society". I couldn't agree more. If you have gay problems, get help, or help yourself and get out of that world. It's not the right world to be in. The great thing is that you can change your life for the better. We all can, and the mayor has too much spare time on his hands to be dealving into these issues. There are issues of far greater importance to this state that deserve and require MUCH MORE attention.

  • More pressing matters
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:28 p.m.

    I've got no problems with the proposal, but aren't there more pressing matters

  • To "Goodness"
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:25 p.m.

    What happens when heterosexual couples break up? Sadness. What makes you think that other couples would be any different? Why does that matter?
    Gay people who want to live with someone already do so. It just makes sense that they have other rights like the rest of us.
    It is interesting how people try and use their non-understanding of issues to compare them to incomparable things. For instance: Some time ago I read a comment from someone who compared marrying his or her dog or marrying multiple partners to marrying a gay person. Well, my answer to this is: We are talking about PEOPLE, we are talking about TWO. Hope this clears things up!

  • One word...
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:23 p.m.


  • surprised
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:20 p.m.

    We should immediately recognize that low morals hurt us the same way high morals improve a society.

    Let's wake up and smell the hot cocoa.

  • Stenar
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:19 p.m.


  • So Sad
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:17 p.m.

    It makes me so sad to know that I live around so many people that hate me for something that doesn't even concearn them. Love is love no matter which way you swing it. I am a human being and I have the right to love whoever I want and I also deserve the right to have the same "privelages" as others! This is a wonderful move by mayor Becker! He is showing that humans, no matter, gay or straight or black or white or catholic or mormon deserve to be treated like human beings. For all of you who don't understand, this is a sad sad day for you.

  • To Please Explain III
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:10 p.m.

    Hypocrite is a person who tells somebody to do something that they themselves are guilty of. "Love thy neighbor" is what you were trying to say. The actual words that you were quoting are translated as "love thy neighbor as thyself". I'm not gay. If I were gay, I'd want my neighbor to tell me to repent.

  • Re: Please Read
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:09 p.m.

    If God was willing to send she-bears to kill kids for making fun of a prophets bald head, the gay people are in trouble!!!

  • john
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:04 p.m.

    I always knew that Becker was a gay man, now he shows it. It was the gays who voted for him and now he pays them back. What a sick society.

  • Jon
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:01 p.m.

    Different mayor, same polarizing influence. Perhaps we should put class sizes before social engineering.

  • Zoobies = hypocrit???
    Jan. 10, 2008 6:00 p.m.

    Calling people in Provo zoobies doesn't make somebody a hypocrit. Somebody would be a hypocrit if they said gays should get benefits, but zoobies shouldn't.

  • Please Read
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:57 p.m.

    Regaurdless if this passes or not it should be a red flag!

    Homosexuality is a bad thing. God lives and he condemns this and all other sin. Whether people choose to obey him or not does not change the fact that it is wrong and should be stopped by the individual.

    How has praying in public schools become illegal while sexual perversion is accepted?

    People don't take a stand.

    There needs to be more speaking openly of the things of God, boldly and in the Spirit of love. More men need to take a stand protect thier families from the evils of our day, and yes. Homosexuality is evil. The good thing is that people can abandon homosexuality, and through Jesus Christ become clean from this act.

    If we really are "one nation under God" why are their so many who reject his plain and precios teachings.

  • Re: Re: Please Explain II
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:56 p.m.

    How does calling people in Provo zoobies make somebody a hypocrit. The question in the original post was would you rather live by a gay couple or the zoobies in provo?

    Is zoobies an offensive term? Not PC?

    If the person said, "zoobies shouldn't be allowed to x, y, or z because they are zoobies" that would be hypocritical. Calling somebody a zoobie doesn't make somebody a hypocrit. Calling a homosexual gay doesn't make somebody a hypocrit? Explain?

  • Just thinking....
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:53 p.m.

    Two questions come to mind:
    1st: Is there a limit to the number of domestic partnerships that one person can enter into? (The FLDS just might like to move their head quaters to Salt Lake depending on the answer...)

    2nd: Is there a minimum age required for a person to enter into a "Domestic Partnership"? If not, Warren Jeff's might like to move his appeal's trial to Salt Lake... ;(


  • Just thinking....
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:47 p.m.

    So, a couple of questions come to mind...

    1st: Is there a limit to the number of "domestic partnerships" one person can enter into? (The FLDS might like this idea and move from Southern Utah to Salt Lake.)

    2nd: Is there a minimum "age of consent" for someone to enter into a "domestic partnership"? (Warren Jeff's might be interested in that)...


  • Stephanie
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:46 p.m.

    You missed the fact that Becker won by a LANDSLIDE because he is a LIBERAL, the residents of SLC are not held hostage- are politically active and that's exactly why Becker won. Like it or not he represents the MAJORITY of SLC residents! unlike it's neighboring cities, SLC is not CONSERVATIVE!
    Thanks again Mayor Becker!

  • George M.
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:45 p.m.

    Does this violate the Utah Constitution's rule that marriage is only between one man and one woman. I realize that they aren't getting "married." But I wonder!!!

  • Re: Please Explain II
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:41 p.m.

    You're the person who dubbed the folks in Provo "zoobies" in the first place hypocrit. And yes I do consider that a sin and if you don't believe there is such a thing as a sin that you believe there is no evil and if you believe there is no evil then there is no good and if you believe these things then you have absolutely no moral compass to live by. My heart goes out to those who struggle with same gender attraction as does my heart go out to any struggler. My heart goes out to alcoholics and drug addicts but I think there should be laws that help them change. My heart even goes out to the people in Provo who you called 'zoobies' - - imagine that - -

  • Stephanie
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:37 p.m.

    Where do these Mayors come from and why do they keep coming to Salt Lake City? Excellent point Joe on the silent majority in Salt Lake City that ensured this would happen. A vocal minority is more powerful that a silent majority. It is time for the residents of Salt Lake City to wake up. You don't have to be held hostage to liberal idealogues, looking for photo opporunities or praise for their "courage" and "vision." This ordinance does not represent the views or values of a majority of the residents of this state, LDS or not. It is time to stand up against the insanity!

    No single person, no matter what his or her title, or how important he is, should be able to unilaterally redefine the institution of marriage. That is exactly what this ordinance is designed to do. Anyone that tells you differently is selling you something. Right now Mr. Becker's idea is to simply establish a registry. The next step will be to try to force businesses and organizations to offer benefits to those who are a part of the registry.

  • YEAH!!!
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:36 p.m.


  • Cost of marriage
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:31 p.m.

    If the purpose is to make this equal to marriage, that's fine by me, but, partnerships should also have the right to pay the marriage penalty with their taxes, pay a fee to the government for their union, and have to wait a year for a finalized 'separation' just like us married folks...

  • RangerGordon
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:31 p.m.

    If people really are concerned that the domestic partnership registry will be abused by unscrupulous heterosexuals, then allowing gays to marry ought to solve the problem.

    After all, marriage laws are never abused by unscrupulous people for the sake of, oh, say, health benefits or citizenship.

  • Party Pooper
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:28 p.m.

    This is DOA -- the state legislature will shut it down in a flash. Chill people, one proposal does not a Rocky II make.

  • Re: To Please Explain
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:22 p.m.

    How does having gays in the neighborhood confuse? Are you confused about whether you are gay?

    Gay people are also the people in the constitution and are entitled to pursue happiness. There are a lot worse ways to spend our tax money then on domestic partner's health benefits.

    Hiding your bigotry behind straw man arguments doesn't work. Love they brother. Love the sinner (or what you consider to be a sinner).

  • Joe Schmoe
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:16 p.m.

    To the Slilent Majority Residents of Salt Lake City......You are getting what you did not vote against in November! Good for you!

  • cmon people
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:13 p.m.

    No one said anything bad about having gay couples around. The problem is giving them unconstitutional rights. Marriage is between a man and a woman according to the Utah constitution. Gay people are normally good clean neighbors but they do not deserve any legal rights any more than if I wanted to marry my cousin or dog or another wife. If you include one, you need to include all. Oh and by the way 50% of marriages don't fail. That rate is determined by the number of yearly marriages divided by the number of yearly divorces. Those divorces include the people that were married all those other years. The real divorce rate is closer to 15% (which still isn't good) ciao!

  • To Please Explain
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:01 p.m.

    Go to San Francisco or live with it and be happy about it. If you don't like being surrounded by Hindus, don't move to India. Yes, having gay neighbors would be disruptive - it confuses, and especially in this case, it's not right that there be benefits. I don't want my tax $'s going to something like that - period -. I'm "the people" our constitution speaks of and 'benefits' in this case are entirely un-necessary. Otherwise it's another great way that our government vomits our tax $'s into society.

  • Josh
    Jan. 10, 2008 5:01 p.m.

    So, it has been ruined for everybody else. This can be abused to where anything goes. Polygamous relationships should register and so should everybody else who wants the advantages of being married. So, where is the limit? They need to keep the age of consent at least. I am a strong supporter of that. Even if all else appears to be eroding, age of consent laws should get stricter or at least stay the same. We are becoming like Europe. I lived there for years because my father worked abroad for the government most of my life.

  • james stowe
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:58 p.m.

    What a great day in SLC. Finally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    GO MAYOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    DON't listen to the LDS religious folks!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Enter Name
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:57 p.m.

    Woo-hooo! This is the first step back towards legalized polygamy in Utah. And it's about itme too. This time we'll just call them "domestic partnerships" or some other such non-offensive title instead of "plural marriages" and we can all circumvent the bounds of decency and civilized behavior. Way to go gay dudes and dudettes. Lead the way.

    Gotta love slippery slopes, eh?

  • Slippery Slope
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:54 p.m.

    First it is domestic partnerships. Next, it is multiple partners. Before you know it, people will be marrying animals. Oh the humanity.

    When explaining why domestic partnerships are a bad thing, using a slippery slope argument is pretty ridiculous.

  • Goodness
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:53 p.m.

    I ask the same question, what happens when they "break up"? A. to the comment suggesting, "just because you believe something doesn't make it true for everyone else!" - - - truth is all things past, present and future as they were, are and will be - - - truth is independant of any other force and stands on its own, and it is eternal and it was eternal and it always will be eternal. I'm not too hip on this whole idea that there's benefits for "domestic partnerships" and not sure exactly what that even means. I'm actually sure it's a cover up phrasing for other things, but would submit that there's no 'benefits' for heterosexual boyfriends and girlfriends etc. and I don't think there should be.

  • Jackson
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:53 p.m.

    WE are doing fine up here in SLC thank you very much. If you don't like it, stay down in Utah County. We would all be happier...

  • Anonymous
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:52 p.m.

    It doesn't matter that it won't hurt the institution of marriage or that your neighbor is a good neighbor. Why should our tax money be used to pay benefits for someone's gay partner of the month? There's nothing prohibiting them from getting their own job with benefits. They aren't staying home to raise a family.

  • Conejo
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:47 p.m.

    There are several issues I would like clarified:

    1.) How long does someone date before they are allowed to become a "partner"?
    2.) How many "partners" can you have in a year?
    3.) Do non-married heterosexual relationships qualify for "partnership"?

    I can see people jumping from partnership to partnership to in order to qualify for these benefits.

  • Non-bigoted Mormon
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:44 p.m.

    Homophiles compared to pedophiles? That makes me sick. What is wrong with making sure 2 consenting adult HUMAN BEINGS and FELLOW AMERICANS are afforded their rights? I may not agree with their lifestyles, but they have every right to live them, just like I have every right to live mine. I'm grateful to live in a city where the mayor isn't afraid to do the right thing, even though he knows it might not be popular with everyone.

    Jan. 10, 2008 4:42 p.m.

    Becker's move is proof positive for all the Mormon haters out there (the real reason Pebble Andersen got elected) that the LDS church really runs SLC!

  • Your predjudice is sad
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:40 p.m.

    Does rape equate to love? It does by your comparison. Pedophilia actually equates with abuse and rape! It DOES NOT equate to homosexuality. You should study and get your facts straight and try and change your about your fellow man.
    Sure, you have your Bible to back you up. But haven't we learned anything about mental illness, slavery, rights of people in the last few thousand years? I hope so. Many ways of life in the Bible are sorely outdated and so are you.

  • jeff
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:36 p.m.

    I know I don't have all the answers and we will all disagree on certain things, but if the registry makes it easier and beneficial to do something that is wrong then I think the registry is wrong. It's not about hate or equality, it's about right and wrong and if you take God out of the equation then how do you know what's right or wrong.

  • Jtandaj
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:36 p.m.

    hey What's Next!
    I will tell you whats next.
    With any luck humanity will work free of the opression applied by our superstition. Hopefully we will see past the veil and realize that our morality comes from our inteligence (not a book written by uneducated people). When this happens, ALL people will be givien the respect they deserve. As more groups gain the rights they deserve we will see them for what they are. HUMANS! just like you and me

  • SDP
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:35 p.m.

    It will be interesting to see what defines the boundries of the partnership. How long must the petitioning party have been together, proof of common welfare etc. Without clear defining guidelines abuse will be rampant. I agree that this is different than civil unions or marrage however the mayor is opening a can of worms.

  • Please Explain
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:33 p.m.

    Why is this a bad thing? How does having gay couples in your neighborhood hurt? Is being gay contagious? Are you affraid your kids will become gay if you have gay neighbors? Isn't a little diversity a good thing?

    Is this the worst thing to ever happen to Salt Lake? Wouldn't you rather live by a gay couple than be surrounded by zoobies in provo?

    It is not like gay couples make out on their front lawns.

  • MARK O
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:33 p.m.


  • From: Geez To: "What next?"
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:32 p.m.

    Hey I've got a first stone over here for you if you would like to cast it.

  • Wondering
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:32 p.m.

    What a bigoted law. Why limit it to one person. What if you want 2 or 3? Shouldn't you have the same right? If you're going to be open and accepting like this, why include that artifical restriction?

  • this will make a difference
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:25 p.m.

    Believe it or not, there is a sizeable gay community in S.L. NewsWeek recently ran an article ranking it 14th in size in the nation. This will make a difference for a lot of people. It's taking time, but gay relationships are making progress and will continue to do so.

  • too bad
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:23 p.m.

    This will cost the city $$$ paying benefits to those unwilling to enter into legally binding relationships. I would suspect it would also run afoul of amendment 3. As has been said above, the legislature will probably act to negate this, so it's all window dressing so Becker can pay some political IOUs.

  • A Citizen
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:23 p.m.

    This hurts the institution of marriage by extending rights to those who are not married, thus weakening the legal precedents that protect family and family members. This hurts society by diluting protections and rights and incentives of the basic societal institution of the family. This hurts my marriage by diluting its meaning in the eyes of the law.

    This is all politics. It has nothing to do with real caring about people or society.

  • james
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:21 p.m.

    Congratulations SLC for dumping one loser mayor and replacing him with another. Another reason to avoid SLC. Marriage is under attack by Mayors like this. Sodom and Gamora was destroyed due to homosexuality. God Made man and woman for a reason.

  • Next
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:20 p.m.

    If there is nothing fundamental to the union of one man and one woman, what's fundamental about 2 people? or people over 18? or even people at all? Why not 3 or 4 people? Why not 16 or 17 year olds? Why not your dog? The thing has to be based on some sort of principle. Personally, I think government should just get out of the marriage/union business and let all people take care of it through their religion if they desire and then through legal agreements. Whoever you want to co-own the property, just put all the names on the deed, bank account, etc. Whoever you want to see you in the hospital or make health care choices, put it in your living will. The courts will decide all the rest anyway, even if you are married. The whole concept of marriage and having children has become a complete joke in much of our society. Unfortunately, the joke will be on us!

  • How does it hurt
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:20 p.m.

    Regular marriages (that are in trouble) 50% of the time? People that want to be committed to one another only helps to show support of marriage! It shouldn't matter that they are the same gender. And before someone gets started with the more recent discussion of polygamy (plural marriage) being compared to gay marriage, let's make something clear:
    Marriage between two people is very different than marriage between one man and a number of women! (Or the much less common form of one woman with a number of men.)
    This issue causes a whole set of other problems. The reason that they like to try and compare it is that they are jumping at the chance to find an excuse for their type of lifestyle.
    TWO people wanting to committ to one another is totally different than more than two!

  • What?
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:16 p.m.

    Didn't we all just pass a Utah constitutional amendment prohibiting domestic unions? Isn't this giving "the same or substantially equivalent legal effect"? Sounds unconstitutional to me.

    Utah Constitutional Amendment 3 to the Utah state constitution designed to define marriage in the state of Utah. It passed in the November 2 2004 election.

    The amendment reads as follows:

    1. Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.
    2. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

  • re: sam
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:14 p.m.

    You can fix up your house all you want. If your neighbors house is a piece of junk your property value will go down. So, having gay couples move into your neighborhood and fixing up houses might be easier than you fixing up your house. By not having to fix up your house, you can spend more time feeling like you are better than other people.

  • just me
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:14 p.m.

    good luck S.L. You and all your children will need it with the Great leadership you have in government.

  • Jtandaj
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:14 p.m.

    I love Christians. Love thy neighbor (as long as they are exactly like me, and belong to the same meaningless club). I am so glad that only half the mormons in this state are this bigoted.

  • Worse case senerio
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:10 p.m.

    What will happen if a bunch of homophobes get their hands on the names in that registry?

  • geez....
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:08 p.m.

    Come on...Rocky II? Let's have a little common sense and compassion. I am as big of a Rocky opponent as there is, but Mr. Becker did what he promised, and while I may not be a proponent of gay marriage a domestic partner registry is a very fair compromise. It gives the relationships an opportunity to have structure, legitimacy and obligation to each other. I don't see that as a bad thing, and don't tell me about the frog in the boiling water. I did not vote for Mr. Becker, but I do admire people that do what they say, especially if they are a politician.

  • M.N.
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:07 p.m.

    Progressive? This has nothing to do with being progressive. What this does is makes Salt Lake take another step back. Instead of thinking of the community as a whole, all this does is pacify a few individuals and their selfish sexual desires. It's sad to think that Salt Lake has at least 4 more year of this.

  • From the outside
    Jan. 10, 2008 4:03 p.m.

    Good luck... You guys voted him in. Now you get to live with your consequences.

  • Blake
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:58 p.m.

    What a great day to be a Salt Laker.

    To everyone else: If this registry dooms your marriage, it was already doomed.

  • Educator
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:52 p.m.


  • Watching
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:52 p.m.

    This will be interesting, I will be watching. I like to see a good fight.

  • Lynn H in Tennessee
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:49 p.m.

    You've got to be kidding.

  • In response to "good Luck"
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:47 p.m.

    I would prefer to have a domestic partner for the rest of my life, We have been together for over 13 years and the marriage i was previously in only lasted approximately a year and a half and for most of that time he was sleeping with the neighbor. So as you can tell he had no consideration for our marriage.

  • PC
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:46 p.m.

    I'm sure that there will be issues with people abusing the system, most likely heterosexuals and not gay couples, but hopefully the good from it will outweigh the bad.

  • Henry Drummond
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:43 p.m.

    I really appreciate having a mayor who understands that being progressive doesn't mean being obnoxious. Mayor Becker should be commended for showing compassion and understanding and making a practical difference in the lives of so many people.

  • WC
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:43 p.m.

    Thank you Becker. Thank you Salt Lake City.

  • Yippee....Not exactly
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:41 p.m.

    What a sad day in Salt Lake City. Too bad we have 4 more years of Rocky 2!

  • hy
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:34 p.m.

    and this hurts your marriage how?

  • Dutchman
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:34 p.m.

    All local governments are creatures of the State. What the State grants it can take away. Watch the State Legislature move to strip local governments of the ability to create these registries. Becker is aware of this since he spent many years on the Hill. But he will be able to say that he tried.

  • Yippee.
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:32 p.m.

    This is a GREAT DAY for Salt Lake City. Thanks Mayor.

    Jan. 10, 2008 3:28 p.m.

    Well it looks like Rocky the II has begun his reign.

  • Dennis
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:26 p.m.

    You must be a beneficiary of the domestic partnership registry

  • MTM
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:22 p.m.

    It's not about rights, since homosexual unions are wrong. It's about sucking up so a special interest group.

    Again, another politician got it wrong.

  • AJVT
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:19 p.m.

    Sorry but this hurts the institution of marriage, which is already in trouble.

  • commitment
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:19 p.m.

    What happens, legally, when they "break up"?

  • Pandora's box
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:18 p.m.

    The proposed policy would be easily abused. Were I a college student again, I would get registered with my "committed" graduate roomate and use that to work out health insurance benefits from his employer. I don't think that my wife would have objected to me working the system either.

  • Good Stereotype
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:18 p.m.

    I have had a few gay neighbors and they are great. Their houses are always well taken care of and increase the home values in the neighborhood. If this registry increases the number of gay couples living in SLC, the property rates will skyrocket.

    A good neighbor is a good neighbor.

  • Freeman
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:16 p.m.

    There goes the neighborhood...

  • Good Luck
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:14 p.m.

    I can only hope that Domestic Partnerships have better success rates than marriages, which is around 50%.

  • Mattimus
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:07 p.m.

    Before the typical homophobic remarks start, I thought I'd jump in. Thank goodness for 2 things! 1. A public servant actually following up on campaign promises, and 2. A measure to extend rights and respect to people that sorely deserve it.

    Before anyone decides this is morally reprehensible, please ask the question "how is this hurting me?"

  • Hmmm...
    Jan. 10, 2008 3:04 p.m.

    I thought we got rid of Rocky.