Catholic archbishop says no same-sex marriage at West Point chapel

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 7, 2011 6:45 p.m.


    Bill's post did not include any assumptions about you. In context, those points simply refereed to a full understanding of HIS belief system. With so many labeling the LDS Church membership as 'haters', then he was commenting on what LDS belief was for the sake of showing that he doesn't hate you, despite believing that your acts are sinful.

    If I were to say 'your actions are immoral, therefore making you an immoral person' would that be politically correct enough? Where does it end? Bill simply referred to your practices according to LDS doctrine, he did not label you with anything harsh. The only label used was no more harsh or inappropriate than calling Bill a "member" of the LDS church. So while you accused him of making assumptions. His comments were without and yours were full of assumptions about him.

    If any label is an obvious assumption and inappropriate it's when LGBT persons label LDS members as "haters". This attack promotes fear, attacking, and hatred.

    Why condemn "sinner" yet never "haters"?

    You always speak of 'double-standards' on here. Well that is one of them. I don't hate gays at all. I simply believe in free agency.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 7, 2011 2:52 p.m.

    George-meet Pagan.
    Pagen--meet cymrul

    It's your right to feel as you do. I'm not hateful for not understanding or accepting it, though I would be upset if my son had a P.E. coach or Boy Scout leader who shared your views.

    We have a president victimizing homosexuals while urging citizens to covet their neighbors wealth. That's causing bitterness and is decaying of our society. Its my right to dislike that without being villainized.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 5:08 p.m.

    Bill in Nebraska, HIS Church,defined.

    To Gods elect(Church, 1588 eklektos ), exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been CHOSEN according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ..(1 Peter 1:1-2).
    For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will(Ephesian 1:4-5). God chooses His Church.

  • George Bronx, NY
    Oct. 6, 2011 4:31 p.m.

    here is what I have frequently noticed on thread about this issue Chris B. You always try to make as inflammatory and/or provocative a statements as you can get away with as early on in a story as you can. Even when the previous post prior to your first few comments today all generally expressed either support or acceptance of the archbishops position you felt the need to start up with the same rhetoric you always do. It is like a strange obsession for you.

  • cymrul West Valley City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 3:51 p.m.

    @ Cris B.
    If it's "just two dudes living together" then what is the big deal if they have a legal contract in the form of a marriage certificate? I could say the same thing sbout a man and a woman living together. If it's no big deal then why all the uproar?

  • Cris B. Sandy, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 3:00 p.m.

    This story has motivated me to contribute again to Pro-Family and Pro-Marriage political groups, which correctly realize that killing babies is wrong and two dudes living together are just two dudes living together.

    Great job West Point Catholics!

    Thanks for making this a great day!

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 1:22 p.m.

    @Bill in Nebraska;

    Fiction & Fantasy isn't the rule of law, my friend. Just because some hairy old men wearing moth-eaten potato sacks "declare" something is such-and-such doesn't make it so; it just indicates that they've managed to keep just enough of their wits about them to be able to speak (maybe).

    Bringing superstition into the debate indicates that you don't have any rational arguments.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:58 p.m.

    All sorts of cultures and religions have prohibitions on behavior. If I don't believe in someone's religion I am tolerant enough to appreciate the cultural differences. If condemning homosexual behavior as part of a moral code is hateful, then is condeming someone's condemning also hateful as well as hypocritical?

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:57 p.m.

    'The straight kid was being bullied and harassed day after day by the gay kid, who kept telling him he was in love with him even though he knew the straight kid was straight and even after he was asked to stop.' - Chris B | 12:22 p.m. Oct. 6, 2011

    So, this is enough reason to shoot him twice in the back of head?

    'I love you' is grounds for murder?

    'I can show to you just as I can to anyone but just because I don't agree with you, I'm a hater.' - Bill in Nebraska | 12:21 p.m. Oct. 6, 2011
    While previously...

    'Pagan: I will say it very nicely but yes one can hate the sin but love the sinner.' - Same

    Your claims of love would be more convincing Bill...

    if you did not insult me, by calling me a sinner while you did it.

    What even makes you think I am LDS?

    If not, shouldn't you respect non-LDS enough not to insult them?

    Apparently, my message of tolerance is lost. As others use justification for murder and inult others while claiming love.

    Thank you, Bill & Chris for giving reason to support gay marriage.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:25 p.m.

    Because he won't stand for anyone violating his commandments is why he gave his only begotten Son, to die for each of our sins. The problem is that we must accept Christ as our savior, repent of our sins, be baptized in HIS Church and then do all of the earthly ordinances. Then we must endure to the end. That means trying to perfect our lives here on earth. That is the most difficult thing we can do. He isn't a respecter of persons so everyone who does what is indicated above has the same opportunity. Our failure to do so will lead us to a less than perfect manision in the kingdom of God.

    You don't believe this nor do you even consider this. That is your perogative but in the end it is all that matters.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:21 p.m.

    Pagan: I will say it very nicely but yes one can hate the sin but love the sinner. The thing is everyone that has lived on this earth EXCEPT one has sinned and will sin. The only perfect person was Jesus Christ.

    Just because my son makes a mistake and is punished for it doesn't mean I don't love him. Homosexuality is a grievious sin as noted by prophets old and modern. Nothing in this has changed. Just as an sexual relations outside of marriage between man and woman is a grievious sin as noted by prophets old and modern. Whether I agree with your lifestyle or not doesn't mean I hate you. Disagreement doesn't mean hate. I can show to you just as I can to anyone but just because I don't agree with you, I'm a hater. Because I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, my beliefs mean I hate you by your standards. Yet, that is as far from the truth as anything. Our Heavenly Father loves every man woman and child on earth. However, he does not stand for any violations of his commandments.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:09 p.m.


    You're preaching to the choir (both cymrul & I are gay).

    @Chris B.

    Truly, it doesn't matter that *some* churches won't marry us. There are enough of them that will that those who won't are losing business (member migration - religion is all about the money).

    What matters is that religion can do whatever they want - but government recognition (of our marriages) is for ALL of us, not just those who are religious.

  • cymrul West Valley City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 12:03 p.m.

    @ Longfellow: Actions speek louder than words. Even for religious organizations. Do you really think that Fred Phelps and his group are acting in a Christ like manner when they protest carrying the signs they carry? How about when a religion actively does all it can to limit the rights of a group? HOW is that acting out of love or understanding? When you read the comments on this site said directly to gay people HOW is that love?

    @ Chris B: It DOESN'T matter because marriage is a LEGAL contract between two people, the CEREMONY is the religious aspest of the union. A marriage is just as legal and binding whether it is performed in a church, synogogue, Justice of the Peace's office or Mountain top. So really it doesn't matter.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 11:55 a.m.

    'Based on the comments claiming this doesn't matter, just proves that to them it does matter.' - Chris B | 11:25 a.m. Oct. 6, 2011

    Kinda like how you complain homosexuals are all 'in your face' about it...

    but you see no contradiction on posting on every. Gay. Story. On the DSNews Chris?

    I guess it's fine when YOU get all 'in their business.'

    Want another example of this Double Standard?

    Missouri executive order 44, October 27, 1838.

    'Again, freedom is a great thing?' (Sarcasm)

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 11:25 a.m.


    I am glad this made it in the news. Based on the comments claiming this doesn't matter, just proves that to them it does matter.


  • Longfellow Holladay, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 11:17 a.m.

    Having grown up in upstate New York, I've been to West Point and the chapel in question. It seemed like a reasonably attractive and peaceful edifice. I guess it must be full of hate because the individuals who officiate in the chapel believe that it is wrong to perform same-sex weddings.

    By that reasoning, all gays and their supporters who believe that any religion that opposes same-sex marriage is wrong are full of hate. Because, of course, it's impossible to disagree with someone without hating them.

  • George Bronx, NY
    Oct. 6, 2011 11:14 a.m.

    viewing your comment in context of all the comments around it pretty much tells the story. It clearly reflects far more poorly on you then those that support gay marriage.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 11:09 a.m.

    That is their right.

    I commend them for sticking up for what they believe.

    Again, freedom is a great thing.

    Keep up the good work!

  • Furry1993 Clearfield, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 10:56 a.m.

    I never imaged the Catholic Church would allow the marriage of any same sex couple in any of their facilities. I don't see why the story is news. It's just business as usual.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 10:48 a.m.

    It is unclear from the article whether or not the chapel in question is Government property or the property of the Catholic church.

    If Catholic ministers (or other ministers) won't marry gay couples in their own facilities, fine. However, if the properties are government owned, they need to be available to all couples regardless of orientation.

    Honestly, I don't understand why any gay couple would want to be married in/by an organization that doesn't accept them fully anyway.

  • cymrul West Valley City, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 10:30 a.m.

    As a gay man I have to ask "WHY IS THIS NEWS?" Here's another NEWSFLASH: Temple marriages won't be performed in the West Point chapel either!!
    I don't know of any gay couple who wants to get married in ANY religious building that doesn't support them. Honestly, why would I want to marry someone I love in a place full of hate & misunderstanding and total lack of tolerance?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Oct. 6, 2011 10:27 a.m.

    I'm telling! BO will fix this.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Oct. 6, 2011 10:24 a.m.

    Although I disagree with the archbishops interpretation of DOMA as someone that support same sex marriage I have no problem with the catholic chapel not allowing gay marriages in its facilities and/or the catholic priest (or any other Chaplin whose religion does not support same sex marriage) not conducting such services provided they do not stand in the way of other religions and judges that support same sex marriage from doing so in other venues.