"Just another way for the gay's to get some attention, and demonstrate their
intolerance and pure hatred for mormons."I'm not gay and I am
Mormon. However, this fiasco of kicking the two men off the property was so
avoidable it's not even funny. The church deserves to be in the news getting
bad press on this one.
for the gay's to get some attention, and demonstrate their intolerance and pure
hatred for mormons. Nothing new.
In that case, maybe the gays should have their kiss-in in Mecca...
It's private property...the owners of the property can do as they wish when it
comes to prosecuting tresspassors. From the news coverage it sounds like this
was more than just a peck or a short kiss. Had a heterosexual couple been making
out I know they too would have been ask to cease and disist or suffer the same
outcome as this homosexual couple did. Like I said at the first of this post
though its totally up to the land owner and they can pick and chose what they
want to do in situations like this.
@ask yourselfMormonism is NOT the fastest growing religion.You
aren't even a BLIP on the radar compared to Buddhism and Islam and Catholicism
globally.Try to get some facts...not published by the Quorum of
Utah earning it's title as the HATE state one goon squad at a time.And then you wonder why your businesses and tourism is being boycotted?
@PropertyKEEP your missionaries off gay's and lesbian's private
property.Keep your HATE MONEY off our Constitutional Rights.
Give me a public display of affection, even among gays, than a public display of
The gays ought to realize we've dealt with the antimormons for years. Protests
around temple square are almost normal. Except the anti mormons are a lot more
dedicated. I see the same ones year after year.
Why don't we see stories about the Mormons going to gathering places for Gays?
Does it happen?Why aren't the Mormons publishing the names and
location of individual supporters of Gay lifestyles?Do the Mormons
claim the members are perfect in following it's teachings?Did these
2 young men not realize they were on temple square in SLC? How can ANYone in
SLC possibly not know the Mormons position on basic issues?Did the
Security Guards say "Gays are not allowed to kiss here?"Has anyone
ever noticed the standards the Mormons expect of their own members at other
properties (BYU campus', meetinghouses, etc)?How did this situation
move from "please leave" to "you're under arrest?"If Gays hate the
Mormons so much why where they there? If my wife and I were on property that I
knew didn't like my lifestyle, I wouldn't feel like kissing.If
Mormons are so old fashioned, why is it one of the fastest growing religions in
the world?Just take a few minutes and ask yourself a few of these
questions. Do a little research...
The problem that I have with this, is that the church representative claimed
they would ask anyone kissing in the plaza to leave. That is sooo unbelievably
a lie. These men probably should have left when they were asked because at that
point they did break the rules. However, I don't believe the LDS church would
ask all people kissing to leave. Just like I don't believe the LDS church
leaders, the leaders of the largest voting body in the state, when they claim
the church to be politcally neutral and encourage members to "vote their
conscience." These men were asked to leave because they were both men.
The lack of tolerance is from the homosexuals, not the Church. Believe it or
not, I have the right to not agree with you. Gasp! Can that be possible?The two guys were asked to leave. They should leave. Deeda should get
a real job.Do what you want on your time on your property. You
can't force me to approve, tolerate or pay for it.
Just how classless and blind is the homosexual community?Apparently
quite a bit.PRIVATE property is PRIVATE property! You DON'T get to
act how you want, whenever you want and say whatever you want in however you
want to express it on somebody's PRIVATE property.I mean just how
stupid can you guys be??????If you choose to have a massive display
of affection on the LDS church's private property you can expect to ONLY be made
out to be massive idiots. It is not the LDS church who will look absolutely
moronic in the eyes of the public but the gay community.The harder
you push for "gay equality" the more you tick off the majority of your fellow
"It'll be a little bit of Paris" uhhh huh, right.
Private property is private property. I have the right to determine what
happens on my property. No troops can force their way onto my property or make
a encampment on my property unless I give them that right and then they have to
pay for that right with compensation I DEEM is right. The same goes for anyone
who comes on my property. As for missionaries coming to the door at
all hours of the night, how incorrect is this. They knock on doors generally
between the hours of 10am to approximately 8pm. They don't do it all day long
as they do have to eat and teach, therefore the likely hood of them coming to
anyones door at all hours is an incorrect statement. Secondly, a member of the
church is a member until they are removed from its roles. We are the only
Church that has a thorough record of all members of it. It is true some get
lost and leave no forwarding address and it comes back to the parents or family
to possibly assist. You are not forced to give this information. Read Christ's
own feelings on sheep that become lost.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but this is what the US Constitution has to say
about "private property":'No person shall be held to answer for a
capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a
Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the
Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any
person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or
limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against
himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation.'Sorry, Beth, but that doesn't exactly cover the
Mormons from detaining and zip-tying two young men, despite what you want to
think.Imagine a privately owned and operated restaurant asking two
people to leave because they are Asian. Private property, right? The restaurant
should be entitled, right? Sorry, doesn't work that way, and for good reason.
The Mormon's "guidelines" don't supersede law, even in Utah.
On a recent visit to the Plaza area, my very heterosexual LDS son and his wife
sat down and shared a couple of kisses---- and guess what???? Security came and
kindly asked that they refrain from doing that or leave the property. So there
you go--- it isn't just all about harrassing homosexuals! They are fair across
If Jesus had been asked to leave the property of another, I am sure he would
politely do as they asked. I hope the security guards keep up the
good work. When I visit Temple Square I don't want to be offended by any
Wow, could you possibly come off as a bigger racist? Is that the 'tolerance' you
were taught? "Negros"? Really? Are you stuck in some 1960's world? You are perfect representation to the rest of the world on how bigoted Mormons
Some thoughts to consider:1. It is impossible to tell what the
intentions of the two men were.2. The church purchased that land
from the city and has the right to regulate behavior as it sees fit.3. Property owners are under no legal obligation to post all prohibited
behaviors on their property in order to enforce them.4. Some people
are offended by displays of affection between homosexuals, no matter its
sincerity.5. Some people are offended by Mormons, no matter their
sincerity.While I'm repeatedly annoyed by both parties to this
argument, I recognize that the church is in the right here. Only an idiot would
believe the kiss-in is meant to spread love. It's intended to repeat the
provocation on a larger scale and with as much publicity as possible. They don't
want to see you lip-locked, and you don't want to hear their sermons. The
difference is, you're on their property and you've chosen to be there.
Tolerence | 4:08 p.m. July 11, 2009 AMEN! You said it! GET A
ROOM!!!!!! The same would have taken place if it were a hetero couple. Stop
playing the victim, it's really pathetic.
Despite the fact that there weren't signs posted warning of private property
they were warned, when they were asked to leave by the security officer. After
they were warned and refused to leave then law enforcement intervened. And
don't tell me that the offending couple didn't know, they were walking HOME.
They live in Salt Lake!A few years ago I was at the plaza, sitting
on the edge of the reflection pool with some friends in front of the temple.
Two gay men walked in front of us and when they saw us one man proceeded to
glare at us while grabbing his companion's butt. Were they deliberately trying
to offend me? Absolutely! Was I offended? Not really, mostly I just thought
that they were ridiculous. Was the current incident a statement
(perhaps impromptu) or just a brief, innocent, spontaneous kiss? Probably not.
But does it even matter? No, because they were on private property and when
they were informed about the property rules/regulations they chose to ignore
them.Private property is a constitutional right. Kissing on any
private property is not. This instance was an assault on freedom of religion,
not gay rights.
That's nice. Your not the only LDS person who is confused by the gay rights
Is your front lawn accessible? I think I would like to come hang out with a few
of my friends. Maybe camp out for a few days.
Maybe the city should seize your private property while they are at it.
I am active LDS and I support this kiss-in. There was no reason for LDS security
guards to say anything to these men. This was a bad mistake and it is an
embarassment to me.
Some comments suggest that the "gays" should keep their noses out of the LDS
church and its interests, staying away from its "private" property. The LDS
church had no qualms about disrupting the lives of gay and lesbian Californians
by actively campaigning for Proposition 8. It's a beautiful thing to see the LDS
church (and some of its members) exposed as a minority organization fighting
against the rights of minorities. A "private space" that should be protected
more than a square or park is the union between two loving adults.
"These men should not have been charged with trespassing since there was no
warning to them that they were breaking your rules."Um, the warning
to them that they were breaking the rules would have been the security guard
coming up to them and asking them politely to leave. They were cited for
trespassing when they became verbally abusive and loudly refused to leave after
being asked to do so.
Wow, I wonder if this kind of behavior happened 6000 years ago when the world
was "created". lol
These comments only prove how deluded the LDS slaves are. They're too busy
hating and waving their flags to realize their hypocrisy.
If the LDS want private property respected so much (to the point of removing gay
couples for kissing on a previously public area) then why are two twenty-year
solicitors encouraged to show up unannounced on my front porch at any hour of
any day? And when will headquarters stop calling our home to get
inactive family members' unpublished phone numbers (which are unpublished for a
reason)?The last is a lot more frustrating- if the inactives wanted
the you to know their info, they'd tell you when they go to church.
This wasn't private property until the city sold the public walkway to you guys
a few years ago. Which they should have never done.The easement for
mandatory allowance of public usage on said now "private property" allowed the
public to continue to use it. If you wish to control the public's actions on
your property you had better clearly post what you wish to allow and not allow
on said property. These men should not have been charged with trespassing since
there was no warning to them that they were breaking your rules. If the it
states that public usage is allowed unless people break your permitted conduct,
then you should be required to post what conduct that is that you do and do not
Have people considered that perhaps this wasn't a deliberate provocation? Perhaps the couple were just infused with some kind of orgasmic
religious experience (being so close to the temple) and they lost control. You
have to admit that there's something undeniably masculine & virile about it.
Hell, makes me want to kiss another man just thinking about it.
Everyone just use common sense and reason, try to understand where the other is
coming from and come up with a result that both can agree with.There
is a difference between tasteful displays of affection and blatently pushing the
line to offend others. That line is very clear. Same-sex couples should be
allowed to express themselves in a decent fashion, and the LDS church should
very much tolerate that. However, behaviour that the church would not condone on
its property between couples of different sexes should not be allowed.Both sides know where the line is. Just spend a little time pondering
potential outcomes and you'll see this can be a non-issue.
Ha Ha...this is classic pay back for all the times I've had to deal with door to
door Mormons. You can come to my house but we can't come to yours?
If its obviously private property that does not permit pedestrian traffic, it is
indeed trespassing. However, if its commonly and openly used by the public
without incident, its discriminatory to select certain people to hit with a
trespassing charge--especially if it isn't clearly marked. Nevertheless, i can see these men as having thought they were being singled
out for their orientation in the absence of private property markers. I dont
blame them for getting upset, but when trespassing is concerned, its always wise
to be polite and apologetic. You never know what kind of people you are dealing
with until after the fact. When the affection-related social norms straight
people take for granted are broadened to a more egalitarian perspective,
misunderstandings like this are bound to become an artifact of the past. I just
wish our civilization would hurry along and grow up already.As for
the kiss-in, people will always find a way to gather in order to increase
awareness when issues collide. Inform more people about who cares about what,
and people will think critically about it for themselves.
Yeah, it's private property, so the church has the right to tell them to get
off, and they should leave politely. This is just like what happened with the
Negroes decades ago. They all decided to hold sit ins in places where they
weren't wanted, and refused to get out, and now look at em'. They get to go
everywhere! I took the fam to dinner and a negro couple was sitting right by us,
like they was normal people? First the negroes, then the gays... what's next?
I don't understand what's happening to this country
Many of the commenters seem to be claiming that the plaza is private property
and therefore subject to whatever rules the Mormons see fit to decree. Would
this apply if the Mormons decided that black people shouldn't be on the square?
Or if they decided that anybody in a wheelchair was an offense to God?
No...there would be an ensuing legal battle. Regardless of what your religious
beliefs are, don't try to suggest that they are legally entitled to what they
To all of those saying what the LDS church did should be tolerated because the
incident occurred on private property, you are mistaken about discrimination. It
doesn't matter if the area is private property or not, if you make an area
accessible to the public then you cannot discriminate against those that visit
it. Would you feel the same if the Mormon Church had arrested a
black couple for trespassing? Of course not. The LDS can either operate a public
space and make it available to everyone or they can close the street down. No
such bigotry should be accepted in our society, even when it comes from an
institution like a church.
Wait...so Mormon bigots donate money to pass a hate law in California and then
get upset when someone shows up in their backyard to smooch? This outdated
religion is on the wrong side of history. Your religion is already filled with
closeted homosexuals - I know because I've slept with them - so what's the
I am a native, born and raised Utahn...and I am truly ashamed of nearly everyone
in my state. Gay or straight or bi, black, white, hispanic...none of it matters.
God wants you to treat everyone like he/she is your brother/sister. I'm
disappointed in the LDS members who can't even practice what they are taught,
and most of them have been on missions. How can you expect people to take you
seriously when you're the largest group of hypocrites amassed in one state? The LDS church teaches against homosexuality as a sin, but what they
don't teach you is to hate ANYONE. Just because someone has a different life
than you, doesn't make you better or make you any more/less important. When
Mormons stop hating people, you will open new doors and make more progress to a
happier union with all members of the community, not just the people who have
the same faith.
The city should seize back the easement, problem solved. Then tell everyone to
get on with their life.
Remember Mary Magdelene? She was a prostitute, but Jesus didn't care, he just
saw that she was a human being and therefore deserving of the same kind of
respect that he showed to everyone. Gays are just like Mary Magdelene: human,
and deserving of the same kind of respect you would give one of your fellow
church members. Remember the golden rule, as well: treat others as
you would have them treat you.
While I understand that it's private property, I highly doubt they would have
asked a straight couple to leave for kissing on the cheek. Intolerance is not what God would want, so I always find it laughable when any
religious group uses their beliefs to hate.
You Utah bigots are hideous.
In Canada, private property rights, in relation to private / public spaces,
cannot trump our charter of rights and freedomes.America's
consititution is as useful as toilet paper.America, land of the
It is assumed that some posters on here are LDS..one poster actually mentioned
the child molesters in the Catholic church...care full there as child molesters
are not just there. They are LDS, Christian, Babtist and etc. I know this to
be factual...perverts hide behind all kinds of masks..seems to me that if you
cannot be tolerant and show compassion in a public venue then you should close
it off so you can screen those visitors to suit your rules.
Since there is not way to really know that this particular area is in fact
private property as there is no fence..seems to me that the security officer
drew way more attention to the whole thing by telling them to leave..it is
better to ignore something that you find uncomfortable. By drawing so much
attention just gives it more of a push. Lesson learned if you want the sanctity
of your precious private property fence it off..post the rules for
This particular location is open to guests...and I have in fact been there and
have seen public displays of affection..no security person intervened..the point
is that if public displays of affection are allowed for some people and not
others then there is intolerance..equal treatment is what the point is. LDS
persons need to remember that this was public property first...if you cannot
show tolerance then close the dame place off to the public. That way you will
have the control that you so desire..if you keep it open then learn tolerance
and equal treatment..stop targeting people who do not believe the same as you
this is the real world.
Dear Utah,Thanks for being such a laugh riot. You give the rest of
us something to point to whenever someone says one of us is the most backward
state in the country.
It is so amusing to listen to people completely undermine themselves and their
opinions. The effort expended on repeatedly condemning homosexual behavior is
wasteful and downright spiteful. And it does nothing but make a mockery of the
very people and their religion who cannot get their fill of making it known that
they don't support homosexuality. And the ludicrous lengths used to
support their passive aggressive intolerance are even more amusing. Private
property, please. Nobody is fooled by this use of semantics and nobody believes
that this is about anything other than discrimination for people that, in this
case Mormons, feel superior to. It's a comfort to know that these
sorts of incidents are simply the frantic struggling efforts of the hypothetical
playground bully who won't allow anyone to play a game he doesn't want to play
and won't simply allow everyone to share the playground equally. Private
property, maybe. But we all play on the playground earth and nobody likes a
bully. And as for the insinuation that homosexuals are "shoving this
in people's faces" well that's just another poor excuse for a lack of tolerance.
God bless EVERYONE. Every. One.
To David, who wrote: " I'm going to now require that nobody can be Mormon on my
property. Let's see how fast those bicycling evangelists can get off my
property!"Having been a Mormon missionary myself, I know that all
you have to do is tell our elders you're not interested and they will go away.
You won't see them again unless they randomly knock on your door again after a
couple of years goes by. The trespassing legally occurred when the
two men refused to leave after being asked and then resorted to profanity and
hostile language. No LDS missionary is going to cuss you out when you ask them
to leave your doorstep. On the other hand, as a LDS missionary, I
was the recipient of verbal abuse and even assaulted on a number of occasions.
I was hit in the head with a brick and had a bag of glass bottles dropped down
from a high balcony window that narrowly missed me. I've had a Baptist deacon
take a swing at me with a shovel!The actions of the two men was
intentionally provocative. Mormons are not at fault here.
A question was asked about what would Jesus do in considering the act on the
plaza owned by the LDS Church. If I recall 2 situations in the Bible, this same
Jesus cast out the money changers from the temple because of inappropriate
behavior. Jesus showed a great deal of love, but please give me chapter and
verse where he condoned sin.When we are on public property in front of
sacred buildings throughout the world, I hope we would show respect. When you
enter those buildings I hope you would follow the appropriate actions of
reverance, profound respect, for the edifice and the sacred, historical, or
national significance of the place you are visiting. If you don't, you will be
asked to leave by the care takers of the property, and if you make a scene you
will be hauled off to jail in any country and in any state of this nation.I am afraid we are loosing our well founded teachings of respect for the
property rights of others and the correct manner in which we should honor sacred
or hallowed buildings of this or any other county.
Salt Lake City: never gonna visit. Ever.
Hey, mormons: for years you were driven out of the rest of the country. You
espouse that you want people to be tolerant of your belief in whatever it is you
believe in. Fine, great! You have a whole state of your fellow believers.But guess what? Tolerance is a two way street. Also I absolutely DARE
you to use the same arguments against bi-racial couples you are using against
gays. To the other "Tolerance," you say "Call it a lack civility,
call it a lack courtesy, or call it a total lack of tolerance from a special
interest group that demands tolerance of others, but not themselves."Ha! Apply that to yourself, please.
My previous post was removed, I'm not sure why. I said, "Eyewitnesses to the
scene have said that it wasn't just a peck on the cheek, or even a brief kiss.
They were standing in place, groping each other and essentially making out for
several minutes before they were asked to leave. " That is a completely FALSE
statement, one that is easily refuted with research and first-hand accounts.
Please stop inflaming this already sensitive issue with mistruths and
outlandish rumor attempts.
Excellent idea, this kiss-in! Once people see gay couples kissing, maybe
they'll realize that the earth won't stall in its orbit when they do. It's just
a happy couple, loving one another. Gay or straight, that kind of love is
always a cause for celebration, as far as I'm concerned.
They didn't deliberately go where LDS families were to make a point. They were
walking home from a concert at 11pm at night. There was NO ONE ELSE on the
plaza. They didn't realize LDS security watches every movement on the plaza
with security cameras. They were just walking home, as they live on the other
side of the plaza. They stopped for a brief second, while they thought they
were entirely alone and one gave a small peck on the cheek of the other one.
There is no common sense to find the church wrong on this issue. The Church was
not the Rude Party. To have ignored it would have been to invite an immoral
injustice for the sake of compromising. Something that the church should never
give into. The guilty parties were given ample oppurtunity to leave
peacefully...their choices were wrong and it's quite obvious they went there
with a possible disruptive intent....They violated the owners privete rights to
set standards that may be even higher than the local communities. Your dealing
with private property not public. If you don't know the laws then like every
other law...ignorance is no excuse. The Church has a right to say,deem or set as
appropriate or inappropriate a higher standardard within the confines of their
property within that community as pertaining to private property. Because of
this right of the legal ownwer to set their own standards they were asked to
leave....they chose not to, but chose rather to make a specticle.... they got
their noses rubbed in the dirt.... they were wrong on all counts...The police
did the right thing. If you don't like it tough.
Good is called evil and evil good. Hate is called love and love is called hate.
Welcome to the last days!
And Yay for human rights!
This is hypocrisy at its best. If you think I am talking about the LDS church
you would be mistaking. So, people want to promote what they label as "love"
What about LOVE for your neighbor regardless of their religous
persuation...EVEN...gasp...LDS. Does it really show love to go on to private
property and try to make a public disturbance? You be the judge. If you came
onto my property and tried to offend me, I think I would have to call that
anti-love or hate. The truth is the LDS church is hated by many people in Utah.
Somehow the Mormons are supposed to just sit back and accept it. I with stand
in TRUE LOVE with all my mormon friends and condemn the actions of these so
called love activist. You want to show love--respect their property. Oh, and
by the way, we already have to much public affection. I can barely walk
anywhere without seeing something inappropriate. We as a society are just
loosing our sense of decensy. Kudos to the Mormon church
Is this really a news worthy report, incident, or even worth the public debate?
Cure wounds by "LOVE" WOW... what a concept. Thought wounds were healed by
medical means and emotional by communication, tolerance, and patience.Rules are rules despite the oppinions of other peoples beliefs, race, gender,
or whatever it may be. Change is enevidable, how come we can't learn to go with
the flow and accept it making the best of it. Even if most don't agree with how
things were done with main street, I for one consider it still a pretty and
worthwhile change. Breaking the rules and being belidgerant towards
authorities requesting the obedience of rules gets twisted into this?
SERIOUSLY.. Only in utah...Are all rules going to start being twisted
into a personal attack against sexual orientation, race, religion? Lets
step back and take a look at what battles are worth this sort of protest...
Don't you think you're planned "love in" is just a little immature? Perhaps a
bit of an overreaction? Second, the two men mentioned weren't
arrested because they kissed (though that action was certainly inappropriate).
Police were necessary because they were profane and disruptive. The
LDS Church is on pretty firm ground, here.
The anti-Mormon hatred that seethes in comments on stories like this is truly
Eyewitnesses to the scene have said that it wasn't just a peck on the cheek, or
even a brief kiss. They were standing in place, groping each other and
essentially making out for several minutes before they were asked to leave. If a
heterosexual couple had done that, there's no question that they'd be asked to
stop, too. That kind of behavior in public is wildly inappropriate.Instead of doing what the security guard asked, they became verbally abusive
and started yelling obscenities, which is also inappropriate public behavior.Would you behave that way in a public library? How about a classroom at
school? In a pew at church? In line at the grocery store? No, you wouldn't.Because the plaza is private property, the LDS church can ask people to
do anything they want them to, and those rules need to be obeyed. They could
insist that unless you hop across the plaza on one foot, you'll need to leave,
and they'd be perfectly within their rights to bar access to anybody choosing to
walk instead. The only ones in the wrong here were these two men who refused to
follow the rules.
These perverts do stuff like this -- absolutely cram their deviancy in our faces
through infantile and offensive publicity stunts like this, and then expect us
to "tolerate" them? THis only drives a lot of reasonable people the other
direction. When you can show a little dignity and tolerance yourselves, then
contact us. Until then, go back in your closets.
What I forgot to say... if the Mormons don't like you being gay, or fondling
each other on their property, then so be it... go somewhere else and stop trying
to stir the pot. This is an attempt at trying to justify an unnatural lifestyle
by making conservative religious beliefs seem wrong... by making them the
discriminating "bigots". Those two guys knew what they were doing...
and don't play dumb like you didn't know that already!
Just face it all homosexuals and “open-minded” people alike...
You're wrong. The homosexual lifestyle is wrong. Just look at the human
anatomy… intercourse between same-sexes doesn’t have any natural
part in the circle of life.People have gay tendencies because we are
a more twisted and deviant society... I can’t believe that it’s been
completely justified and forced as being normal, or even right. I
understand that the attraction is real, but it’s not normal, not natural,
and not healthy. Why is that so hard to see? Are there any healthy minded people
left in this world???? Thank goodness for the Mormons sticking to their
values!Whatever though… just keep on justifying it so that you
don’t have to fix it. Keeping your head in the sand is easier than seeing
Jen you are WAY off! You state that "it is not legal, nor is it
acceptable to make rules governing your private property that violate the rights
and laws of the country..."Your example of "...beating your wife..."
is just plain silly and wrong headed.As a point of fact when it
comes to law, you CAN in fact make rules for private property that COMPLETELY
violates laws of personal freedom and security. A private company
can dictate that only black people can work there. Did you know that? Yes, it is
true, and they are NOT breaking the rules. As long as this company is NOT
publicly traded or has contracts with a publicly traded company or a government
agency, it is totally legal.The church can make whatever rules they
want for their PRIVATE PROPERTY. They are not publicly traded, nor do they have
contracts with publicly traded companies or government agencies. See how easy
that is!Issues of safety are different matter, such as the "beating
your wife" comment. That you simply cannot do, anywhere. No one has the right to
harm another for any reason, except for the defense of others or self.Easy!
This is not a disagreement about private property. It is true that people have a
right to make rules to govern the actions of people on their private property,
and it is true that the couple in question here should NOT have made a scene
when asked to leave. HOWEVER! It is not legal, nor is it acceptable
to make rules governing your private property that violate the rights and laws
of the country- you can't, for instance, make beating your wife an "allowed"
behavior just because it takes place on your private property.The
issue here is that it is ok in Utah and far to many other places for gays
expressing affection to be treated differently from straight people expressing
affection. If the LDS church had a problem with ANY PDA on the square, and asked
all kissing couples to leave, there would be no issue here. However, I'm in a
heterosexual relationship and have kissed (quite passionately) in the square
with no adverse reaction. The issue here is that the government has
not provided the same anti-discrimination protection to gays that it has
provided to women, blacks- even Mormons!
It is curious that Deeda Seed does not list her private property address in the
phone book. It seems as though she wants her private property respected, but
could care less about the LDS church's private property rights.
This situation is a perfect example of why hate crimes legislation is wrong.
Look at all the different posts of people saying "They did it to make a point",
others saying, "No, they were just showing affection." Everyone has an opinion,
but how can it possibly be proven what their intentions, thoughts, or
motivations were?? There is no way to enter someone's mind & determine that
sort of thing.
Those who decry the supposed "intolerance" of the LDS Church are now going to
stage an extended scene of anti-religious intolerance against the LDS Church,
its teachings, and its people. They know their conduct will offend people,
which is why they are doing it, in the shadow of one of the LDS church's most
sacred sights, the temple. It is akin to parading around a Jewish synagogue
with a Nazi flag.Here is the truth, for any with courage to hear
it:“The unholy transgression of homosexuality is either
rapidly growing or tolerance is giving it wider publicity. The Lord condemns and
forbids this practice with a vigor equal to his condemnation of adultery and
other such sex acts. The fact that some governments and some churches and
numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal
offense to personal privilege does not change the nature or the seriousness of
the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the
practice as being unworthy of sons of God; and Christ’s church denounces
it and condemns it so long as men have bodies which can be defiled.” LDS
President Spencer W. Kimball
Jesus would tell them to get the Hades off the private property.
I'm gay, yet I feel the community is doing what they always do when something
doesn't go our way. They shout/protest and draw attention...I'm very
disappointed by the gay community, they need to look at the big picture and
realize these two men were on private property, owned by huge religious church,
they were in the wrong, they should have left when asked. Im disappointed that
they represented us in such an awful manner. I'm also disappointed in the church
security guards, they should have represented the church in a better manner. I
do hope the gays tomorrow have fun with their choice, I will not support the gay
community. I just wish they'd really think about who they're dealing with before
crying about it. This is a complete hypocrisy....ON BOTH PARTS.
Ms. Seed says what they did was not wrong. Sorry, but it was. They refused to
leave private property when asked. The only reason they went their in the first
place was to stir up controversy. Sounds childish to me.
@I stand in amazement:Well, if one of the other religions bought public
property and put it inbetween areas that are traveled to and from frequently, I
am sure they would have still kissed there. Not because of the religion, but
because they were being affectionate in the moment. No signs say no homosexual
kissing, at least not on those 10' gates.@Anonymous | 10:14
p.m. July 11, 2009 Mormons believe they are the "one true church" and
have, in the past, shown their distaste for other religions. Also, you ask how
they are bigoted for standing up for their beliefs..Bigot: a prejudiced
person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own.They are
bigoted because of what you just said.
It is rather sad when the voice of one side of an issue insinuates their
intolerance by changing the subject and calling others intolerant...
Some say that mormons don't go and try to "offend" gays. Well, when missionaries
walk up and tell us we are sinners, they protest pride and many other things I
dont think that you can say mormons don't.Also, if heterosexual
couples can kiss at the plaza, there is no reason two guys shouldnt be able to.
You try to claim that the only people that have rights are gays, but who spent
millions trying to take rights from homosexuals? The LDS Church. "Call it a lack civility, call it a lack courtesy, or call it a total lack of
tolerance..." --Who are the ones being intolerant?Sure, I disagree
with many things gay activists do, but it doesnt excuse the church pushing its
medieval beliefs on everyone. We aren't saying you have to be gay, just let us
live in peace without meddling in our lives. I have been patient and
have stood up for the LDSchurch for about 8 years on this subject, but after
prop 8 and this, I have no respect for the church. I still respect other
christian religions that oppose us quietly, but not mormonism any longer.
I love the "they had an agenda", "they did it to provoke" comments. They didn't
have an agenda, they had a relationship. How many times have straight couples
walked through that same easement holding hands or shared a simple kiss on the
cheek? How many times were they told to "move on"? The issue is not
one of trespassing or private property rights being ignored. It's about these
two adults who are in a relationship walking through a part of the city open to
the public being singled out for doing the same thing that is allowed on the
same property every day by straight couples - because they were two men instead
of a man and a woman.If you can't understand the unfairness of this
and the resulting outrage that people feel from this, then you are right where
you belong. In Utah, following the rest of the flock.
I don't go preach in gay bars so, perhaps you could spare us the kiss in.
Do we have to jump on this merry-go-round again with the same old comments. I am
not LDS but let's at least get on the same page so that we are arguing from
solid ground. Whether you believe in the Bible or not, homosexuality is not
accepted in the teachings. You can make all of the "Jesus" arguments you want.
If you remember the story of the women caught in adultry, Jesus simply said "go
they way and sin no more". Simple and straight forward. The Bible never shows
Jesus tolerating what he terms sin. Are we on the same page yet? Second, since
the LDS Church does own the property and PDA between same sex couples is not
accepted, they too can ask the couple to leave. These are the facts whether we
like them or not. Third, this issue has to do with the definition of marriage.
If this is about rights, let's simply call a same-sex union a Domestic
Partnership with all of the same legal rights and responsibilities. Let's call a
union between a male and femal marriage. Both define things correctly and both
have the same rights. Comments?
Why do gays have to use deception, exaggerations, lies, trickery and
grandstanding when they communicate? People are kicked off the plaza all the
time for "inappropriate" behavior. But when they're gay, they have to call the
paper, exaggerate the story and protest. Who are the tolerant ones, the church
who allows the public to use its property as long as they are respectful, or the
people who choose to protest a church's right to govern its own property?
If my morals and value system said that murder is the only way to get to heaven,
than would that make it okay for me to do it? Could I impose this belief in
These two homosexuals do not represent the LGBT community in Utah at ALL--we
have bigger things to worry about. NO matter what the "Church" will continue on
its own path of self-destruction without the need of these kissing fools.I say sleep in. There is nothing progressive about a kiss-in. And the
people that think they are making a difference are confused and setting back
national & local LGBT efforts that we have been fervently working towards.
Is it fair to call them bigoted? They actually stand by their morals and
beliefs. Why is that bigoted? The LDS church doesn't hate other religions. They
don't actively seek to bring down other religious institutions. The members of
the LDS church just stand up for their collective belief system. That is every
individuals right given in the First Amendment.
So, by your logic, put up a sign. Say "No Mormons" or "No Proselyting" or
something to that affect. Just the same as a "No Soliciting" sign. And Mormon's
are not the only ones to send out missionaries. There are Baptists, Protestants,
and Born Again Christians as well as a plethora of other religions that each
send out missionaries. Strictly speaking, Catholic missionaries were some of the
worst in history. I mean, come on, if a person didn't convert they were
persecuted and killed. Whole towns were burned.
Security doesn't pounce on two people walking across the Plaza who just kiss
each other on the cheek. They were asked to "move on," which suggests they were
standing and making a scene. In essence, they were purposely provoking an
incident. Now Ms. Seed is covering the anger that the provocateurs
had with "love." Nonsense! This is nothing more than anti-Mormon
sentiment. Leave the Latter-day Saints alone. It is private property. If you
continue to instigate incidents, the LDS Church would be within it's rights to
close the Main St. Plaza to public access.
I honestly expect nothing less from the Mormon church, since they are known to
be bigoted against many different types of people. I just wish that they could
see that what they do hurts people and puts a bad image on themselves. I know
for a fact that there are good mormons out there, and some in my husband's
family that are very tolerant, and try to convince us to come to church with
them, but this is just another example of why I will not go. Once again, I will
be there tomorrow, with my family. If the LDS church doesn't want this kind of
thing to happen, then give it up and be fair. Make sure you kick straight
couples off the property too for sharing a kiss. Heck, Maybe they should ban
marraiges as well, after all, don't you have to *kiss* the bride? Isn't that
done on church property?
These young men were not doing anything outrageous. There was a kiss on the
cheek and that is it. Get over it! This was motivated because they were 2 men.
What would Jesus do?
When they open their mouth and say they are from the LDS church, that's a pretty
good indication they are Mormon.So again, offending me. And you are
right, I don't want people on my property pushing their religious views on
me.You're right! Sound thinking it is!
Good sound thinking man!!! How are you going to tell if the person on your
property is Mormon??? I do respect your right to not want a Mormon or any
other person on your property but that's like saying you don't want the a
Catholic or Baptist on your property---- how are you going to monitor that
I'm going to assume that you've never, in fact, kissed someone, or else I'm sure
you'd realize that you've never "chosen" a spot do so. You feel affection, you
kiss someone. That's all.You point out that the Mormon church's
policy on homosexuality should come into play- I have to ask, then- WHY WASN'T
THAT PART OF THEIR STATEMENT? The official statement from the Mormons was that
"the men were 'politely asked to stop engaging in inappropriate behavior _ just
as any other couple would have been.'If this had ANYTHING to do with
the church's views on gays, don't you think an official spokeswoman would've
Mormons do however come knocking on my doors. So yes, you do offend the public.
Sounds like something else set up by the ACLU. They are probably trying to make
the church pay for the plaza a fifth time.
I love it. Since someone can't choose to be gay, but they can choose to be
Mormon, I'm going to now require that nobody can be Mormon on my property.Let's see how fast those bicycling evangelists can get off my
It is not the kiss that is shocking, it is the locaton they chose. They did not
choose to go out infront of the Cathedral of the Madeline on South Temple with
tons of car trffic going by for the PDA. They did not go in front a mosque or a
Jewish temple either. They deliberately went where they knew there were LDS
families and monitored security so as to make a scene. It is widely known what
the LDS Church policy is on homosexuality. The PRACTICE is frowned upon.
Therefore, this was not a spontaneous moment where they were showing love and
affection, but a deliberate and defiant action against the beliefs of ONE
another strike in popularity, againts the gay community. Boy, you are getting
well liked around here.
The church may have asked the gay men to leave but that doesn't all of a sudden
make them the bad guy. If others had complained to the security guards etc
about the behavior of the men it would be well within their right to ask them to
leave. It would be within their right even if no one had complained. It
doesn't matter if the plaza was bought by the LDS church or given to them the
fact remains it is private property and the men did not leave when asked. As
for it being a case of prejudice, I have the right to restrict what happens on
my property for any reason. We weren't there so all we know is what we read.
I'm a member of the LDS church and I don't believe the church would ask them to
leave for simply kissing each other. I think there was probably more going on
then the media is telling us. It's ridiculous to make judgments without knowing
the whole situation.
I will be astonished if intelligent people actually show up for this kiss-in.
Dear Serious,I'm an "out-of state observer" too, but must in this
case I side with the church on grounds of equality. Nobody's sexual orientation
is a free pass to ignore property rights.The two men were not, as
you put it, "on the street." They were on private property whose owners make
their own rules, just as you and I do about our own private property. How can you support the two men without undermining the principle of private
property? The logical extension of their claim is that any guest can, in
principle, refuse to leave his host's property. I'm not the least
interested in the mens' sexuality. My concern is that everybody in the
country--you and me and them--all have the freedom to make our own decisions
about our own private property.I'm sorry they chose to do what they
did, because it was (a) rude to their hosts, and I hate rudeness, and (b)against
the law, and I hate lawlessness. I don't expect anyone to tolerate
rudeness or lawlessness from me because of my sexuality, or any other
consideration. So: equal treatment for the two guilty men.
First of all, the City, via Rocky Anderson, deeded that portion of Main Street
over to your church. It has never been closed to the public. In fact, your
church uses it as a way to greet people and proselyte to them. If you want it
closed, then fence it, close it, and post signs as to what is appropriate (I
notice many couples kissing on the plaza). As far as being on your church's
property, just tell us the rules and mark the boundaries. You can't have it
Read the story. They were not on a street. They were on private property owned
by the LDS Church. They were there, and their actions, were meant to make a
statement. They were asked to leave private property and refused. Like has
been said before. Let me come to your property and demand its use. Bet you
would not like that. And to Anon, I bet if the missionaries went to
the Vatican and began teaching and handing out church information they would be
asked to leave. As an LDS missionary I was kicked out of other churches and
throw off people’s property. Don’t begin to tell me that any other
church would let you do anything you want. This Catholic Church you are
talking about, is not this, the same church who kicks our priests who have sex
with young boys and women. Guess they are not too understanding and do not
accept any type of behavior.The LDS church welcomes any who will respect
the churches beliefs and will treat the property with respect. We will not
accept behavior that is against our doctrine that is meant to degrade.
This began as an issue of private property rights. In response to a request to
leave private property, the couple in question chose to make a fuss. And now
have taken a simple issue and turned it into a public cry for tolerance. I'm
sorry, but does any one else see the logical fallacies present in this? In response to "Seriously"- when the LDS church purchased (legally, I
might add) Main Street and turned it into the plaza, they dedicated it in the
same fashion the LDS church dedicates their other properties--including meeting
houses/chapels. In that sense, it is a place of worship for believers fo the LDS
faith. It is the same as going into a Mosque without taking off your shoes. Or
eating pork in a synagogue. It shows a distinct disrespect of beliefs and
How ignorant so many people are who continue to make comments here. No one gave
the Church the street, they bought it. They paid more than the valued price.
It is private property.
Ultra Dem--I don't see eminent domain wouldn't work--unless you mean
politically. Surely ensuring non-discriminatory pedestrian passage between
SLC's giant blocks counts as a "public purpose." (I won't go so far as to
describe the area as "blighted.")The only question would be
determining the fair market value of being able to discriminate against gays.
If I was on the jury, I'd give'em a dollar.
I don't want homosexuals exposing themselves in front of my children. The limp
wrists, swishing, and lisping are inappropriate behavior.
To uncannygunman - the city could not afford to buy the plaza back and emenient
domain wouldn't work, duh!To What? - yes they have every right to
use cuffs and they did contact SLPD after the mos were removed from the plaza,
the private property plaza. To Arthur - sorry, Rocky and the City
Council probably wet their pants thinking of that $8 mil they got for that block
I don't want to deny the church property rights. This whole thing went off the
rails when we gave them the property in the first place.
then let those of us who believe in the rights of private property owners attend
too, and we will respect private property laws and display our banners on city
property. That should be fair.
It was the Mormons who threw the first stone in this scuffle with their bigotet
Proposition H8. They should not act surprised when the gays start throwing
Please, offended Mormons, enlighten an out-of-state observer-I have
seen several of you post comments such as "place of worship" and make bizarre
comparisons to Jewish temples. Can someone please clarify how a sidewalk is a
place of worship? These men didn't enter a Mormon church and hold hands- they
did so on the street.I hope you can all appreciate how much the rest
of the US sympathizes with these victims and breathes a sigh of relief that, for
the most part, you've chosen to sequester yourselves to just Utah.
This demonstration is calculated to disrupt and/or offend the sensibilities of
those attending the broadcast of Music and the Spoken Word tomorrow morning, and
those coming to seek communion with the heavens.Demonstrations like
this will accomplish nothing good for GLTB.
"Have all the homosexuals with overt hate agendas moved west?" In the wrapped
convolutions of the LDS conservative mind a public display of affection becomes
If, Utah was like the rest of the world, no church would own Main Street because
of the negative message this sends to all who don't belong to this church.This couldn't happen in the rest of the Western World. I gay would have
no problem in front of the Cathedral of Notre Dame of Westminster Abbey.Only n Utah, can a church buy Main Street, taking the rights of others
away. I can drink a beer in any plaza fronting as Cathedral.
Catholics don't sent kids claiming to be elder to my door.I've
photographed many churches without being hit on by the police of god.Growing up Mormon in Utah has made me learn to like Catholicism. I love the
architecture devoid of secretive port holes. I love seeing light cast through
stained glass. Where temples look like fortresses from the Soviet
Era, Cathedrals are inspirational. This make you ask, if god is
light and light is truth than god hides nothing.
I hope security block everyone with a paper heart from entering the plaza.
Demonstrations are clearly banned on the plaza and keeping the demonstrators off
is the best action. This was not about love, but forcing PDA onto other
Have all the homosexuals with overt hate agendas moved west?
Rather than an easement why don't we respect the property rights of others and
obey the rules set forth by that property owner?????If I had the
responsibility for security in that area Sunday, I'd close it for the day to all
foot traffic.NO ONE ENTERS... CLOSED TO FOOT TRAFFIC EXCEPT BY
INVITATIONWho is this Seed chick anyway???????
To force the issue and then make a huge thing out of a little confromtation. It
wasn't the church that was in the wrong here, it was the two gay trespassers
that took the incident to the next level.Like almost all gays, they walk
around with a chip on their shoulder and try to force their warped sense of
morality on everyone around them.
The problem with a lot of homosexuals kissing in public is that it makes normal
heterosexual people who happen to witness it want to vomit. Then, we have a
problem with cleaning all of that stuff up.
Hey, my family is full of love and would like to use your back yard for our
family reunion on August 29,2009.I know you won't care because you are
full of love and respect and will accord us the hospitality of your yard and
home without question.Please leave your approval online and publish your
address so we can get our invitations out with the correct information.. We are
all pet lovers so our dogs will be with us as well. I know you won't mind.Thank you Deeda.....And I am a lifelong Democrat Deeda-- I won't be
voting for you in the future...
Very dumb, almost as dumb as selling a public street to a church in the first
Bet she lives in a gated community.
Question: Would the church arrest a father and son showing affection in the same
area? My thought they wouldn't intervene, or if they did they would accept their
answer. Bottom line, go protest at Gay people church's, probably won't find any
because gay people are not ignorant blind sheep like the morale right. If God
hates gay people let him judge them (as soon as he jumps out of the genie
bottle) in the mean time keep baaa baaaa baaaa and pretend your white.
Hey Ms. Seed, show your "love" for others by calling it off and respecting
"Private Property" and others who feel and believe different than you do. To do
what you are planning is doing nothing but planting "Seeds" of hate.
This is so dumb!
SInce when do rent-a-cops have the authority to handcuff anyone? Private
property or not, they should have contacted legitimate law enforcement officers
rather than escalate a situation...
Anybody have Ms. Seed's home address so that we can organize our own event? The
former Councilwoman clearly does not respect the property rights of others, so
she shouldn't have a problem with uninvited guests ignoring her requests to
leave her property.
Wish I were in-state to participate.
Yes. I am sure they are just trying to show love.Uh-huh.
Two gay men provoke an incident, get offended (and arrested) over the results of
their provocation, a laughable news story is written, and now a planned
"kiss-in." I can't get over the fact that this is even a reportable event. I
guess only in Utah! Gay, straight, bi-sexual, whatever....Just follow the rules
and laws that pertain to the places that you visit, and there will not be
anything to report. Excuse me now while I go find a No Trespassing sign and
challenge the landowner by trespassing. Next on my list is a No Hunting, and No
Fishing challenge. How dare those landowners tell me what I can do on their
land! Watch for my planned "fish-in" in the near future.
I'l be there...
Go have your kiss in at the Sorenson Unity Center.Good luck and have
a nice day. It's private property, get used to it. If someone was smoking in
your home, you asked them not to, and they refused, became verbally abusive and
profane with you, would we all be accusing you of "overreacting" for calling the
police? Would I, as your neighbor, call for a "smoke in" on your front lawn,
and view myself as morally superior?
You go girl!
Maybe the city should seize a pedestrian easement across the plaza by eminent
domain. That would solve the problem.
I truly believe these guys did more then just a little kiss and hand hold. I am
sure they were doing it for attention and to prove a point. I wouldn't show up
to a Jewish synagogue and set up a pork hot dog stand and not expect them to
have an issue with it. It's about showing some respect for peoples property and
beliefs. I would be equally disappointed if people were putting "Marriage is
between one man and one woman" signs on someone's lawn without permission. This
"protest" is nothing more than an attention grab by some very insensitive
Obvioiusly the homosexuals were protesting the Church's stand against
homosexuality. Its not as if they weere there admiring the landscaping and just
decided right then and there to get frisky. Hey, homosexuals, leave our Church
I understand protests...but the location and the target audience speaks of how
insensitive the "organizers" are for a belief system and a people. They would
never go protest another religion by, for example, having a pork BBQ on a
sidewalk in front of a church. Or having a Saturday picnic in front of another
church that worships on that day. What a poor indication of character to
protest in this way on this place. Let it go. Go do some service. Do you
really think this protest will do anything except create more controversy? It
will certainly not change policy. This planned event is simply hurtful. But
knowing who is organizing it, it's typical.
If they actually go through with this then all that will happen is repeat of
Thursday. They will be asked to leave and if they don't then they'll be cited
for trespassing. Because the police will have to be involved to remove the
people from the property then it will be a waste of taxpayer money and police
time. Go ahead, do it, and feel good about that fact that just because you don't
like something you then feel you have the right to waste the tax money of every
person in Utah.
What they were doing was not love, it was out of place may be with the intention
of making the gay cause more appealing to their cause. They know this is
private property, and they are like spoiled kids trying to punish us for their
lost in california. If they want to kiss then pay a hotel.
bring their loved ones – husbands, wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, kids
and even pets – to the downtown plaza between 9 a.m. and 10 a.m. and show
their love with a smooch.Kool....I'm in so long as gays are
Yes it is wrong. It is private property and as private property if they do not
want two men kissing in public then they should leave. End of story. And since
they didn't and they made a big deal about it they were escorted off the
property. So now they have to whine about it and get other people involved!
When will gays and homosexuals respects OUR rights to not have to witness their
No one has rights anymore unless they are gay or are willing to flaunt or
celebrate "alternative" behaviors....LDS church...no rights to adhere to moral
beliefs or practices, it is then an agenda; security guards, SLC Police, no
right to enforce the law...they are over reacting....I had gay friends as a teen
in the 60's and 70's, neither they nor I felt the need to flaunt or shove in
each other's faces our beliefs or "agendas." I still have friends who are
gay--thanks to each of you who can accept me and my opinions...and I will
continue to accept you and yours. Together we will tolerate the narcissistic cry
babies who think there is no room in the world for opinions or belief systems
different than their own. Wear your hearts on your sleeves so you can waa waa
Lame,lame, and lame!
If you don't like the rules, then stay off private property!!!! You are there
as a guest and if you cannot conduct yourself with respect and by the rules of
the property owner stay away. Go to your own place and kiss away. Hopefully
you will be asked to leave and arrested if you do not!
This is not a gay vs. Mormon struggle: this is a struggle for tolerance.
Mormons disagree with gays, and gays disagree with Mormons.Mormons
don't go to gay nightclubs and offend gays.Why do gays have to go to
our places of worship to offend us?Call it a lack civility, call it
a lack courtesy, or call it a total lack of tolerance from a special interest
group that demands tolerance of others, but not themselves.I call it
Get a life
I can't make it on Sunday morning but I will be there in spirit supporting those
that can. May God bless us all and make us much more tolerant and less
This will be cool. The LDS church can't seem to stop stepping all over itself