Oregon religious freedom group counters gay marriage ballot proposal

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Dec. 2, 2013 10:33 a.m.

    @sharrona --

    "You know the commandments"

    There is no commandment which says "thou shalt not be homosexual".

    There is also no commandment which says "thou shalt reproduce". In fact, Paul specifically taught that it is better to remain single than to marry -- and Jesus himself said that men who are "born eunuchs" (a term which encompassed gay men) should not marry women (Matthew 19:12).

    As Ranch said, gay marriage doesn't harm anyone. You haven't offered even the slightest bit of evidence to the contrary.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Dec. 1, 2013 2:12 p.m.

    Kalindra, protest outside of *abortion clinics. Should all things related to groups that protest be banned or just things you don't agree with?

    Jesus gave us a guide:
    (Do] You know the commandments: 'You shall not commit adultery, you shall *not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother(not significant other).'" Luke 18:20.

    Honor your Father and Mother which is the first commandment(not a suggestion) with a promise. God distinguishes father and mother from all other persons on earth, chooses them and sets them next to Himself, occupying the highest place in our lives next to God.. Eph 6:2,3.

    RanchHand, re-read the (many, many, many) passages on hypocrisy. True,
    "top judging by mere appearances, and make a right judgment." (John 7:24).

    Last Post.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Dec. 1, 2013 11:07 a.m.

    Sarrona says:

    "One of their issues was about gay marriage."


    Yeah, so?

    Did you pay attention to the so-called "religious" people testifying about gay marriages in Hawaii?

    You're a hypocrite when you only castigate one side for the things they do and ignore the other. Since you like reading and quoting the bible so much, perhaps you'd like to re-read the (many, many, many) passages on hypocrisy.

  • ShmittyWitty Maple Valley, WA
    Nov. 30, 2013 11:02 p.m.

    I don't see how same-sex couples getting married is going to effect my life. Besides, what about separation of church and state? It seems like some on here want a theocracy where they can force others who don't share their beliefs to live by those beliefs. Separation of church and state was meant to prevent that.

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Nov. 30, 2013 9:00 p.m.

    @ sharrona: Westboro Baptists engage in many protests. Political groups engage in protests. There are many groups that protest outside of abortion clinics. Should all things related to groups that protest be banned or just things you don't agree with?

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Nov. 29, 2013 3:55 p.m.

    RanchHand, Your comparison is about angry people, not gay marriage. One of their issues was about gay marriage.

    We were involved with helping homeless vets but we had to leave. You confuse bigotry for the truth,

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Nov. 29, 2013 11:17 a.m.


    Was that the result of gay marriages? No, it wasn't. Your comparison is about angry people, not gay marriage.


    Good for you for choosing bigotry. I'm sure your god is going to just love you for it.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Nov. 29, 2013 8:39 a.m.

    @sharrona --

    "When I lived in San Francisco...."

    There is no comparison whatsoever between a few angry gay activists and all the harm done TO gay people by homophobes across the country and around the world.

    Gays in the US are still eight times more likely to be the victims of violent crimes than straights.

    Another transgender person was beaten to death on the streets of NYC just a couple of months ago -- with the killer shouting anti-gay slurs -- just because he had been flirting with her before he figured out what she was.

    Another transgendered person was found dead in a trashcan in Detroit just a couple of weeks ago.

    Roughly one third -- some estimates say one half -- of all homeless youth are gay. They are often on the streets because their own families kicked them out when they found out they had a gay kid.

    In some countries, homosexuality is literally punishable by death, and gays are even more frequently killed or beaten than they are here.

    So don't you DARE try to compare a few shouting people in San Fran with the violence the LGBT community has to survive every day of their lives.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Nov. 29, 2013 7:37 a.m.

    @ RanchHand ,Gay marriage harms nobody. Partners in crime,

    When I lived in San Francisco some gay rights groups harassed attendees of a local Catholic church. Before The national guard arrived there were several incidents with them.

  • ChuckGG Gaithersburg, MD
    Nov. 28, 2013 11:09 p.m.


    I do not believe it is "too early" at all to see the impact. Within the USA, Massachusetts has had same-sex marriage (SSM) since 2004. It is 49th in the lowest divorce rate, exceeded only by New Jersey. Additionally, we have Canada with SSM starting in 2001. In 1979, the Netherlands had the first "Unregistered Cohabitation" providing some civil rights to gays. In 1989, Denmark recognized "same-sex unions.

    So far, we have had no locust attacks, women have not become barren, and the world has not spiraled into the Abyss of Hell for All Eternity. The morality of which you speak is your opinion, just as an Islamic cleric believes our women going about town UN-covered with no burka is immoral.

    Relax. Unless you are part of a SSM, I would not much worry about it.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Nov. 28, 2013 10:42 p.m.

    RE:RanchHand ,Gay marriage harms nobody.

    When I lived in San Francisco some gay rights groups harassed attendees of a local Catholic church. Before The national guard arrived there were several incidents with the Hetero-phobes..

  • Rikitikitavi Cardston, Alberta
    Nov. 28, 2013 10:36 p.m.

    It is way too early in this whole same-sex marriage debate for anyone to so boldly assert that there is no harm in same-sex marriage. As for me and my house, we choose to side with the Lord's Prophet in opposing same-sex marriage. Rapidly declining moral values can only bode ill for this once-great nation.

  • Sorry Charlie! SLC, UT
    Nov. 28, 2013 10:21 a.m.

    @smart aleck
    one small problem with your logic your business model cannot violate state or federal law. (i.e. public accommodation laws and civil rights laws, unless of course you want to go back to segregation).

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Nov. 28, 2013 10:13 a.m.


    Pedophiles harm children. Gay marriage harms nobody. Therein lies the difference.

    @Smart Aleck;

    Businesses are granted licenses to operate by the government. Those licenses require the business owner to operate within the law, they do not give the business owner carte blanche to discriminate against society.

  • Smart Aleck Vancouver, WA
    Nov. 27, 2013 2:23 p.m.

    Every business operates on core principles and those principles are identified by the individual owners and shareholders. That those principles can, and should, include those that are religiously based should come as no surprise to anyone. This initiative would simply codify the already implied right of individuals to run their businesses according to their own business model, to provide a service to a niche-market, opposite gender weddings, for example.

    Other financial and logistical concerns constantly limit every business from providing service to all-comers, so the right to refuse service to anyone can be as much a matter of insufficient staff as to crossing the religious convictions of the owner.

  • Culbear Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 27, 2013 2:16 p.m.

    I love it how people will use the logic that such previous comments have been open about the idea of consequentialism with this law. But they utterly refute the same logic when people introduce it to say that pedophiles will be saying that they are on equal footing for being attracted to children, or that it will lead to societal acceptance of bestiality and utter removal of marriage as a concept etc... not that I agree with either. It essentially eliminates freedom of the business owner (or whomever is on the awarded end of this bill) deny them they lose repute and business that's how it should be fought not by saying they are mean, make it illegal and punishable to say no to us.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Nov. 27, 2013 1:43 p.m.

    "... it would exempt religious objectors from accommodating same-sex couples."


    No blacks served here.

    No Mormons served here.

    No Catholics served here.

    No inter-racial couples served here.

    Do you see where that leads?

  • ChuckGG Gaithersburg, MD
    Nov. 27, 2013 1:33 p.m.

    In the article: "While exemptions for clergy and houses of worship in same-sex marriage bills have been successful in several states, protections for private individuals have gone nowhere. The Oregon initiative would be the first time such an exemption would be put before voters."

    Well, I would hope they are successful for the clergy and houses of worship as those are covered by the First Amendment. Quite correctly, the States would abide by the U.S. Constitution. The First Amendment "religious umbrella" does not extend to businesses open to the public and this is why they constantly fail. It is not same-sex marriage per se, but outright discrimination based upon sexual orientation.

    Oregon can put these "outside the umbrella" exemptions on the ballot. Should it win, the first court case that comes along will find the law unconstitutional because it is public accommodation discrimination. It is no different than refusing to bake a wedding cake for an inter-racial couple - regardless of the reason. If you are open for business to the public, you are open to ALL of the public. That's the rule. Take it or leave it.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    Nov. 27, 2013 1:27 p.m.

    "right to discriminate initiative"

    And that's exactly what it would be, too.

    -- Does your religion tell you that blacks are inferior to whites? This initiative will allow you to turn them away at your business's front door.

    -- Does your religion tell you that white Christian men are the Evil Overlords? You can turn them away at the front door too.

    -- Does your religion tell you that Mormons are cultists? No wedding cakes for them.

    -- Does your religion tell you that it's sinful to give birth out of wedlock? You don't have to help with baby showers for unwed mothers.

    -- Does your religion tell you that women should stay in the home and raise babies? You don't have to hire any to work for your business.

    -- Does your religion tell you that blood transfusions are evil? The hospital you run doesn't have to offer them to any of its patients.

    -- Does your religion tell you that taxes are the work of the Devil? No income tax for you!

    Talk about slippery slopes and unintended consequences! This sort of right-to-discriminate law would only lead to widespread hatred and fragmentation of society.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 27, 2013 1:16 p.m.


  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 27, 2013 1:01 p.m.

    Freedom is for people first. Not corporations, nor religion.