Traditional marriage advocates rally over lunch in Orem to make voices heard

I am a lifelong Utahn, a lesbian woman with a wife of 18 years. We have 3 beautiful children together who are amazing individuals. We were married legally in California, but are suddenly unmarried when we cross into Utah. Silly, really. Growing up, everyone wants to find their soul-mate and get married. There is no "secret" plot of gay people here to undermine the Constitution. Hello? Really? I am married because I chose a spouse! Why did you get married? And how on earth is it anyone's business who "I" choose to marry? Our lives are so fantastically normal I wish I could invite everyone who is so upset about our "family " to come and spend some time with us. I guarantee you would be changed. And it shouldn't matter but I will offer for the sake of some that we are a religious, church-going bunch whose congregation is very accepting of our family. And our church has accepted and blessed our wedding vows. We are citizens of Utah. We are citizens of the United States. Nice to meet you. We are your neighbors. Our kids go to school together. We are in PTA together. We are.

Gays are free to love and be, this is not about that, I have gay family members and know that activists are seeking to destroy the First Amendment and take away the rights of religious persons to be involved. Those Utahns and Americans who have open eyes realize that powerful activists are currently taking away the rights of Americans to vote, have a say on laws, speak out on moral issues, and so on. This is about America's Constitution, and the Family is the backbone of Civilization. I do hope people will be stirred to action and I want to know how I might become involved, I can't stand idly by while this happens.

Many of us feel the same way, we trusted that Judges would be honest etc and didn't really think that activists would be as dishonest, selfish, and powerful as they are. Please read "Crafting Gay Children" for more info on what is going on in our Country. Those pushing these agendas have little concern for society as a whole, or government by the People, they overturn laws and constitutions and take control with pressure, money, threats and media manipulation (this includes the activists who hang out on the DN and Trib etc, they are employed to sway opinions and pretend they are people that they are not).

iron&clay

"The 10th amendment of the constitution leaves all the power with the States to guard the public morals and the public health. End of story"

Not quite.

The 9th Amendment to the Constitution reinforces the fact that INDIVIDUALS have "unenumerated rights" (such as the right to marry the person of their choosing), the equal protection of which is guaranteed by the Constitution. States can NOT violate the equal protection of individual rights.

Grateful Federal A.G. has clarified the marriage status for those who married – grateful Utah A.G. has recanted his original instruction and now confirms this clarification as well. Legal sanity has prevailed. Let us live within the legal rules of our land ... and for those who disagree, may they find a country whose legal rules fit their beliefs.

This affects 2.5-3% of the population, so please all the nonsense about perfect child rearing conditions, they don't exist.

That also means that 97% of the gay population comes from what the religious folks mistakenly call "Traditional Marriage." By the bad logic exhibited here traditional procreation is the main cause of gays being born.

I wish Monte Stewart would mange to get his voice heard on this issue more. His balanced and reasoned secular defence of man/woman marriage may be less fiery than Ruzicka's talk, but it is also much more compelling and needed.

We need man/woman marriage because marriage is about child rearing and that is the only way to have marriage in a form that points to child rearing.

The 10th amendment of the constitution leaves all the power with the States to guard the public morals and the public health. End of story

@Badgerbadger;

Please show me one person who has tried to make you have an SSM. Legal recognition of our marriages won't hurt you in the least.

@fowersjl
"...two women "marry" and want to have children, so one decides she is the "wife" and gets impregnated through artificial insemination. That child then wants to know later who his father is. A sperm bank is the answer...other male figures...will hardly be a great substitute for a missing father. The perfect way to raise children is in an intact family with a female mother and a male father. History has proven that for centuries. Eroding that model further will continue to bring societies down. It's about the children."

First off, a majority of the studies regarding committed/married homosexual parents concludes they are just as good, or better, at child rearing compared to heterosexual parents. Second, don't adopted children, or children raised by a single women that were artificially inseminated/unintentionally pregnant, or children who had one of their parents die when they were young have these same types questions and issues? Based on your logic we should make adoption, being single and pregnant, and dying unintentionally when you have children all illegal.

@ Bandersen:
You wrote:
"The federal government has no right to intervene in those decisions, to say yes or to say no! If the people of a state want to allow incest then so be it. I doubt it will get that far, but that is the way our system of government works."

It is curious, because it seems that the Federal Government through the SCOTUS has already intervened.

" I will do whatever I can legally do to save any child from growing up in a marriage that by word and deed shows only contempt for God's laws,"

Really, banderson? Well I have total contempt for what Mormons believe is God's law. Will you try to stop me from raising children? I'd like to see you try.

"SS partners can believe they are a married couple, but are they willing to let those who believe that marriage is a partnership with God, and he requires marriage be a man and a woman, to believe that you are not really married? "

Well, you can believe what ever you want. Nobody stops people from being delusional.

"You (SSM supporters) are trying to force everybody else to abide by your beliefs."

This is an absolutely bizarre idea. Do you think anybody is trying to force you to be homosexual? Or is your complaint just that you have to live in a world that has homosexuals?

Banderson said: "Your push for rights are no different than someone pushing for the right to marry their child or men to marry beasts."

So to you, their is no difference between animals and gays and child molesters, just as Jesus taught?

The federal government has no right to intervene in those decisions, to say yes or to say no!
Utah had to change their "traditional marriage laws" just to get statehood. What make you believe this is different?
Now were a state so we can allow incest if the majority votes for it?

This is where your argument turns to the absurd, and complete hyperbole, which is why it won't work in court either.

Why has nearly every culture in the world, since the beginning, had the good sense to recognize and foster marriages between one man and one woman? Because it takes both to have children.

"Marriage is between man and woman! No if's, and's, or but's!"

Meh. . . just your opinion. That and two bucks will buy you a Big Mac.

@badgerbadger 11:28pm

Not true. You can always believe that your marriage is superior to another. You can "know this in your heart of hearts", and no one will really care. Please read my comment posted on page 3 at 8:45am. Lots of people apparently agree.

Two for flinching: I'm not forcing you to do anything. It is you that is trying to force the state to recognize something that isn't a right under the Constitution. The states, a state which you voluntarily are a part of, had the authority to decide on these matters and you want the federal government to intervene in something it has no power to intervene. Your push for rights are no different than someone pushing for the right to marry their child or men to marry beasts. The federal government has no right to intervene in those decisions, to say yes or to say no! If the people of a state want to allow incest then so be it. I doubt it will get that far, but that is the way our system of government works. The states are of right sovereign entities that are only limited by the Constitution, something that almost all gay marriage advocates don't understand. DOMA should never have been passed. The federal government has no authority or right to impose on the states anything that belongs to the state. The words of the Constitution have meaning! Study them.

"I can see why these folks are concerned about making their voices heard. No one is speaking publicly for their concerns - well, no one other than the Governor, the Attorney General, most members of the State Legislature, the leaders of the dominant local religious institution, the editorial board of the Deseret News . . . "

Yes, you are right of course. There is no one that plays the victim card as often and as effectively as a conservative. It's almost their entire MO. They are always the victim. They love being the victim. They thrive on it. That and their arguments based 100 % on emotion.

To "I M LDS 2" that depends on what you want to call scripture. No, it is not part of what many consider scripture, but it does contain the DOCTRINES of the LDS church.

If you really want to get technical and say that only the BoM, Bible, D&C, and PoGP are admissable, then you are really messed up. You are denying that prophets give us continual revelation.

Just because it has not been included in the D&C, does not make it any less valid or important to follow. You should read 2 Timothy 3:1-7, and pay attention to verses 5 and 7.

Also see D&C 1:38 "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same."

By saying that the Proclamation is just a suggestion is saying that God didn't really mean it. It was written by a Prophet, signed by 3 Prophets, and presented to the entire church during General Confrence. If that doesn't make it scripture, nothing will.

@Tiago

What is your definition between love and lust?

I read these comments and observe the wretched depravity to which this nation has fallen with total disregard, even contempt, for that God which brought forth this nation and see prophecy being fulfilled. A sad day indeed.

The fight will come down to the churches standing for their rights to not marry those of the same sex in the churches. When we refuse, the next step will be to take away our tax exempt status, which is one of the biggest hammer they have against us right now. This will mark a change in religion and the tolerance of religion in our country. Don't ever forget that they forced us to define marriage when we became a state. Their standards are forever changing, ours cannot.

Traditional marriage is as old as time itself. It clearly states in the bible that marriage is between a man and a woman. (except for the parts where Abraham had more than one wife but other than that the bible clearly states marriage is between one man and one woman.)

"You are free to believe whatever you like, but please stop trying to force everybody else to abide by your beliefs."

Back at you!

SS partners can believe they are a married couple, but are they willing to let those who believe that marriage is a partnership with God, and he requires marriage be a man and a woman, to believe that you are not really married? Nope. It is all your way only. There is no "you can believe what you like" for anyone but yourself.

You (SSM supporters) are trying to force everybody else to abide by your beliefs.

@ bandersen

Conceiving children is not, nor has it ever been a requirement to get married. Also, there are many same-sex parents who are wonderful, loving, and supportive parents. You are free to believe whatever you like, but please stop trying to force everybody else to abide by your beliefs.

I was taught from an early age that Satan's plan was to force everyone to live according to a rigid set of rules. By not allowing us to each make our own choices, he would guarantee that we would all make it back to our Father. The problem with that plan is that we don't grow when we are compelled to do what is "right." The plan that we chose allows for us all to make choices and learn from our mistakes.

Too many of our laws in Utah are designed to compel people to do the "right" thing. We need to start thinking about the freedoms of others and allow them to make what we consider to be mistakes or sins as long as they do not interfere with the freedoms of everyone else.

If you fear that marriage equality will force you to bake cakes or take photographs at a gay wedding, then I suggest it's time you find a new career. If you don't want to change careers, maybe you could stop doing all weddings; that way you aren't discriminating.

Happy Valley heretic: If you prefer that I just use a Prophet's words, I could? However, I'm certain you are aware of the words of the prophets, both ancient and modern. I have a whole host of things that I need to change, but one thing I am certain I won't have to recant is defending one of the most simple and beautiful doctrines ever designed for the joy and happiness of men and women, which is marriage! The Lord will never tell me I was wrong about that. I think that any person that marries someone of the same gender is self-absorbed. I don't know of any other word to describe someone that avoids the responsibility of marriage and children. I will do whatever I can legally do to save any child from growing up in a marriage that by word and deed shows only contempt for God's laws, then I will. Society has an obligation to think about children. There is nobody in the gay movement that is thinking about the affects of this on children because the first priority is themselves--obviously.

@ Danny Jackson

If you don't believe in SSM, don't get married to someone of your same gender. You have no right to say who other consenting adults can marry.

Your gods don't have a right to infringe on the rights of real people. It doesn't matter how deeply you believe in them; they're not real.

I believe in God and that he set up marriage to be between a man and a wife and that same sex marriage is against God's law. Therefore, I support traditional marriage. I don't understand what it means to be gay; I don't know if it is something you choose or if you are born gay. But I also don't know why kids are born with AIDS or to conditions so unfavorable to their survival. I don't know why some Jews' lives were cut short during the Holocaust. There is much about life that isn't fair. I believe that all people, gay or straight, want to be loved and we generally express that love through marriage in family. So I can understand why gay people want marriage and family.
However, I believe it important to look beyond this life. God has an eternal plan for gay people like he does for the millions of children who haven't lived to reach age 5. Is it fair to deny gay people marriage? I'm not sure it is. But I have to take a stand in accord with my beliefs.

I fear we will discover all too soon just what complications SSM will eventually cause to traditional values and the freedoms of those who do not agree with this fad.

I, like others who have spoken out here, am LDS. The First Presidency has reaffirmed that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. As long as I continue to have my rights to believe as I choose -- I will continue to support and sustain the leaders of the church --- not blindly, but in response to heart felt thought and prayer.

And to those convinced that Jesus would have us not only love everyone, which I agree with, but also endorse the varied lifestyles of everyone, we are also reminded that Jesus cleansed the temple twice.

@ fowersjl

If it was really about the children you would be trying to outlaw divorce. That effects FAR more kids than SSM ever will.

I M LDS 2-

You claim a spiritual confirmation that gay marriage is right -- this is surely not from the Spirit of God since it opposes fundamental doctrine and living Prophets' words.

You say Gospel Principles and the Proclamation is not canonized and thus imply it is not scripture and something we can just ignore. Did you know it does not need to be canonized to be scripture? Read D&C 68:3-4:

" 3 And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation."

The Proclamation about the Family was spoken by a Prophet of God (and 12 Apostles) moved upon by the Spirit! The Proclamation is the will of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, the word of the Lord, and the voice of the Lord.

Marriage is between man and woman! No if's, and's, or but's!

'How do you deny people in a "loving way" the right to liberty and happiness?'

Well said Shaun.

I am a heterosexual husband of 25 years. I get uncomfortable at the thought of two men being intimate, kissing each other, or even holding hands. But guess what--that is my issue to deal with.

You can believe anything you want about persons in the LGBT community. You may have books that suggest a LGBT lifestyle is evil. You can believe children are best served with one mom and one dad. Just don't let your personal feelings cloud the important decisions that affect your LGBT neighbors. The children with same sex parents are fine--they're better off than children with a single parent and outcomes are not better relative to children with one mom and one dad. Don't just trust what an extremist group may suggest--perform your own research and expand your knowledge.

Don't let yourself be uncomfortable just because people different from you have a different path to happiness than you do. Embrace tolerance. Allow your neighbors to be who they are, with the same rights and privileges that you have. We have tied secular benefits to marriage, and to deprive same sex marriages the same secular benefits is unjustified.

@Really????
I hope that you find love and marriage and live a happy authentic life. If only the majority here would allow the same for all.

@ M Hes, I am a "good" Latter Day Saint. I pay my tithing, hold a Temple Recommend and pray regularly. None of that has anything to do with the rights of same-sex couples to obtain a marriage license from the State and have it recognized for purposes of filing joint taxes, sharing health benefits, hospital visitation rights. I am a FIRM believer in the separation of Church and State. My faith and belief has absolutely no bearing in my support of marriage equality from a legal standpoint.

"It is hard to believe so many, even one is astonishing, LDS people who haven't read the Book of Mormon scripture that says that you can't take happiness in sin."

Actually, I have read the scriptures, fasted, and prayed hundreds--more likely thousands--of times asking to have my sin of homosexuality removed. It never happened. One day, however, when I changed my prayers, I received the distinct impression that my sin was dishonesty. I wasn't being truthful about who I am. I moved from a single adult ward to the family ward where I reside. I never get visits from anyone in my new ward, and 95% of the single adults from the previous ward have neglected to make contact with me since I came to terms with who I am.

Is my life lonelier now that I have accepted my sexual identity? Yes, but I am also happier in the honest life I am now living.

EDM said "I have brave, active, temple-working family members who have made it very clear to church leaders that they do not agree with the Proclamation because it isn't inclusive."

It is officially entitled "The Family: A Proclamation to the World"

That is inclusive of every single human on earth.

@ Versant

Thankyou for your comments regarding why you are opposed to same sex marriage. As an active LDS who is married to a woman I agree with you 100%.

Voices in the grassroots for traditional marriage: today Golden Corral, tomorrow the Salt Palace. From there the national mall or the White House. I support traditional marriage. It is time we had a strong voice! Lots of squawking from the other side!

I'm a Mormon living in one of the most conservative areas in the state and I've always found this argument ridiculous. While marriage does have religious ceremonies involved, as far as State and Federal is concerned, it is a legal definition. You are not recognized as 'married' until you get a marriage license from the court. There are no legal reasons why same-sex marriages should not be allowed; only religious reasons are ever presented. And in this great country of ours, we believe in religious freedom and the separation of Church and State. That is why the law was found Unconstitutional, not because of any "activist" judge.

RedShirt,

The Gospel Principles book is NOT scripture.

Enough said.

@ MAYHEM MIKE
You wrote:
" to your dredging up remarks by Mark E. Petersen and others re mixing the races: Elder Petersen was wrong. Got it? He was wrong, and, although I support him as an ordained Apostle of the Lord, I completely disavow his prejudiced remarks. He was a prophet only when speaking as such; the discourse was his opinion and his, alone."

Thank you for your honest answer. As an LDS I have never read anything "revealed" about homosexuality. Nothing in the BOM, D&C, Pearl of Great Price.

Homosexuality is mentioned in Leviticus/The Law of Moses and in the words of Paul. Paul epistles were letters to guide members with what he thought was best, using your words "his opinion and his, alone". Was he writing as a church leader or as a prophet? After all, Peter was the highest leader of the church, yet, he didn't mention the subject.

Perhaps you would like to google " Joseph Smith and Homosexuality" The prophet seemed to have been very at ease with the subject.

In the meantime perhaps you or somebody else could guide me to a "Latter Day Revelation" about this subject.

I am really concerned about those of you who claim to be good LDS and you support gay marriage! You apparently do not understand the doctrine about marriage. It appears you do not consider marriage as the sacred, special institution that it is. It is not just about two same gender people being in love, it is about their lifestyle being based upon an unnatural sex act AND the facts they want to destroy the institution of marriage and cram their lifestyle down our throats. Please consider this thought…

“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As to be hated needs but to be seen; Yet too oft, familiar with her face, We first endure, then pity, then embrace.”

- Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
English Poet, Critic, and Translator

Where in this cycle are you?

I'm a nice person, and I do not support gay marriage.

I've no problem with these people voicing their opinions.

I do have a problem with any support of the State's current action to not honor the marriage certificates which were legal when issued. This is not a difficult legal issue. The state is directly disobeying the Federal ruling.

Anyone who supports that does not support the Constitution.

@Spellman789
I love the religious community enough to show them that the path they are on is a dead end. I try to reason with them about science, equality, and justice. I give them evidence about the LGTB community and how marriage rights for them will protect all children and not just families in hetero marriages. I explain to them that we live in a democracy and not a theocracy and that benefits everyone because no one religion should dictate their dogma to all. I remind them that they are a minority in the US and there groups that don't even believe they are Christians. Allowing gays to marry is the right thing to do, not because you approve of gays, but because we live in a country where the majority does not get to deny the rights of the minority.

@ATL134: You wrote, "How about you google "slippery slope logical fallacy (sic)". I have and and the arguments presented there either admit that there is no conclusive way to predict the social outcome of same-sex marriage, or use arguments that are not logically on point (i.e., comparing mix-race marriages or marriage between humans and non-humans, etc.).

All of you who are condemning members of the Church for being pro-gay marriage, please read what was said during Prop 8:

"Latter-day Saints are free to disagree with their church on the issue without facing any sanction, said L. Whitney Clayton of the LDS Quorum of the Seventy. "We love them and bear them no ill will."

Either you believe this or you think he was lying.

@WILF55: Here's my response (as a devout Mormon) to your dredging up remarks by Mark E. Petersen and others re mixing the races: Elder Petersen was wrong. Got it? He was wrong, and, although I support him as an ordained Apostle of the Lord, I completely disavow his prejudiced remarks. He was a prophet only when speaking as such; the discourse was his opinion and his, alone. The former quotes as to the so-called "seed of Cain" have been completely disavowed as incorrect doctrine by present LDS leaders. (See remarks made by Bruce R. McConkie when the revelation giving priesthood to the blacks was received.) Consult LDS.ORG for the Church's complete statement. Finally, the doctrine of the LDS Church is completely irrelevant when debating what harmful social effects gay marriage later might foist upon our children. That is a chapter yet to be written. Are you prophetic enough to bet the future emotional well-being of your children and grandchildren on your support for it? I'm not.

To "I M LDS 2" you are wrong. If you go to your Gospel Principels book, chapter 10, it states "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts four books as scripture: the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. These books are called the standard works of the Church. The inspired words of our living prophets are also accepted as scripture....In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, the Liahona or Ensign magazine, and instructions to local priesthood leaders."

The Family Proclamation should be considered scripture.

You said that if the Prophet said to support marriage equality, you would run to do so. Well, the Prophet has said that we should support laws that support traditional marriage of a man and a woman. The "Church Statement on Definition of Marriage" the church leadership said that "We especially urge those entrusted with the public good to support laws that uphold the time-honoured definition of marriage." Why do you not support Utah's ammendment that upholds the time-honored definition of marriage?

bandersen said:
"I'm LDS Too: This is the most irresponsible bizarre understanding of said scripture that I have ever heard. If you are a member in good standing, I would challenge you to go tell the Prophet that you supposedly sustain that he doesn't speak for God when he says that marriage is between a man and a women. "

I would challenge you to think for yourself occasionally and realize that men are not perfect even prophets...

(BYU address) Brigham Young said "If the white man mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, (black man) the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (JD 10).

Judging others though, that is where your talent obviously lies.

For those of us who are Latter Day Saints, and who are striving to do what is right, the statement issued by our Church following the court ruling on same-sex marriages in Utah gives us clear direction, as does the Family Proclamation.

That 'news room' statement is as follows: "The Church has been consistent in its support of traditional marriage while teaching that all people should be treated with respect. This ruling by a district court will work its way through the judicial process. We continue to believe that voters in Utah did the right thing by providing clear direction in the state constitution that marriage should be between a man and a woman, and we are hopeful that this view will be validated by a higher court."

The key words, in this statement, I believe, are 'all people should by treated with respect' and 'marriage should be between a man and a woman'.

How grateful I am for a Prophet in these latter days, when so many are running every which way.

Spellman789: "I love the LGBT community enough to show them the path they are on is a dead end. There is a life after this, and what can they expect? ... What kind of love is that to encourage someone in a relationship that will end as surely as this life will end? What about the long term?"

Thank you for worrying about their afterlife. But all they ask now is to be allowed to marry "till death does us part." Your belief in eternal marriage and eternal procreation is admirable, but it does not give the right to deny two responsible adults a civil marriage here on earth.

I M LDS 2 - We will need to respectfully agree to disagree on this issue.

If you truly believe what you have posted, then you must also believe that the Plan of Salvation (as has always been taught to LDS people) will need to be completely altered as will the temple ceremony to include same sex marriage. The Spirit confirms to me that this is simply false and will never happen.

RE A Quaker, Quaker Meetings have discerned that when two men or two women have been joined together in this fashion, we may witness it and celebrate their marriage under the care of our Meetings in the same fashion as we do men-women marriages. It is the work of the Lord, not of Man, and not ours to reject. Wrong,

… do you not know that the unrighteous] will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality(1 Cor 6:9).

…, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.(Rom 1:26-27)

'Of course it affects my marriages and my children and society at large. Children growing up thinking this is normal are going to be confused and weakened both socially and morally.'

People don't even see it, do they?

Making the fabricated and false claim that marriage equality affects 'my marriages and y children'…

when 1) In the SAME SENTENCE (perhaps by omission) the person claims 1) marriages. Plural. When marriage is 'traditionally' only supposed to be once in a lifetime.

2) In the SAME SENTENCE claims that the 'direct' harm done by marriage equality to the person…

effects an abstract and not individual 'society'.

Look. I understand people feel strongly about marriage equality.

But lying about what actually happens when Utah allowed marriage equality?

Does not mean you are on the 'right' side of history, when you have to lie.

bandersen
Saint George, UT
"This issue isn't about marriage; it is about destroying God."

.... Uhhh, if He is God, He cannot be destroyed"

"It is hard to believe so many, even one is astonishing, LDS people who haven't read the Book of Mormon scripture that says that you can't take happiness in sin."

... It's astonishing to think that too many lds members think that Civil Law and the US Constitution are subordinate to the book of mormon.
-----
Mr__scott
Alpine, UT
"We often talk about the gay marriage issue in terms of freedom and love. We are bound to mutual respect for each other and our different views....
God made both man and woman, and has only sanctified sexual relations within the divinely appointed union of marriage. All sexual relations outside of this are held by God as sin."

--- I would not have the slightest argument with that, if you kept it at church and did not expect to add it to Civil Law.

EXCEPT that it breaks my heart, and (for me) offends God mightily, when you produce Gay children and tell them that what God put in their heart is evil and bad.

"This is a war that can only be one by standing up for whats right, and letting the pro SSM liberal activist judges know we will not be intimidated and force to accept whats wrong, but that we will stand together and fight for whats right! our family, nay our world depends on us to stop this!"

Actually, you will. One of the best ideas that came out of the founding of this nation was the system of checks and balances. The courts were established to address the fears of thinkers like Adams who feared the tyranny of the majority stepping on the rights of the minority. What these "activist judges" are doing is exactly what they are supposed to do: rule according to what they feel is the law and ensure the Constitution isn't violated. People have fought the decisions before (Little Rock, anyone?), but in the end, you will be forced to accept it.

@bandersen @ 1.96 standard deviation

So well said! I stand with you on this issue.

ImaUteFan,

"the Proclamation on the Family" is not canonized scripture. The Doctrine & Covenants IS. Scripture trumps everything else. Church leaders have said so themselves.

Additionally, this quote: "Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets" does not contradict or go against marriage equality. There is NO evidence that marriage equality would contribute to, cause, or in any way bring about one iota of "disintegration of the family". In fact, it creates INTEGRITY in the newly formed families of same sex couples!

When the Church Leaders say, "We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society." - I run with that call to support marriage equality, which explicitly strengthens ALL families (notice the Brethren do not single out on "traditional" families) as the fundamental unit of society!

I strongly believe not only will history, but also Heavenly Father, will vindicate my interpretation, which I feel has been confirmed by the Spirit.

To those who are surprised that members of the church in good standing could support marriage equality, I will try to explain my position. I am fully active in the church. I listen to all of general conference and review it during the year, read the scriptures, pray, and attend the temple.
I also experience same sex attraction and have many friends who experience this. I will personally follow my beliefs and never have a relationship with another man. It is a sacrifice I make because of my beliefs. I support other people of faith who do the same thing, but I would never try to pressure someone who doesn't believe to make the same choice because it would not help them. It would be cruel. I think that nonreligious gay people who want to marry and be faithful to one person for a lifetime is a lot better than making an environment where they feel shunned and have to hide their love in back alleys.
Public disapproval, shunning, and maligning will not help any gay person. Let's support them in their good intentions to form committed relationships.

I love the LGBT community enough to show them the path they are on is a dead end. There is a life after this, and what can they expect? To continue in this lifestyle after death? For LDS individuals you know the only marriage relationships that will continue beyond the grave are those sealed in holy temples between a man and a woman who keep their committments. Why are we encouraging and even applauding so called equal marriage when you know it is not equal, and same sex marriage is a dead end. Can two people "love" each other, sure. Will it last? No. What kind of love is that to encourage someone in a relationship that will end as surely as this life will end? What about the long term?

@ImaUteFan
Proclamation of the Family says man and woman, husband and wife; however, it does not say "biological" because it cannot, as many are born with mixed organs (medically speaking). Utah ironically has pushed the issue of marriage freedom all the way to the Supreme Court which may require all states to comply with possible new federal ruling in favor of marriage equality for all (Governor ruling, A.G. ruling, contemptible legal advice to county, state, and federal administrations and emergency stay instead of calm appeal procedure). Utah's new attorney general has just guaranteed that the both the federal Circuit Court and the U.S. Supreme Court will find Utah in violation of the 14th Amendment concerning legal marriage, thus invalidating an individual state as final arbiter of marriage. This has left the federal courts with no recourse other than invalidating both a state attorney general's definition of legal marriage and a state constitution's definition of legal marriage when such definitions abridge the rights of citizens as stated in the Supreme Court's invalidation of DOMA.

"Gay marriage a Trojan horse... an attack on religion!!"

Oh brother.

Utah's religious "family values" have driven Utah's sons and daughters out of their families, their homes, their state for far too long. Lives have been diminished and destroyed.

It's hard to have sympathy for someone whose greatest fear is that someone, somewhere, might be "forced" to bake a cake.

Man the battle stations!

It's true that kids might encounter this scary fact in school: Some people are gay and fall in love, get married, raise kids, and lead perfectly recognizable lives.

Some people view this as some sort of ant hill to be quickly breezed through and to get on with more important things! Nothing could be further from the truth. This issue isn't about marriage; it is about destroying God. It is hard to believe so many, even one is astonishing, LDS people who haven't read the Book of Mormon scripture that says that you can't take happiness in sin. If LDS people are afraid to even stand by one of the most cherished institutions God has ever created to bring children into the world, what other issue really matters? It is time stand for something! This is a welcoming battle and great division that is looming here in Utah and across the country! No one will be able to straddle the fence on this one. A merciful God doesn't look kindly on those who take His word and spit on it!

@donn:

"For the right joining in marriage is the work of the Lord only, and not the priests or magistrates; for it is God's ordinance and not Man's; and therefore Friends cannot consent that they should join them together; for we marry none; it is the Lord's work, and we are but witnesses." -- George Fox, 1669

Taking this Truth, and living our Testimony of Equality, some Quaker Meetings have discerned that when two men or two women have been joined together in this fashion, we may witness it and celebrate their marriage under the care of our Meetings in the same fashion as we do men-women marriages. It is the work of the Lord, not of Man, and not ours to reject.

I M LDS 2 (from page 1 of comments):

You have "wrested" (which means twisted) the scriptures in D&C 134 with a clearly false interpretation and application. You might want to follow gittalopctbi's advice (page 1 of comments) and re-read 2 Peter 1:20 and Alma 13:20 about interpreting and "wresting" the scriptures.

Add to your reading Ephesian 4:11-14. In summary, God gave prophets/apostles so "that we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." You well know what the First Presidency and 12 Apostles have said regarding the matter on marriage. Read the Proclamation about the Family!

Lastly, President Hinckley said in the 1999 October Conference Talk, Why We Do Some of the Things We Do, the following:

"God-sanctioned marriage between a man and a woman has been the basis of civilization for thousands of years. There is no justification to redefine what marriage is. Such is not our right, and those who try will find themselves answerable to God."

Meckofahess says:

"However, as an LDS member are you suggesting that we should disregard the Proclamation on The Family?"

Nope; feel free to wallpaper your kitchen with it and recite it every morning at dawn, but you can't expect anyone who's not of your faith to treat it with reverence, can you?

"Forcing parents to accept the teaching of homosexuality in schools . . "

High comedy! What exactly is the "teaching of homosexuality"? Are we talking physical mechanics or simply fabulous fashion tips?

"Allowing those confused about their gender identity to enter into opposite sex restrooms and locker rooms."

Higher comedy! I must've missed all the unisex bathroom rallies whipping the Gay Mafia into a frenzy. Because, of course, gays want nothing more than to see the opposite sex go to the bathroom. I vaguely remember my father going on about this during the ERA debate of the 70's. It was goofy then and it's goofy now.

"Don't stop loving your son, but don't deny me my rights, either."

It's like a broken record. What rights are you being denied? Your right for other consenting adults not to marry?

keep the faith ladies! we need more people like you to stand up to activist judges, and prove that the best way to raise a family is between a mother and a father. This is the number one threat to not only Utah, but also to the world right now! This is a war that can only be one by standing up for whats right, and letting the pro SSM liberal activist judges know we will not be intimidated and force to accept whats wrong, but that we will stand together and fight for whats right! our family, nay our world depends on us to stop this!

I'm LDS Too: This is the most irresponsible bizarre understanding of said scripture that I have ever heard. If you are a member in good standing, I would challenge you to go tell the Prophet that you supposedly sustain that he doesn't speak for God when he says that marriage is between a man and a women. I assume you haven't read any statements by present or past prophets concerning the matter, nor do you reflect even the vaguest understanding that all of our law represents religious influence, including the concept of marriage. When I hear an LDS person state that there is no connection between religious laws and civil laws, I am astonished beyond measure. I am only reminded of not only darkness, but how deep is that darkness. With your brazen statements, I can only assume that at some point your tag line will include the word "Once...but not anymore!"

marriage equality is a worldly thing not a religious thing. if you are for the worldly things in life then ssm is for you if you are for ssm what is the next step marriage in temples and churches. there agenda doesn't stop here.

The Family: A Proclamation to the world was issued by the LDS church in 1995. Nearly 2 decades later we are seeing how prophetic it actually was. here are some points on that proclamation.
Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God.
The family is ordained of God and central to God's plan.
All human beings are created in the image of God.
Gender is an essential characteristic of human identity before, during, and after life on Earth.
Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.
Fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners.

President Hinckly, LDS prophet at the time of the proclamation has been quoted "our opposition to attempts to legalize same-sex marriage should never be interpreted as justification for hatred, intolerance, or abuse of those who profess homosexual tendencies, either individually or as a group.

Lastly, we were counseled that "Citizens and officers of government should promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society"

We must no longer be the silent majority

@meckofahess 11:35

"However, as an LDS member are you suggesting that we should disregard the Proclamation on The Family? Should we disregard what the scriptures say about the sinfulness of homosexuality? Should we disregard the the teachings of our leaders? Should we disregard our conscience?"

You didn't ask me, but I'll answer, if you don't mind. Answer: Take it all with a grain of salt.
- I have brave, active, temple-working family members who have made it very clear to church leaders that they do not agree with the Proclamation because it isn't inclusive.
- We should never read the scriptures literally. Can you imagine trying to buy clothing that doesn't have blended fabrics because the Bible instructs us not to wear such things?
- We should never follow our leaders without listening to our own moral compass first. Be brave when your moral compass tells you something different than you hear from church leaders. All good LDS church leaders will tell you they are fallible, and will respect your position when you are true to yourself.

To those who claim that SSM presents no threat to society and traditional marriage and also to those who are so easily persuaded because they know someone who is really nice and wants to have a SSM, I say do a quick Google search and read of the consequences to religious freedoms in today's society. It is far reaching and very troubling. Those in favor are greatly camouflaging the far reaching consequences. This isn't just a be fair and nice to everyone issue as many try to make it. That is a given; however, to change the moral foundation of our country is not just some small thing. please do your own search and see what the effects have already been in other states just a few strides ahead of Utah in this controversy. I applaud those who are standing firm. In saying this, I truly do not attack anyone personally- just the issue.

Glad to see conservative Christians waking up in Utah....finally. These people tend to be pretty silent on issues until they sense danger and then they act. I have said this a thousand times... we are at WAR in the country with the progressive left. It may not be a war of guns and bullets but it is none the less a war where there can only be winners and losers. No room for compromise. If people in the state of Utah want to maintain the quality, family friendly ,wholesome neighborhoods to raise their kids in then they are going to have to FIGHT for them. I could care less what those on the left think or want ... don't care anymore. Those on the left have their view of America and it is not my view or hope for America. Not even in the same universe. I liked what Pres Reagan once said when asked about his views on the Cold War. He simply said "we win and they lose". That sums up my feelings exactly going forward.

@A Quaker. Traditional marriage. The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24.

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33 In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the. crowning achievement of God’s creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself. Marriage then, is the first institution of human society.

The Christian tradition refers to marriage as “holy matrimony” because it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee.
The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience is a manifesto issued by Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical. (Christians united by the belief in the Tri-une God).

I don't know why my last three posts have been rejected by DN? I always try to stay respectful.

Anyway, people fighting against same-sex marriage have yet to provide any compelling evidence that justifies restricting marriage to one man-one woman that does not also justify criminalizing divorce and adoption by homosexuals and single people.

Without also calling for these restrictions, your arguments have no logic or validity.

Katy: As a Quaker, I'm pretty much committed to Equality. It's one of our most important Testimonies, and it comes from our discernment that That Of God lives in each of His children, since He made them. You're conceding that you're willing to treat gay people the same, and I commend you for that, but only as long as you can fool yourself that it's something different.

It's not. All love comes from God, the universal source of all love. When two people love each other, that's God's love, speaking through each of them, to each of them, and to all of us.

One of the most important legal benefits of marriage is being treated as a household unit by the government, and for now at least, the Federal government only fully recognizes the word "marriage." To give people equal treatment, you must let them use the one word that the Feds recognize.

To DUPDaze: We do. The Friends General Conference of the Religious Society of Friends supports same-sex couples and families and treats them with the respect we accord all couples and families. Google FGCQuaker same-sex.

@katy
"We have no problems with allowing people who are committed to each other and go thru a ceremony of some kind pledging their love to each other receiving the same benefits"

You all wouldn't have voted for Amendment 3 (which bans civil unions or anything that sets it up so that they receive roughly the same benefits) if that were the case.

@ImaUteFan
"I, too, am baffled by the support of SSM by "active" LDS members. "

It's quite simple, most of them don't think the LDS church should recognize same-sex couples, but they are opposed to intruding on others outside the church. This is typically based on AoF 11 and AoF 12 (the latter) based on believing that banning same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

@Meckofahess
"- Allowing those confused about their gender identity to enter into opposite sex restrooms and locker rooms"

That's a trans issue, not a gay/lesbian issue. Same sex marriage has nothing to do with that.

"- Causing employers to layoff straight people for fear of prosecution because gays become a "protected class of people""

Nondiscrimination protects people from being fired for sexual orientation. Firing someone because they're straight would also be a violation.

@Meckofahess:"Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal contract between a man and a woman in which there is emotional and sexual fidelity, along with childrearing"
NOT TRUE, NOT TRUE, NOT TRUE! It never ceases to amaze me how little "traditional" marriage advocates actually know about "traditional marriages" or marriage at all for that matter.

re:Meckofahess

The scriptures have more to say about divorce than homosexuality.

#1 Schools aren't teaching "homosexuality." They are teaching children to be kind and respectful of those different from themselves. On the other hand, you are free, have the right, to teach your children the opposite and to teach them to not associate with school/classmates who are gay or who live in a same-sex household. You also have the right to send your child to a religious school.

#2 Being transgender is not mere "confusion." It is a real condition that frequently becomes evident at an early age. Read the story "Led by the Child Who Simply Knew" in the Boston Globe about Jonas and Wyatt Maines. You have more to learn.

#3 ??? can't even address this ridiculous claim.

You are correct. Life is not simple--it didn't even start simple with Adam and Eve who were confronted with conflicting choices.

@ ImaUteFan

Your comments are very true indeed. I can clearly see this happening right before our very eyes.

Breathe Deep - I, too, am baffled by the support of SSM by "active" LDS members. However, the phrase that keeps coming to mind is "Even the very elect shall be deceived."

I'm also reminded that we've been counselled that in the last days, the greatest opposition to the Church will come from within.

I guess what bothers me most about the comments on this and the other newspaper sites is that it is so unnecessary and solves little other than providing a place to vent. Fundamentally we aren't all starting with the same premises or assumptions. How can the "homophobes" and "homophiles" possibly agree about what constitutes marriage when they don't agree on the existence or nature of a God, whether or not Jesus Christ was real and the Son of God, or whether or not Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God? For most LDS folks I would imagine that these beliefs factor into their decisions about politics, laws, society norms, etc etc. Generally LDS people are against most abortions, view drinking alcohol as a vice, and see homosexual intimacy as a sin against God and nature. Ergo, they support laws that prohibit these activities as part of their war against sin, an obligation they embrace as a result of the covenants they have made. They will continue to fight against sin and for what they believe their God has decreed is the proper, allowable form of marriage. Next battleground: religious liberty.

Wow- How juicy for Utah to have to deal with the freakiness of redefining traditional marriage, again. Talk about flip-flops... The 1890 Manifesto didn't settle all problems that polygamy brought.

Still curious how quickly the pews would empty should Pres. Monson give a pro-SSM Proclamation? If this site is an indicator, it's 27:7, the reverse!

To answer my own previous question #2 (because LDS seem to think that non-Utahans have forgotten all pre-1890 practices and exaltation doctrines), Utah lawmakers wanna pretend Fundamentalists live on another planet not of their making. Actually dealing with the fallout of Joseph Smith's signature doctrine will bring them face-to-face with the consequences of their defining foundational religion. And that is something they've managed to avoid since statehood.

I say this battle is long overdue. Since Joseph and Brigham redefined American and Biblical Christianity, let's see what standard they will use in this arena.

Several comments have referred to "The Family: A Proclamation to the World". First of all, I believe this is a prophetic declaration. It was presented to the world by the First Presidency and Council of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in 1995, well ahead of the current controversy. The family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His plan.

It wasn't Adam and Steve in the Garden of Eden, otherwise none of us would be here. It was Adam and Eve and they bore and raised children as they were commanded. This is not a civil rights or equality issue. It is a moral one. Children (offspring) cannot naturally result from a so called same-sex union. It frustrates Gods plan. This is why I am opposed to it.

As several have identified themselves as members of the LDS Church in support of same-sex marriage; I would challenge you to read or re-read your Prophet and Apostles declaration. It should help you understand the effects on children and society.

RE: A Quaker, The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience is a manifesto issued by Orthodox, Catholic and Evangelical. (Christians united by the belief in the Tri-une God).

Marriage,The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man.” For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24.

However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33 In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the. crowning achievement of God’s creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself. Marriage then, is the first institution of human society.

The Christian tradition refers to marriage as “holy matrimony” because it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee.

@katy,

Even if it goes your way, you have to strike down amendment 3 first, it bans both gay marriage and other equivalent unions.

Since "marriage" is between a man and a woman, why don't they call a marriage between the same sexes a different name. Marital bliss, Forever After, Happy Union or whatever. We have no problems with allowing people who are committed to each other and go thru a ceremony of some kind pledging their love to each other receiving the same benefits. It would save a lot of arguments and bad feelings if they called their union by a different name.

The definition and what takes place in the term "marriage" will always be different than what same sex unions are.

@ I M LDS 2 You said that it is high time we followed our true Master. Jesus said, "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh" (Mark 10:7-8). One man. One woman.

So if you are going to follow the True Master you would not support SSM and you would know that even Christ taught against SSM.

"Even the Republican Party in Massachusetts has caved and will no longer oppose same-sex marriage," the former GOP U.S. Senate candidate said, adding that Republicans there now march in gay pride parades.
-----
And Cherilyn Eagar still believes "We're not in a losing battle"?

----
'Jensen, the Pleasant Grove mother, said she's going to pass on the information she received Wednesday and at another meeting last week, starting with her own family. She's also taking to Facebook and Twitter. So far, she said, she hasn’t received many "likes" or comments to her posts.
"People, I think, are too afraid of offending someone. It's really sad because we're giving up our freedom of speech by doing that," she said.'

----
Ms. Jensen, do you know why you haven't received many "likes"? You went to the wrong places. Who use facebook and twitter most these days? Young people. And who support marriage equality most? Young people. No wonder you don't have many "likes"

It is not because they are too afraid of offending gays, they just don't agree with you on this issue. That's all.

@Simple Truths

I can certainly appreciate that you have a sensitive perspective on this issue having a gay son. I applaud you for loving and accepting him and his partner. However, as an LDS member are you suggesting that we should disregard the Proclamation on The Family? Should we disregard what the scriptures say about the sinfulness of homosexuality? Should we disregard the the teachings of our leaders? Should we disregard our conscience?

I wonder if you have considered other issues associated with adopting same-sex marriage laws such as:
- Forcing parents to accept the teaching of homosexuality in schools to kindergarten children without parental permission
- Allowing those confused about their gender identity to enter into opposite sex restrooms and locker rooms
- Causing employers to layoff straight people for fear of prosecution because gays become a "protected class of people" or in other words have special rights that you don't.

Not quite so simple as having empathy and love for a gay child is it? There is a lot more to consider brother. Don't stop loving your son, but please don't deny me of my rights either.

Just curious Ranch- What religion teaches that same sexes can be a parental unit, or could be a procreating, functional family head, or should have legal married status?

How mean-spirited to call "superstitious" what has been practiced tradition and sacred, religious belief virtually globally for all of written history and then suggest that your very new fight this new century in your less-than-300-years-old-country gets to redefine terms and legality 'cuz it's the latest fad.

At least find some civility. Your "superstitions" and redefinitions are being hard fought for a reason: they are a paradigm shift on every level. Someone else needs a good dose of reality and a history lesson. Live your life however you want, but don't expect the world to turn over their dictionaries and law books just because you want legal status.

What's next, Shariah Law 'cuz a Mullah gets on CNN? Work for your new laws and changes and stop belittling others for their sacred beliefs.

To those of you that think that children raised by same sex couples are no different than children raised by their biological mother and father that are married, you are wrong.

There are quite a few studies out there showing that children raised by same sex couples are more likely to identify as gay, experiment with homosexual behavior, or engage in risky sexual behavior.

There are also a few studies out there that show that the ideal situation for children is to grow up in a home with their mother and father. The children exhibit better emotional behavior and are least likely to experience abuse.

So, rather than fight for second rate homes to put children, how about we fight to make every home the best for children, meaning they are raised by their married biological mother and father.

To those who are bleeting, "Traditional Marriage," I say, SHOW ME THE DOWERIES.

This phrase, "Traditional Marriage," doesn't mean what you think it means. Through much of Western history, marriages were arranged, between families, and the "lucky couple" had no say in the matter, and sometimes never even met until shortly before the appointed day. It was a business transaction, and the woman was property to be negotiated, and her property became the property of the man. Traditional marriage was not a lot different for some women than being sold into slavery.

But, of course, that's not what you're speaking about today. Today, you're trying to define it as, "Marriage restricted so that homosexuals can't marry."

Meanwhile, while you've chosen your supposed justifications for this limitation:

Sterile heterosexuals can marry.

Unchaste heterosexuals can marry.

Unfaithful heterosexuals can marry.

Old/infirm heterosexuals can marry.

No one is required to bear children.

50% of heterosexuals divorce.

Anyone can cohabitate.

Unmarried people can have any kind of consensual sex with adults they wish.

Any fertile women can bear children out of wedlock and 40.7% of births are.

In sum: False rationalizations don't justify discriminatory treatment of homosexuals.

To "I M LDS 2" it is nice that you support what you see as marriage equality. That is also a nice scripture from the D&C. However, you are wrong. Modern prophets have also stated documents stating that LDS Church members should support laws that define marriage as between a man and a woman.

The official church statement, titled "Church Statement on Definition of Marriage", states that "we encourage all people of goodwill to protect marriage as the union between one man and one woman, and to consider carefully the far‐ranging impact for religious freedom if marriage is redefined. We especially urge those entrusted with the public good to support laws that uphold the time‐honoured definition of marriage." It sure sounds like they want political leaders to retain the definition that marriage is between a man and woman only.

You should also read "The Divine Institution of Marriage" on the LDSNewsroom. They not only explain why they supported California's Proposition 8, but also explain why gay marriage and why just living together is a bad idea for society

Listening ear-

The "Church" did not spend trillions on downtown projects. You, and so many others, have no clue how much a trillion is. The richest of the richest of this country don't hold a trillion dollars between them. The largest corporations in the country could scrape up about 1 1/2 trillion if they sold all their properties and pooled all the money.

The "Church" doesn't have even 1 trillion, not even close.

Your blind hate is clouding your ability to see the facts.

" . . gay marriages or other unions, as many social professionals fear, might have untold consequences to our children and others."

Unintentionally hit the nail on the head, you did. SSM "might have untold consequences." In other words, no-one has any idea what those consequences will be, when they would happen, and how they might affect anyone. One can always start yelping about a "slippery slope" when talking about any social issue. Legally barring an action or behavior based on murky theories (read: guesses) informed by religious belifes about future developments is not the answer.

I'm pretty sure about one thing . . SSM won't affect my marriage. Well, that's not true . . it already has. My wife and I disagree on this issue, and it's been a point of contention. But why somone else's marriage would "devalue" or "threaten" my marriage or that of my children, I can't possibly imagine. Neither can any of you, without stretching your predictive abilities well past the point of plausibility.

"The perfect way to raise children is in an intact family with a female mother and a male father. History has proven that for centuries. Eroding that model further will continue to bring societies down."

Kinda sorta true, but hopelessly simplistic. You know what else is proven? Children of alcoholics are more likely to become alcoholics. Children of the grossly overweight are likely to be grossly overweight and have health problems. Children of a chronically cheating spouse are more likely to engage in extra-marital affairs. Let's legislate all that stuff . . you know, actual harmful behaviors/conditions . . out of existence.

One thing that isn't proven by any data produced by any reputable source? That having gay parents makes you more likely to be gay.

The "erosion" of the "perfect family model" is an alarmist fantasy. Of all the variables to consider when looking at the likely success or failure of a couple as potential parents, their sexual orientation is wayyyyyy down on the list.

All you "Go read the Proclomation blah blah blah" types have going for you is fasting and prayer. Good luck with that.

Marriage has been universally acknowledged throughout history as a legal contract between a man and a woman in which there is emotional and sexual fidelity, along with childrearing. But homosexual marriage would change this. Since marriage is also a moral issue, redefining marriage is redefining morals. Furthermore, marriage is an extremely wide-spread practice within any society and has many legal and moral issues attached to it. So, when marriage is redefined, the society is dramatically affected. Legalizing gay marriage means changing the laws of the land. The ramifications are vast and we are seeing the effects of homosexual legal "rights" affecting housing, education, the work place, medicine, the armed forces, adoption, religion, etc. Are all the changes good? That is hotly debated. But we have to ask, is it morally right to force all of society to adopt the morals of a minority? Of course not!

@mcclark-
1- If you factor out all Biblical religion, it makes no difference and "hurts" no one.

2- If the God of the Bible is the true Creator, the Loving Father, the Holy One of Israel, you'll find out soon enough who is hurt.

3- Utah has been creating its own religion and mandates from its inception. It certainly can redefine marriage once again if it chooses.

4- This is a Biblical battle for Christians, Jews and Muslims of deep literal, Biblical convictions. Period. If you aren't in those groups, you won't ever "get it", so don't try.

5- Bestiality is legal in Holland. Marriage and property wills to the "pets" are next.

It's the natural right of the non-religious to work to rescind old religious laws. Conversely the traditionalists also have lobbying and legal rights to petition their preferences, also.

And the world goes 'round..,

@Cherilyn Eagar & bjensen;

What about OUR religious freedom? That doesn't matter because it differs from yours?

You women need a good dose of reality. Your superstitious beliefs DO NOT get to violate the US Constitutional freedoms of LGBT American citizens.

The more the anti-gay crowd rallies against marriage equality, the more traction marriage equality will have. Every point they raise is either based in misunderstanding or plain old fear. People see through the anti-gay arguments even if the people making them don't.

I'm LDS; my son is gay, and his partner is a part of our family. We learned that the differences in our beliefs don't have to separate us. Years of watching my son and his partner build a life together makes it impossible for me to see any advantage in denying them freedom to marry. It will only make our family stronger. And making up laws like silly Amendment to force people to act one way or the other is pure poison to the principles of faith. I will always regret voting for that ten years ago. I've sure learned a lot since then.

Once again the same 50 same sex advocates who post their opinions quickly after any group or
event supporting traditional marriage to demonstrate they have clout. I'm working full time but
took the time to attend this rally. There are twenty five couples my wife and I associate with and 100% of them support traditional marriage but many are busy working productive members of society and can't always go to these meetings.

It appears that there is strong support for gay marriage in Utah but I feel if amendment three was on the ballot it would have a similar result.

@postaledith
Excuse me. Same-sex marriage will not teach our children about love and open minds. Our children already know about love and have open minds! They know the difference between a family that has a mom and dad and kids and they understand that is different than a same-sex partnership. We should reinforce with our children to love everyone, including those who are different from ourselves, but we must never betray our sacred heritage and the legitimate legal right to recognize our traditional family structures. Now is the time for Utahns to let their voice be heard on this important and sacred trust.

I fail to see how Gay Marriage hurts anyone. The argument against seems to be "its our club, and we don't want those people in it."

What a schizo state of affairs for a state that owes its founders full appreciation because they acted on their religious beliefs and created The Deseret- in direct contravention of Biblical and American law... (No, polygamy was never "commanded", just allowed. Read the text carefully.)

But there's nothing that my beloved Mormons can't fix with a revelation reversal. So I ask two questions:

1- If the Prophet received a reversal on homosexual marriage, would all active LDS just acquiesce?
2- Why is Utah still averse to its polygamous married/cohabitating families?

'Cuz that's the next shoe to drop...

So one part of their argument is that marriage is a state responsibility. The problem with that is how can one state say it's OK for marriage equality (same sex marriage) to be legally recognized both at the state and federal levels in terms of property, taxes, and other rights and then that couple move to another state, like Utah, and it be illegal. Even during the civil war if a slave left Mississippi and was in Ohio he was still a slave if he was with his master and still a slave even if he escaped his master. So while it's easy now to be against slavery, then it was a federal issue even in areas where slavery was illegal. Utah is not it's own country but part of a federal union. What is done in one state will effect other states and what is legal in one state will need to be supported in other states. Just think about drivers licenses. A drivers license from Mass. is still legal in Utah. Marriage licenses and ceremonies should be the same way. It's part of being in the United States.

I think it's appalling that in this society people teach the values of discrimination to their children by opposing equal rights to same sex couples. All in the name of family values and :Christianity to boot. It gives the appearance of extreme hypocrisy.

The scenery here is breathtaking, Utah isn't as crowded, the air away from the cities is clean.
But....
If you want a place of diversity, free thinkers, acceptance, open conversations, a place to teach your children tolerance......
This is NOT the place.

Good for these people and others throughout the US who recognize that marriage should be strengthened rather than redefined.

When the people lead, the leaders will follow!

@Thid Barker
"You can vote, but your vote will be overturned by activist judges legislating from the bench."

Was it activist judges who overturned interracial marriage bans?

@Breathe Deep
"How can you support the Prophet and be for gay marriage? "

I imagine, speaking as someone now outside the church, they think that it's rather hypocritical to attack others' marriages when the church was attacked for their non-traditional marriages 150 years ago and that freedom of religion allows for a fair amount of letting others do what they want. I would bet that most of those who support gay marriage and are LDS still oppose the LDS church marrying same-sex couples.

@MAYHEM MIKE
How about you google "slippery slope logical fallacy".

LDS who support SSM do not understand the plan of salvation.
- Most will ultimately fall away from the church.
- Some will stay in and seek to counsel God because of the greater wisdom they think they have. In essence, they will have rejected God regardless of their geography on Sundays.
- Some will stay in and go through the motions because of habit or family pressures or some other reason but without gospel comprehension above a superficial theoretical level.

@4blade2007
"Lets assume "John" is raised by two women, who is going to set the example for John when it is time to learn what a man does?"

And what, pray tell, does a man do?

@gittalopctbi
There's a difference between believing the nation should have same-sex marriage, and believing the LDS church should have same-sex marriage.

@Pops
"gay marriage advocates propose to extend the benefits of marriage to gay couples with no reasonable expectation of the assumption of anything more than minimal obligations"

You're the ones who want to ban them from adopting... (I assume raising children is the obligation you think they're lacking...)

@Jamescmeyer
"we're going to use that power of marriage to alienate that child's relationship with their mother and father.'"

Single people can adopt in this state and none of you care.

"People, I think, are too afraid of offending someone. It's really sad because we're giving up our freedom of speech by doing that." No, no you're not...freedom of speech means the government can't prevent you speaking your mind. Did someone from the government show up at your 75-person meeting and try to shut it down? No? Well, there you go. PS, you can have a religious conviction and not offend people, it's easy. If you have neighbors (man and woman) who are not married but living together, you don't march on over to their home and yell at them for being evil, right? You won't do that because you are not a horrible person, that's why. Be nice to gay people, they can be nice back. :-)

I respect the Proclamation on the Family, just as I respect D&C 89. They have not, however, been enacted into law.

ALERT - the gay community will tell us that "organizing grass roots campaigns will do nothing". They will also tell us that our voice doesn't matter. The gay community would like to think that their voice and their rights are the only ones that matter because they see themselves as victims. Well heterosexual/straight folks, in my optinion we need to stand up and voice our concerns and strive to protect the rights of all citizens - not only the gay community rights. Lets ask the gay community if they think all citizens should have a voice? Lets ask the gay community if they think all citizens have rights - or just "special interest" groups? The gay community will tell us that we are bigots and inhuman people with no feelings. They will challenge the very core of your intelectual and moral beliefs and tell us religion has no place in the discussion. If we who respect the rights of all people and want a better solution sit on our chairs and say nothing - we soon discover that we have lost our liberty, freedom and rights!

I chuckled to think that Cherilyn Eager, Gayle Ruzicka and Lavar Christensen have a hard time having their voices heard in Utah politics.

Dear Deseret News:

This was not a gathering of "traditional marriage advocates." The very definition of the word advocate means a person who champions a cause. The cause, in the case of these people in the article, is not championing traditional marriage. Rather, their cause is to champion denying marriage rights to LGBT citizens. That makes them anti-gay rights advocates.

So please, dear Deseret News, I sincerely ask that you work harder to craft your reporting in a transparent bias-free manner which means you should characterize groups of people accurately. In this case, it was erroneous to call the gathered group "traditional marriage advocates" but rather they should honestly and accurately be called anti-gay rights advocates. Thank you for your consideration.

Regarding the goal of the meeting participants to re-establish Bible-based traditional marriage, great. I can't wait to get a concubine, stone my wife for cheating, and marry my sister-in-law after my brother dies. On the other hand, I guess divorce will be off the table. That will be an unpleasant reality for some at the meeting.

PL: "We live in a country where majority rules and the majority of people in this state and in the United States favor marriage between a man and woman."

----------

No, we do not live in a country where majority rules. We live in a Constitutional Republic, where the constitution rules. Read it. Learn why the judge ruled as he had to. Learn why Utah will lose. And be grateful that we have such a blessed constitution.

MAYHEM MIKE: "Please don't dredge up miscegenation cases to support your position. Mixed race marriages have never been shown to present a public social harm, but gay marriages or other unions... might have untold consequences to our children and others."

Up to the 1960s Mormon leaders condemned interracial marriages. Mark E. Petersen said in 1954: "I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar with white people... it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage." (BYU address) Brigham Young said "If the white man mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (JD 10).

And then came intermarriage and nothing happened. And now we Mormons are ashamed that former leaders held such ideas -- because of tradition and unsubstantiated fears.

What will our grandchildren think of the anti-SSM statements some Mormons make today?

@B Man

So refreshing to hear someone point out the REAL endgame of the LGBT community...

....and it isn't about the 'love and the happiness they have' or 'commitment' or 'spending the rest of our lives together or raising children'.
Gay and Lesbian couples have been & will continue to do that, regardless of 'marriage' or not.

All this drama--it is really about SOMETHING ELSE.

It is not about homosexuality,
Not about same gender attracted.
Not about LGBT kindness and love and commitment for each other.
Not about the straight community's love of them or celebrating with them, or not.
Not about the LDS Church and whether they and their members are for it, or not.
Not about any religion.
Not about if either side has Constitutional grounds and which Amendment is valid or not.
Not about its commonality to slavery or mixed marriages.
Not about majority votes, or State's Rights.
Not about activist judges or circuit courts or Supreme Court decisions

Its about trying to make the very act of same sex appear moral, normal, and natural to the current young adults, teens and children- and the generations of the future.

Meanwhile people in the Central African Republic are being tortured and raped and murdered while their children stand by and watch. I think God would rather have us trying to save those people than arguing whether two homosexual people can file a joint tax return.

Ooh!! DOZENS of conservatives meeting in a Golden Corral!! As opposed to the THOUSANDS of gay people in Utah who don't want the conservative agenda shoved down their throats! Live and let live. No one is forcing conservatives to get gay-married.

As an active, believing Mormon with many gay friends the marriage dialogue is of particular interest to me. I have gay friends who are married, others living together, and others choosing celibate lives. All offer challenges as do those same choices for a heterosexual individual.

The issue of individual rights over states rights is quoted often. We live in a country where majority rules and the majority of people in this state and in the United States favor marriage between a man and woman. Heterosexuals have individual rights also. Their opinion is usually less vocal. Those believing in "traditional marriage" want to continue a legal institution which has proven over history to be most healthy and stable for family and society.

Thank you to those who have the courage to publicly support marriage between a man and woman. They are doing so in a non-confrontational and respectful manner and I applaud you.

Utah's legal faux pas starting with the emergency "stay", federal government offices not in compliance issuing equality and closing doors following Shelby's ruling, SSA and DMV violations to not recognize before the "stay", A.G. Reyes' edict to not recognize past marriages (which Utah former Federal Judge Cassell cautioned against), may lead to federal control over the State of Utah due to incompetent leaders! Don't forget politics and religion don't mix - J.S. saw this and said it time and time again, see Articles of Faith 11, 12. B.Y. moved to Mexico for polygamist marriage freedom - thus, it may be time for a move again to a new country! Sadly religious leaders spent trillions on SLC block acquisition, beautifications, and a mall - as Benson said "pride will be the downfall of the Church"!

You advocates for gay marriage, consider Googling "gay marriage and slippery slope," and then responding to these simple questions and point: When enough gay people, albeit a minority, finally yelled loud enough and pushed their marriage agenda in our faces, the courts and some legislators finally buckled and approved it. Now, when enough people advocate marriages with more than two partners (and the key is "enough"), will you support their rights? Will you also cry "discrimination" under so-called "equal protection" if they are denied? Under what logic will you do so? Again, if enough people want more "creative" unions, where should we draw the limit? Three partners? Five? Or, should we just scrap the idea of traditional marriage altogether and call them "unions?" And please don't dredge up miscegenation cases to support your position. Mixed race marriages have never been shown to present a public social harm, but gay marriages or other unions, as many social professionals fear, might have untold consequences to our children and others.

I'm glad to see that people are working together to stand up for their beliefs. I support traditional marriage because I do believe it strengthens the community and the society as a whole. People who say that they cannot understand how same-sex marriage will effect them do not understand how societies work. It WILL effect you and your children. Ever heard of Sodom and Gomorrah? Whether directly or indirectly, what other people do--good or bad-- has an effect on you.
I may be called intolerant for my beliefs that homosexual behavior is a sin, but I want to make it clear that I would never be unkind to anyone I talk to no matter their sexual preference. (Love the sinner hate the sin type of thing).

It is very heartening to hear that people are willing to stand up for what is right even with the bullies calling them names for doing it. In polite society we have given up using degrading names for people who are different than us, yet the SSM folks freely use nasty epithets against those who simply disagree with them. The SSM folks need to join polite society before there can even be conversations between the two sides.

What needs to happen is the churches should sue the government for interfering and regulation their religious rite of marriage. The laws need to change. A great start would be to scrap all laws regarding marriage and give marriage back to the churches where it originated and was stolen from. The state can then institute civil contracts of it's own construct however it wants.

Total equality would be the result.

But the SSM crowd doesn't want this. They want to dominate and control, and take away the rights of others. They want to force churches and temples to perform their unions. Such lawsuits have already begun. They have become the bigoted oppressor.

I can see why these folks are concerned about making their voices heard. No one is speaking publicly for their concerns - well, no one other than the Governor, the Attorney General, most members of the State Legislature, the leaders of the dominant local religious institution, the editorial board of the Deseret News . . .

The idea expressed in this article, that somehow people who oppose marriage equality are being silenced, seems downright odd. The article itself is proof that's not the case. So we've got these folks gathering in public, covered by the local media, expressing their opinions . . . and asserting at the same time their opinions are being silenced. Something is wrong with this picture.

Maybe, the claims that they need to make their voices heard are a way of shifting the debate away from substantive issues of equality and social justice to anything but a discussion of equality and social justice. Just a thought.

So, Ms Jensen, please outline EXACTLY how other people lives their lives affects yours? Does it threaten YOUR marriage? Of course not.

And um WHAT? @4blade2007 - so children learn by example? LOL Then where do you think gays came from? The majority of them came from HETEROSEXUAL parents. People don't "learn" or "choose" to be gay or straight. They are born that way.

fowersjl

Farmington, Utah

Let's say two women "marry" and want to have children, so one decides she is the "wife" and gets impregnated through artificial insemination. That child then wants to know later who his father is. A sperm bank is the answer. And other male figures in that boy's life will hardly be a great substitute for a missing father. The perfect way to raise children is in an intact family with a female mother and a male father.

------------------

But why is it fine for a single mother to do the same thing or an infertile couple? The biological father will not be in the picture. You do not want to outlaw this practice, but feel that gays should not marry because this could happen?

You are not making sense. You see, gays are doing this right now. Did you not look at all the pictures of the gay couples wedding? Lots of them had children with them to celebrate this occasion. By determining that gays cannot marry, you are harming those children that are already being raised by gays. Why don't they matter?

Article: Mary Summerhays, who heads a group called Friends of Marriage, said marriage is the only institution that protects children's right to have a relationship with their mother and father. "When we redefine marriage law we have said to those children, 'Your rights don't matter anymore,'" she said.

And what are we telling the children of gay couples? There are lots of them, despite the widespread perception that gays cannot reproduce. One in every three or four gay-headed households has children (the figure is actually higher in Utah). Children were abundant at the SL county complex on December 23 when gay couples snaked through the hallways waiting for marriage licenses. Protecting their children was a major motivation for couples wanting to marry. Opponents of SSM point to the benefits of marriage for children, yet they consciously and deliberately withhold these benefits from the children of gay couples. That strikes me as premeditated cruelty. If anything is telling children that their "rights don't matter any more," it is that.

Their voices will be heard, and I'm sure the buffet enjoyed. In the end, however, Utah is going to become known as the state that made same sex marriage legal nation wide.

Once gay marriage is legal in all 50 states will the "traditional only" group believe that it was God's will for gay marriage to be the law of the land?

To my LDS brothers and sisters who oppose SSM: Please move on because the gay marriage movement is only going one direction. It doesn't have to be this painful. If you must have something sacred to distinguish or "preserve" your marriage from a certain other, temple marriage is it. You'd do much better to rally in support of temple marriage.

Not very Christian of them

I'm all for traditional marriage. So why don't we start focusing our efforts on strengthening our own marriages, helping strengthen the marriages of those around us, and start working harder to reduce the amount of divorces and broken families. If we put the same zeal and passion into focusing on strengthening traditional marriages instead of preventing gays from getting married, we would probably do a whole lot more good in the world than we currently are. Allowing two people's relationships to be legally recognized by law so they can receive the same benefits that we do doesn't weaken our traditional marriages.

I am looking for Belinda Jensen's FB Page, to show her support. What is her FB link? People do not realize this is a slippery slope that will end up taking away parental rights. Those behind the scenes are already trying to take away parents rights. Anyway, please share the name of her FB page, because I want to show her support, and have others support her that support traditional marriage.

4blade2007

Provo, Utah

I disagree with postaledith. Children learn from what they see and experience. When children are raised by a same sex couple they will learn from them and think it is normal, is it?

______________________

How did gay children learn to love someone of the same sex when they grew up in a home with both a father and a mother showing opposite sex affection?

Could it be that people are wired to be attracted to either the same sex or opposite sex, and the affection that they see their parents express is a learning tool of how to love someone you are attracted to? If not, how did we get so many gay LDS?

For all you LDS proponents of gay marriage. I agree that you need to study "The Family: A Proclamation to the World." You have let go of the “Iron Rod” and wandering in paths that will eventually take you to some place you won't want to be. How can you support the Prophet and be for gay marriage? I’m truly baffled by this.

Sad to say but those supporting traditional marriage have lost their voices, you no longer have a voice if you support traditional marriage. You can vote, but your vote will be overturned by activist judges legislating from the bench. You have no voice in the public discussion because you will be shouted down and called derogatory names. You have no voice! The next voice that will be heard defending tradition marriage will be God's voice! Reference Sodom and Gomorrah.

TA1 - You are absolutely right when you state "we are accountable for our feelings and our support."

You will also be accountable to the consequences that come with such support.

Stop the nonsense, please! "Traditional marriage" is not under attack; everyone supports it.

"Obama's war against Utah's state sovereignty, marriage, family and religious liberty." - good grief. Apparently, no statement is too absurd in order to rile up a crowd, and avoid any rational discussion on the topic of SSM.

BOTTOM LINE- We should love and accept anyone and everyone, however my main question regarding whether we should accept same-sex marriage is, what does God say about it? We can argue back and forth about it all day, but in the end which opinion really matters? So I ask again what does God say about it? Is it OK? Yes or No?

It's black and white, there is no gray area to this question. His answer has been consistent throughout the scriptures and with modern day revelation in the Proclamation to the World. Until God reveals through one of his Prophets whether it is acceptable or not, I stand by God and his doctrine.

I understand that religion informs religious peoples opinions and that is fine as far as it goes. It should determine how you conduct your personal life and the choices you make. However once you start to confuse your allowing me to live my principles with the allowance of sin you've gone too far.

Once you justify your denial of my constitutional rights (and the courts will determine that) with the logic that God will hold you accountable for allowing sin, you've step over the lines of a civil society.

The only argument that has any bearing here is the constitutional argument of a states right to determine who gets "married" versus an individuals right to marry whom they wish. Save the rest of it for Priesthood meeting or Relief Society.

Defenders of “traditional” marriage want to make themselves heard. When have they not been heard? For generations, they were the only ones being heard. The difference now is that proponents of SSM no longer keep their silence sitting passively at the back of the bus allowing tradition to have a corner on defining the issue.

There is nothing admirable in the straight backlash. They of course have the right to speak out even though their tone is one of hysteria over a timely change that doesn’t impact their lives. Whether prompted by animus or phobia, traditional marriage is under no threat and never has been. That perception is the creature of a silly imagination and an irrational fear.

"That child then wants to know later who his father is. A sperm bank is the answer. And other male figures in that boy's life will hardly be a great substitute for a missing father. The perfect way to raise children is in an intact family with a female mother and a male father."

Nobody has ever denied that this may be the gold standard, but 1 in 4 children in this country are being raised by single parents. There are a half a million children in foster care praying to find their forever families but they never come because straight people with mother and father households don't step up to the plate and adopt them. It seems to me that straight people are doing a bang up job violating their own standards for child rearing and hurting children in the process.

This is very encouraging. I'll join a meeting, myself, to support traditional marriage -- as long as there is no opposition there to same-sex marriage also. The story doesn't indicate anyone opposed that.

Marriage--whether SSM or OSM does provide a benefit to society. When people make a lifelong commitment to each other, they create a stable family that will love and care for each other as the "first line of defense." Married people are, on average, healthier and happier than non-marrieds. It follows that the government should facilitate the legal framework for people to make this commitment.
Regarding the fear that schools will teach that gay couples are real: Why is this a bad thing? Would you also be worried if schools taught that some people write with their left hand or that the President of the U.S. is black?

My support of traditional marriage is very simple. If SSM becomes the law of the land then any organization that opposes it will be in opposition to the law.

Anyone who thinks that churches will be exempt for long are mistaken. Many within the LGBT community are not after equality they want forced compliance. Ask the bakery shop owner in New Mexico about that.

@Two For Flinching wrote:

"4blade2007 So how to do explain all of the homosexual kids who come from straight parents?"

S/He answered with the second sentence, "Children learn from what they see and experience." While some homosexuality is a result of genes, much of it is because of choice. As much as they and the homosexual community want to deny it, I am of the opinion based on observation that many cases is a result of an active choice.

". . . we will appoint wise men to be judges, that will judge this people according to the commandments of God.
Now it is better that a man should be judged of God than of man, for the judgments of God are always just, but the judgments of man are not always just."
Mosiah 29: 11,12

Marriage--whether SSM or OSM-- does bring a benefit to society. It creates a family that loves and supports each other. Married people statistically are healthier and happier. Th

Two points the believing LDS who aren't concerned about SSM. First, by endorsing SSM, you are telling these folks you don't want to be with them after this life. SSM leads to sex outside marriage endorsed by God (which no matter how many states/countries recognize SSM, it is not marriage in God's eyes), which is sinful and estranges them from God here and in the hereafter. Unless they repent after their partner dies or they divorce, they will die in their sins. But what a difficult situation to be in where you're married, and you recognize that to repent you have to divorce! Do we really want to set up that kind of roadblock to repentance? Second, how many SSM couples will there be in the celestial kingdom? Zero. Being with those you love in the eternities is critical to the plan of salvation. Are you really loving those by endorsing behavior that in the end will exclude them from those they "love" and from the celestial kingdom and eternal progression? That's tolerance but not love. If you really loved them, you'd be concerned about enduring happiness.

We don't have to choose between upholding the intact family with a mother and father as the societal ideal, and making reasonable accommodations for other domestic situations. But redefining traditional marriage altogether goes way too far. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. There are many legal rights that have become associated with marriage over years and even centuries of jurisprudence. Some may be reasonably applied to same-sex domestic partnerships, while others may not. For example, given the choice between placing a child for adoption with a traditional family vs. a non-traditional household, it would be in the best interest of the child to be placed with the former, everything else being equal, because that is the time-proven ideal. We can't always achieve the ideal, but we should not actively militate against it in the name of "tolerance" for the alternatives.

Gay marriage is a Trojan horse. If it is allowed to stay in our state, it is the first step towards other things. Although I believe there are some homosexual couples that are honest in just wanting to be married. I believe the overall end game plan for the LGBT movement is something else altogether. Gay marriage is an attack upon religion. You can look at the lawsuits that have been filed in other areas once it was allowed.

I have no problem with people taking a stance, for or against SSM, as it is their right. What I do object to is making this about President Obama. I also vehemently object to making this about the judge. Judges make decisions on all kinds of issues. Four judges may come down four different ways on the same issue. That's why we have the appellate system, which generally works well. If these anti-SSM folks respect the Constitution, which they say is divinely inspired, they will accept whatever the end decision is of the judicial system. From their personal religious perspectives, they are free to hold contrary views. Extremism and near overt rebellion is toxic and against the very founding principles that these people claim to have. As I have said for a very long time, the concept of marriage should be separated from the concept of a contractual relationship. Leave marriage to churches. That way, a person may affiliate with like minded people. But for the rest of society, all should have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities under the law. Gays already have family lives. Give them rights. Opponents of SSM won't notice a thing.

Imautefan While I consider the Proclamation on the family to be insired it has not yet been cannonized into scripture by a vote of the Church. I think that D&C 134:4 is right on point to this case.

To my fellow LDS Church members - for those of us who support the LGBT community's quest for marriage equality - stop beating us up by citing things like "prayerfully studying the Proclamation of the Family" - we did study it - we feel different than you do - we are accountable for our feelings and our support - not you - get over it!

@im LDS 2
There is a prophet leading this church under God's direction, and when I sustain him in conference or in temple interviews, I commit to allow him to speak for God on my behalf on these issues. He will define god's position on marriage and I follow. I don't need to start doing some creative interpretations of scripture. When God decides to change his position, the prophet will tell us. It's really that simple to me.

The issue which many proponents of gay marriage have is with the Biblical confines of marriage, and they have chosen to reject what God says in His Word about marriage and sexuality - or perhaps, reject the Bible altogether. Many people claim that Jesus never spoke out on the the subject of homosexuality or gay marriage, but they either have not read and/or do not understand what Jesus really said. In Matthew 19:4-6, Jesus was answering a question on the subject of divorce, and He actually quoted from the Old Testament - specifically, Genesis 2:24: "And He [Jesus] answered and said to them, 'Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” This leaves no doubt as to God's intentions for marriage. God has gifted us with free will to choose whatever we wish - but He alone controls the consequences of our choices.

There's a good reason for the separation of church and state. One group's religious beliefs don't get to dictate other people's rights. Early settlers came to this country to enjoy freedom of religion without government interference, with the safeguard of strong protections for minority rights enshrined in our Constitution and its amendments. All Americans are entitled to equality under the law, and that includes the hundreds of rights and responsibilities that go along with civil marriage. The important word being "civil”! States issue marriage licenses (a civil matter), and then couples can ask a church to conduct the ceremony, or a justice of the peace. Each religious denomination then gets to choose whether to bless a civil marriage with a religious ceremony or not. Some churches/temples do bless same-sex marriages and others do not. Why should LDS or the Catholic church get more power in this regard than the many Christian and Jewish denominations that do bless same-sex unions? And no one's taking away anyone's freedom of speech, but freedom of speech doesn't allow certain groups to take away other citizens' rights to equal treatment under the law.

"When we redefine marriage law we have said to those children, 'Your rights don't matter anymore,'" she said. "Judge Shelby has proposed this new experiment that says, 'No, we're not going to use the power of marriage to protect a child's relationship with their mother and father. Instead, we're going to use that power of marriage to alienate that child's relationship with their mother and father.'"

I'm just sticking this here for the people who no doubt didn't read that far.

Let's say two women "marry" and want to have children, so one decides she is the "wife" and gets impregnated through artificial insemination. That child then wants to know later who his father is. A sperm bank is the answer. And other male figures in that boy's life will hardly be a great substitute for a missing father. The perfect way to raise children is in an intact family with a female mother and a male father. History has proven that for centuries. Eroding that model further will continue to bring societies down. It's about the children.

This whole issue isn't about "marriage equality." That's just a false front. It's about making an immoral practice "legal" and therefore seem right to more people. It is calling evil good and good evil. In the end, the goal is to lead more people (especially those with same gender attraction) to believe that homosexuality is good and right. It is not!

There is a difference between supporting what is right and moral and being hateful or bigoted. It is not hateful or bigoted to say that a particular practice is wrong.

I love and care for all of God's children, and I feel particular concern and sadness for those who struggle with the challenge of same gender attraction. I cannot imagine a more difficult challenge to struggle with. I pray for those in that situation and know that God has special blessings preserved for those who faithfully struggle and resist temptation.

I'm a great supporter of 'traditional' marriage, however you conceptualise it. It is one of innumerable possible conceptualisations of marriage. I support them all. I don't think any one should be allowed to negate another.

Ms Ruzicka. Fasting and prayer is not going to change the 14th Amendment.

I see the "love" straw man is alive and well. Nobody asked me about love when I got my marriage license.

From a logical perspective, it boils down to this: marriage is a discretionary status offered by the state of Utah, with certain benefits provided by the state to the couple in return for certain obligations imposed by the state on the couple. In the aggregate, gay marriage advocates propose to extend the benefits of marriage to gay couples with no reasonable expectation of the assumption of anything more than minimal obligations on the part of the couple. I suppose that's fitting in a society where not winning "employee of the month" is perceived as a form of punishment.

At the end of the day, the courts may well rule in favor of the plaintiffs in this case, irrespective of the effect on society. The challenge of raising children will increase and we will see new and challenging dysfunctions in the rising generation, but the sun will still rise and set. Our gay brothers and sisters will have something to celebrate, and I wouldn't disparage them for that. It's never been about putting anyone down.

Dear friends of gay people and the Utah gay community,
Having just experienced late last year the hate filled rants of the religious right wing during their speeches and organized rallies at the state capitol building in Honolulu; prepare yourselves for an onslaught ten time worse during this interim period while the courts make a decision on marriage equality for Utah. Thank God we had level headed legislators who could see through the homophobic tactics these groups used to demonize gay people. The Church will back them to the hilt . . . it won't be pretty.

Brave words after lunch will not be enough. Utahns seem to think that it can ignore the full faith and credit clause and the 14th Amendment. Marriage comes and goes, and so does divorce, but the 14th Amendment is forever.

I M LDS 2 has an interesting interpretation of scripture. If you are really LDS, then you need to read "The Family: A Proclamation to the World." That document outlines clearly what marriage is and what God accepts as such. If you argue against that, you are arguing agsinst...well, you know. You should be very careful of "wresting" the scriptures. You should read 2 Peter 1:20 and Alma 13:20 where it warns against "wresting" scriptures.

I don't understand the critics of the "low" turn out. One said he had a company meeting with more people. Well, yeah, of course you did--they all have the same schedule (what, 9 to 5?) and all located in the same place. These were people who came from different locals on different schedules. Also, the mockery of only 75--what about all the other things that the lame stream media reports about activists while making the TV camera shot to make 6 or 12 or 20 people look like a crowd? And how many can a Golden Corral hold, anyway?

You go, ladies! Keep fighting. It is the right battle and it can be won.

@ 4blade2007

So how to do explain all of the homosexual kids who come from straight parents?

Trueconservative writes: "Thank you ladies for standing up to the bullies of the gay movement, who are only tolerant if you lean their way! It takes a lot of courage these days to stand up for the traditions that have made our country truly what it is today....and that includes the freedom of speech!

Yes indeed, freedom of speech is a right, just like "Liberty and justice for all".

Traditions, on the other hand, are not a "right". You can practice any "tradition" you want, but when it comes to outlawing the rights of others, you have no legal or moral right to do that. Slavery was a tradition, as was "a woman being the property of men".

Thank goodness for those who question the traditions of others, right?

I am LDS and believe in family values and traditional values, but I don't understand why allowing gay people to marry is a threat to traditional marriage.
Are these really the options we want to give our gay family members:
1. Stay celibate forever. Never act on your feelings. Never mind the physical and mental health risks of lifelong loneliness.
2. Marry someone of the opposite sex who you don't fully love. Get a lot of therapy and try to white knuckle it to eternity. Don't worry about the huge failure rate of these marriages.
3. If you can't repress yourself, date other gays, be promiscuous, maybe settle down and cohabitate eventually..Just don't make us think about it.
But whatever you do, absolutely do NOT choose one person you love and make a lifelong commitment of marriage to him or her and support each other through good times and bad. No, that's against family values.

The sad thing is that this protest is identified with the Mormon Church. I'm a Mormon, active, married in temple, and do not understand how same-sex marriage could hurt my marriage or society in general. In all of the most advanced countries in tne world, SSM is now allowed and became a non-issue. Mormons opposing SSM hurt the church and missionary work. The history of the priesthood ban continues to taint the image of Mormonism as racist and it will take time to erase that image. But the fight against SSM reactivates the image of the Mormon church as intolerant and prone to discrimination.

I did not organize the events last week. I organized the event today, but it was somehow confused with the others because I pushed out the marketing for all of them.

These are grassroots groups that work together in a coalition. We had about 200 one evening at Eagle Forum's presentation, 300 the next night with Sam Bushman and Sheriff Mack and Eagle Forum's morning meeting had a significant increase in numbers, and then over 100 crammed into the restaurant's room today. These are organizing meetings and from them we will be able to push back even more because everything is different now, and there is new energy.

I M LDS 2 - I strongly recommend prayerful study of the Proclamation on the Family:

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 and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.

We often talk about the gay marriage issue in terms of freedom and love. We are bound to mutual respect for each other and our different views. We do have all have a core common interest though, in One God, and in His divine power and it's ability.

Whether we accept or reject this does not change the unalterable nature of a cosmological reality, and that is that God made both man and woman, and has only sanctified sexual relations within the divinely appointed union of marriage. All sexual relations outside of this are held by God as sin.

What we are not addressing in this issue is the unalterable fact that sin is death. The reality is we show our truest love to our brothers and sisters by standing united against accepting spiritual death as an equal choice.

More importantly, we are required to protect the innocent from spiritual death, and we will not be able to avoid the fact that we will be held accountable in the next life for where we stood in bringing spiritual life, or spiritual death caused by sin into the lives of our brothers and sisters through marginalizing God's design.

It seems the DN is willing to publish the most paltry article against marriage equality, but never seems to mention most events taking place around the world and the USA that would give readers a chance to see all sides of the issue.

75 ladies in Orem? This is less than one quarter the number of students protesting on multiple days outside a Washington State Catholic High School because their beloved vice-principal got the sack, due to marrying his longtime companion.
.... As in Utah, the catholic bishops accept many, many thousands of Gay teacher and employees who have partners, but go nuts when the person DARES to go before God (or a judge) and solemnifies his/her relationship.

4blade2007
Provo, Utah
" Lets assume "John" is raised by two women, who is going to set the example for John when it is time to learn what a man does?"

... You mean "let's assume John is raised by two women who are complete idiots, and never make sure to expose John to their own family and friends who are male"

Reaching for justifications is NEVER a sign of truth, and never a sign that one is carrying out what God wants.

Like LDS 2 is quoting scriptures to prove anything against the will of the people in Utah to make them look like fools in being religious.

I think this is a big misunderstanding here.
Utahns are religion based people, but having strong faith does not implement that their voice is mixing politics and religion, it just reflects a religious language, but they have a right for a social and political opinion, despite their religion.

For a state where "66%" of the people support their cause, they can only get an attendance of 75? We had a staff meeting at work last week with more people than that. Why didn't that make the news?

The well-being of children raised in same-sex households has been examined carefully in court and found to be no different than the well-being of children from straight households.

You can make all the claims you want to the contrary, but in court and under scrutiny with strict rules of evidence and cross examination, the claim that children raised by same-sex partners are disadvantaged simply falls apart.

Think about it for a minute - is how you have sex the sole defining metric for evaluating your own marriage and how you raise your own children? Of course not.

Marriage equality won't hurt your own marriage or your own families one bit. And now that the arguments are being heard in court, the case against marriage equality has completely collapsed. Marriage equality is coming, and you'll be fine. However, your irrational animosity towards people who are different than you is in for a rough time.

I'm LDS, conservative, Temple married 25yrs, life long Republican, and I support marriage equality.

I strongly recommend prayerful study of D&C134:

"4 We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others;...

9 We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied".

It is way past time for our fellow citizens to be freed from the mingling of religious influence with civil government that has long deprived them of their individual rights to equality before the law!

It is long overdue for us to join with our fellow Americans in supporting their emancipation from discriminatory populist rhetoric and unconstitutional Amendments such as 3!

It is high time we followed our true Master, who dined with the "unrighteous" and rendered unto Ceasar what was his, and to God His own, but loved all equally.

Thank you ladies for standing up to the bullies of the gay movement, who are only tolerant if you lean their way! It takes a lot of courage these days to stand up for the traditions that have made our country truly what it is today....and that includes the freedom of speech!

@4Blade
Same-sex marriage will teach children about love and open their minds and hearts to all love and that all people in the world can show love. It's a win-win and will enrich their minds and hearts for future generations to come.

"Conservative political activist Cherilyn Eagar organized the event she pitched as taking on "Obama's war against Utah's state sovereignty, marriage, family and religious liberty."

And this is why Eagar has little credibility- a tendency to overstate the facts. Obama's war against Utah? This was a judge who received a case and asked to determine whether or not Amendment 3 was Constitutional. He said no. Does she think he called the President on the phone and asked him how he should rule? And let's remember, while he may have been nominated by the President, he was given glowing recommendations by both Senators Lee and Hatch. Oh, AND he's a Republican (but of course now they'll just call him a RINO).

Besides, organizing a grass-roots campaign now will do nothing. This case is in the hands of the courts. And this is exactly the reason that federal judges are appointed, not elected. So they won't feel the need to bend to the pressure of parties, politicians, or political groups. Whichever way they rule, someone will be unhappy and scream "activist judges!"

Of course it affects my marriages and my children and society at large. Children growing up thinking this is normal are going to be confused and weakened both socially and morally. This is a deviant behavior - deviant is defined as "departing from the norm." It is wrong morally and by nature's standards. I am sickened when I blatantly see on the TV new channels two same-sex couples kissing. The decay of traditional families and marriages will be the downfall of our once great nation. To think otherwise is foolishness.

I disagree with postaledith. Children learn from what they see and experience. When children are raised by a same sex couple they will learn from them and think it is normal, is it? Lets assume "John" is raised by two women, who is going to set the example for John when it is time to learn what a man does? Lets fast forward this ruling of same sex marriage for two or three generations, it scares me to think what our children and grandchildren will interpret as marriage and family.

How do you deny people in a "loving way" the right to liberty and happiness?

Another course of action that I am taking and wasn't mentioned in the article is contacting your state representative and state senator and tell them of your convictions.

I am a straight ally and I support gay marriage. I look forward to the day when it will just be called "marriage." I believe that the LGBT community have the right to marry who they love. I do not believe that this affects other peoples' marriages, not does it affect the children who are born into traditional marriages. There are children being adopted by same-sex couples and they are loved and nurtured just as much. I look forward to the day that same-sex marriage will be legal in every state of the country. I believe it will happen.

Such a great story

Good people standing up for good things.

Keep up the good work.

I am not Mormon myself, but I stand with Mormon prophet monson on this issue.