Small but dedicated 'March for Marriage' crowd occupies patch of Capitol grounds

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Tiago Seattle, WA
    June 22, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    Thank you, Deseret News, for removing the paragraph with the inflated attendance numbers.

  • Understands Math Lacey, WA
    June 20, 2014 5:06 p.m.

    The local community here will be having their Pride festival this weekend. Any bets on whether the Pride festival in the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the thirteenth-largest state will have more attendees than NOM had at their national march?

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    June 20, 2014 1:00 p.m.

    The event was all the way in D.C. which I think is why it wasn't reported on earlier here, as opposed to something more local like the local pride parade you noted.

  • USU-Logan Logan, UT
    June 20, 2014 12:24 p.m.

    Just google "Hundreds march in defense of traditional marriage", you will get a report from Washington Times, a sponsor of this march. I am pretty sure if there were 5000 attendees for real, its own sponsor would not use "Hundreds march......." as headline.

  • Values Voter LONG BEACH, CA
    June 20, 2014 12:04 p.m.

    One last point (and this might be of special interest to DN readers):

    The article features quotes from former Senator Rick Santorum, but fails to mention the event's culminating speaker, former governor and former Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. As I watched him exhort the crowd and display what I found to be an irritating self-righteousness, I couldn't help but remember his past shabby and offensive treatment of governor Romney (and the religious beliefs of Latter-day Saints in general). I would think long and hard before I aligned myself with someone like that.

  • Values Voter LONG BEACH, CA
    June 20, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    I was aware of this event long before it happened yesterday (anyone who is paying attention to this issue couldn't have missed it) and I was able to watch much of it over NOM's live-stream:

    1.) The 5,000 estimate for the crowed does not match either my own observations from the broadcast, nor does it match any of the estimates of various Marriage Equality observers on the ground attending the event. Crowd numbers are routinely skewed (in either direction, depending) as anyone who tracks hot-button political issues knows. I'll leave it to individual readers to look at the available information and make their own determinations. I will say, best case, 5,000 -- that is depressingly small by any standard, if NOM is characterizing itself as a "National Movement".

    2.) Th repetitive messages I heard --pretty much without exception-- involved religious arguments. People who hold to this type of thinking are, of course, free to bring those arguments into court, but we all know how those arguments have fared lately. I'll end by pointing out that, while the arguments offered at yesterday's event are held by some religious people, they are not held by all religious people.

  • Tiago Seattle, WA
    June 20, 2014 1:08 a.m.

    Where did this reporter get the "estimated 5,000" attendance number?
    Even the far right Washington Times which livestreamed the event and made a special pullout section in their paper dedicated to the march yesterday, today has the headline "Hundreds march in defense of traditional marriage." Hundreds. Not 5,000.

  • Tiago Seattle, WA
    June 19, 2014 11:35 p.m.

    Small march? Yes. The Deseret News states that there were around 5,000 in attendance. Every other article I read estimated around 2,000. You can easily find photos and video of the event on social media and other articles.
    Dedicated march? By the end of the rally, a lot of the crowd had dispersed and the final speakers thanked those who stuck around to the end.
    New York State Senator, Rev. Ruben Diaz had committed to bring 100 buses carrying 55 people each from the Bronx. The National Organization for Marriage did a huge fundraising push to fund those buses. You can find the YouTube video where Diaz advertises this event in Spanish to Hispanic churches in NYC. He never mentions the march or marriage in the entire video. He only promises people a totally free trip to Washington DC for the day. You do the math and it's clear that they couldn't even fill the 100 free buses from NYC.
    I'm glad speakers emphasized that the march was not "anti-gay," but look at signs people were carrying were carrying photos of the event and what NOM says on its website and it looks anti-gay to me.

  • A Quaker Brooklyn, NY
    June 19, 2014 11:30 p.m.

    The misnamed "March For Marriage" should more accurately be called the "March Against Marriage For Them." Because, that's all it is, a marriage-denial movement. It never even existed before the possibility arose that gay people might want to settle down into normal, average, lifetime commitments, like the rest of us. For whatever reason, that prospect was used to whip up a lot of animosity, and a lot of money for anti-gay lobbying groups, and we saw 30+ states pass state amendments which it seems may not have been constitutional.

    The tiny turnout to this vigorously hyped event gives me hope that more people see this for what it is, a hate movement. For those of you who would respond, "Love the sinner, hate the sin," may I remind you that the sin you're hating amounts to who these people are. They're gay. They're not heterosexual. In every other way, they're perfectly normal, but if you hate that one distinguishing characteristic that sets them apart, and doesn't affect you in the least, you're hating them.

  • John Sun Houston, TX
    June 19, 2014 10:01 p.m.


    Anybody who wants to have a nuclear family of opposite sex and children can have it, nobody will ever deny that right.

    The problem is that when same sex couples want to get married, their rights are denied in many states. fortunately, more and more American people have evolved and majority are in favor of marriage equality. It is just a matter of time that SSM be recognized in all 50 states.

    the fact is, this so-called 'March for Marriage' is actually about denying same sex couples' marriage right, not about helping straight couples to stay in their marriage. let's not sugar coating it. denying same sex couples' marriage right also has nothing to do with getting more straight people into marriage.

  • samhill Salt Lake City, UT
    June 19, 2014 8:28 p.m.

    I think it's telling of the disdain that our popular culture now has for traditional marriage that I didn't see any notice of this event. Nothing on the radio/TV and nothing in this or the other two newspapers I read.

    It could be that I missed this news along with a lot of other news because of recent events in my own life that has interrupted my usual close scrutiny of news in general. However, even with my reduced vigilance, had this event been promoted as much as "Pride Day" or any of the now common and much more closely followed people and events that advocate for homosexual "marriage", I'm certain I would have noticed.

    I wish I could have attended this event and hope it will have some effect in countering an ever increasing disregard and even hostility for the most fundamental institution of this and every other successful society. That being the plain, old-fashioned and most effective environment for raising and nurturing human beings, the nuclear family of parents (of opposite sex, by biological necessity) and children.