Reader comments
Gay advocates trek to LDS offices
277 comments | Read story
Anonymous | 7:23 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
There were a total of about a dozen people. I don't think that merits the
attention of an article.
itsjustme | 7:24 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Let me see if I have this right: It is OK for the homosexual community to be
politically active and lobby for their cause, but the LDS church needs to remain
silent?
Sounds fair to me. NOT!!!
Sounds fair to me. NOT!!!
Really? | 7:25 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
What a waste of time. Oh well, at least I hope that they feel better.
Isn't that what this is all about? Trying to feel better about the choices
that they've made?
Good luck with that.
Good luck with that.
Comments continue below
Todd | 7:38 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
What the LDS are forcing their lifestyle on you homosexuals? What ? Going to
church is volountary.
JAYEG | 7:44 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Throughout the history of mankind, the struggle for freedom, and for equality
has always taken Herculean efforts, and patience. It is a never ending quest
which requires vigilance and persistence.
This was true for the women's suffragettes, and those who supported their dream of equal rights with men...and it was true for the African Americans and all who supported their dream for equality and an end to oppression in the Civil Rights Movement.
It continues to be true for members of the GLBT community, as they seek the same rights and protections under the law as the heterosexual community enjoys.
This was true for the women's suffragettes, and those who supported their dream of equal rights with men...and it was true for the African Americans and all who supported their dream for equality and an end to oppression in the Civil Rights Movement.
It continues to be true for members of the GLBT community, as they seek the same rights and protections under the law as the heterosexual community enjoys.
just a thought | 7:45 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
how 'bout instead of degrading these individuals you actually took the time
to listen to what they have to say and try to understand where they are coming
from... they might be more receptive to you and what you have to say.
John Pack Lambert | 7:53 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Committing homosexual actions is a choice. What the causes of same gender
attraction are is not fully known or understood, but to say that a person who
feels such an attraction has no choice but to act on it is to deny men free
will.
Re: JAYEG | 7:59 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
I think you need to also consider this fact, they are trying to get the church
to change a stance that many prophets and apostles have already said. .
.homosexuality if practiced is living in sin. We still love the people, but it
is still sin, plain and simple.
See me... | 7:59 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
See me, feel me, touch me, heal me. (The Who)
If said trek was cathartic for the participants, then more power to them. However, I wouldn't hold out much hope that PR stunts like this will have much impact on the LDS Church's position about homosexual behavior.
And about GBH not being able to answer a black/white question about the origins of sexual orientation? Not a problem to me as I believe it the answer is very complex and involves environment, genetics, AND some degree of choice.
I do feel that the average LDS Church member could use lots of improvement in how they treat or think about gays. Hopefully LDS Church leaders will continue to speak out about the evils of homosexual behavior (actually, ANY sexual relations outside of marriage) but temper their statements with the plea to try to understand the tremendous burden faced by gays who attempt a celibate life. These people need our help!
If said trek was cathartic for the participants, then more power to them. However, I wouldn't hold out much hope that PR stunts like this will have much impact on the LDS Church's position about homosexual behavior.
And about GBH not being able to answer a black/white question about the origins of sexual orientation? Not a problem to me as I believe it the answer is very complex and involves environment, genetics, AND some degree of choice.
I do feel that the average LDS Church member could use lots of improvement in how they treat or think about gays. Hopefully LDS Church leaders will continue to speak out about the evils of homosexual behavior (actually, ANY sexual relations outside of marriage) but temper their statements with the plea to try to understand the tremendous burden faced by gays who attempt a celibate life. These people need our help!
RE:RE: Really | 8:03 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
No gainsaying necessary. I'm not making a definitive statement as to the
root cause of homosexual feelings because I don't know either.
My point is much simpler. A person makes a choice to act on their urges, feelings, and emotions. Period.
A person will never become an alcoholic if they never take a drink. It's a choice to drink alcohol, even if the urge is biological. Many people have this urge and choose not to act on it.
A person will never become addicted to pornography if they never look at pornography. It's a choice to look at pornography, even if the urge is biological. Many people have this urge and choose not to act on it.
Except in the case of rape, if you choose to engage in sexual relations (homosexual or heterosexual), it's a choice, even if the urge is biological. Period.
So, unless you're saying that a person with homosexual tendencies (whether from nature or nurture) has no control over their sexual activities, it's a CHOICE to engage in homosexual relations, just as it's a choice for a person to engage in heterosexual relations.
My point is much simpler. A person makes a choice to act on their urges, feelings, and emotions. Period.
A person will never become an alcoholic if they never take a drink. It's a choice to drink alcohol, even if the urge is biological. Many people have this urge and choose not to act on it.
A person will never become addicted to pornography if they never look at pornography. It's a choice to look at pornography, even if the urge is biological. Many people have this urge and choose not to act on it.
Except in the case of rape, if you choose to engage in sexual relations (homosexual or heterosexual), it's a choice, even if the urge is biological. Period.
So, unless you're saying that a person with homosexual tendencies (whether from nature or nurture) has no control over their sexual activities, it's a CHOICE to engage in homosexual relations, just as it's a choice for a person to engage in heterosexual relations.
Can't have it both ways | 8:09 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
If you want to be active, protest, and make political waves, GLBT community,
respect the rights of others to do the same. We are not forcing our lifestyle
or religion on you, this is not a communist state or nation with a
government-endorsed religion, despite what the news media may think! Utah is a
place where many people live and work with each other regardless of race, age,
beliefs, or ideologies.
RE: JAYEG | 8:14 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Prophets through the history of mankind have denounced homosexuality as a sin
and perversion. It matters not what any part of the population thinks, sin
remains sin and the choice is absolutely with each individual to remain in sin
or to repent.
Prophets to not sway with the wind, consider this one fact - regardless of any cause, participation in homosexual acts is sin.
Civil rights is not the issue, it is the moral issue.
Prophets to not sway with the wind, consider this one fact - regardless of any cause, participation in homosexual acts is sin.
Civil rights is not the issue, it is the moral issue.
Again? | 8:18 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Car bomb explodes in Baghdad...
Health care reform debate tied up in Congress...
Gays demonstrate against LDS Church...
...just another day at the office....
Health care reform debate tied up in Congress...
Gays demonstrate against LDS Church...
...just another day at the office....
Robert - St. George | 10:36 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
The LDS Church, believing it is thee true church on the earth, is probably not
going to change its stance on homosexual activity. They truly have that right.
But being a gay human being is no reason to not be loved and accepted in the LDS
Church. For sure, if one chooses to break the commandments then you have to
accept the consequences. However every single member of the Church has sin in
their lives. There are many heterosexuals in the Church who sin sexually but
are still visited and still welcomed in the Church and are helped through their
pain and sin oriented life. Same is true with Mormons who drink, do drugs,
lie, cheat, steal, etc. But if you are gay they avoid you like the plague.
There is nothing "Non-Christian", Anti-Christ, or even Anti-Mormon
about being kind and reaching out to Gay Members. In fact I think that is what
Christ taught. But Mormons don't have a true Christian love about them
when it comes to the Gay members and that is what causes the Church so many
problems. They say they love gays, but we don't see it.
Just another comment | 10:45 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
RE:RE: Really, I'm with you. It is all about choices we make. We’re
all born with characteristics that drive us to make choices. That’s just
a part of life. Regardless of religious affiliation, it comes down to choice.
When this topic is brought up it always seems to be that so many blame the LDS
church for what is happening around opposition to Gays and Lesbians. However,
there are plenty of other groups and religious affiliations that are also
apposed to a Gay or Lesbian life styles. If you want to bring it up as an
issue, quite blaming others for choices you, as gays and lesbians, make.
Realize the LDS church, like any other, has the right, as do you G/Ls, to
believe and follow a certain life style. Why do you continue to blame the LDS
church for not accepting your life style. You ought to look in the mirror and
realize that you are doing the very thing you are telling the church not to do,
force your lifestyle upon others who don't believe that what you are doing
is right. It's a choice. It's your choice.
help | 11:12 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
Can somebody please tell me what the goal of the GLBT Community is? When does
their complaining, fighting and despondency stop? What is their goal? I have a
hard time believing that if the LDS Church says that being Gay is Ok and it is
ok to marry then all will be well. I have a very hard time believing that.
What is their ultimate goal?
JAYEG | 12:11 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
John Pack Lambert:
If a gay man, or a lesbian woman is physically incapable of sexual attraction for the opposite sex...and cannot fall in love with the opposite sex...then the ramifications of what you are saying is that while a heterosexual man or woman may eventually hope to sanctify their sexuality through marriage...the gay man or lesbian woman must forever remain celibate.
How very convenient for the heterosexual. And how very unfair for the homosexual.
If a gay man, or a lesbian woman is physically incapable of sexual attraction for the opposite sex...and cannot fall in love with the opposite sex...then the ramifications of what you are saying is that while a heterosexual man or woman may eventually hope to sanctify their sexuality through marriage...the gay man or lesbian woman must forever remain celibate.
How very convenient for the heterosexual. And how very unfair for the homosexual.
Californian #1@94131 | 12:14 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
* "Can somebody please tell me what the goal of the GLBT Community is?
When does their complaining, fighting and despondency stop? What is their
goal?" *
They claim it is "reconciliation." IOW, they want us to all live in peace.
rec·on·cil·i·a·tion
1. reconciling of people: the ending of conflict or renewing of a friendly relationship between disputing people or groups
2. achievement of consistency or compatibility: the making of two or more apparently conflicting things consistent or compatible
3. Christianity sacrament of penance: the sacrament in the Roman Catholic Church whereby an individual’s sins are absolved through confession and penance
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library.
No, I don't think any of these is what the activists want.
Reconciliation requires BOTH parties to act, and the Church has already been consiliatory. The activist want total victory, not harmony. A "friendly relationship" with them requires that every other party accept their definitions as correct. They will be satisfied only if they can put their foot on the neck of the LDS, Catholic, and other churches who continue to defend traditional marriage. It isn't reconciliation they are after, but capitulation.
They claim it is "reconciliation." IOW, they want us to all live in peace.
rec·on·cil·i·a·tion
1. reconciling of people: the ending of conflict or renewing of a friendly relationship between disputing people or groups
2. achievement of consistency or compatibility: the making of two or more apparently conflicting things consistent or compatible
3. Christianity sacrament of penance: the sacrament in the Roman Catholic Church whereby an individual’s sins are absolved through confession and penance
Microsoft® Encarta® Reference Library.
No, I don't think any of these is what the activists want.
Reconciliation requires BOTH parties to act, and the Church has already been consiliatory. The activist want total victory, not harmony. A "friendly relationship" with them requires that every other party accept their definitions as correct. They will be satisfied only if they can put their foot on the neck of the LDS, Catholic, and other churches who continue to defend traditional marriage. It isn't reconciliation they are after, but capitulation.
JAYEG | 12:16 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Re: Re: JAYEG | 7:59 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009
I have seen very little that resembles love in the LDS Church's treatment of gays and lesbians. Especially from the general membership.
Consider this. Many things are considered to be a sin...and we all sin. Pride. Arrogance. Sloth. Lack of charity. Lack of forgiveness. Unrighteous dominion. Unrighteous judgment.
And the Lord taught that inasmuch as we judged the sins of others, while conveniently forgetting about our own sins...we would be judged with that same measure of judgment.
I have seen very little that resembles love in the LDS Church's treatment of gays and lesbians. Especially from the general membership.
Consider this. Many things are considered to be a sin...and we all sin. Pride. Arrogance. Sloth. Lack of charity. Lack of forgiveness. Unrighteous dominion. Unrighteous judgment.
And the Lord taught that inasmuch as we judged the sins of others, while conveniently forgetting about our own sins...we would be judged with that same measure of judgment.
JAYEG | 12:20 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
RE: See me
What these people need is for you, and the LDS Church, and the ultra right wing Christian fundamentalists to stay out of their personal lives.
What these people need is for you, and the LDS Church, and the ultra right wing Christian fundamentalists to stay out of their personal lives.
JAYEG | 12:37 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
How many of you heterosexual guys and gals would voluntarily and willingly face
a lifetime of sexual abstinence?
Californian #1@94131 | 12:45 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
How ironic that some of these activists took exception to Elder Oaks'
allusion to the civil rights movement in his religious freedom speech.
To force attention onto their demands that the Church accept a lifestyle contrary to Church doctrine and God's laws, they pulled handcarts, a revered symbol of our pioneer heritage and those who struggled across a thousand miles of wilderness or died at Winter Quarters or Martin's Cove.
Not surprising. After all, they had already degraded the true civil rights movement and dishonored people like Martin Luther King, Viola Liuzzo, and the Birmingham church bombing victims by linking same-sex "marriage" to the conflicts over voting rights or school segregation. And to interracial marriage! They Don't Get It: a marriage between a man and a woman of different races is still a marriage between a MAN and a WOMAN.
I am a convert with no Mormon pioneer ancestry, and I am not African-American. But I am insulted and offended by the way this special interest group has latched onto the coattails of true pioneers and true civil rights heroes. What they are doing is inaccurate, opportunistic, deceptive, and, yes, very ironic.
To force attention onto their demands that the Church accept a lifestyle contrary to Church doctrine and God's laws, they pulled handcarts, a revered symbol of our pioneer heritage and those who struggled across a thousand miles of wilderness or died at Winter Quarters or Martin's Cove.
Not surprising. After all, they had already degraded the true civil rights movement and dishonored people like Martin Luther King, Viola Liuzzo, and the Birmingham church bombing victims by linking same-sex "marriage" to the conflicts over voting rights or school segregation. And to interracial marriage! They Don't Get It: a marriage between a man and a woman of different races is still a marriage between a MAN and a WOMAN.
I am a convert with no Mormon pioneer ancestry, and I am not African-American. But I am insulted and offended by the way this special interest group has latched onto the coattails of true pioneers and true civil rights heroes. What they are doing is inaccurate, opportunistic, deceptive, and, yes, very ironic.
JAYEG | 12:47 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I have yet to meet a gay man or lesbian woman who is interested in forcing a
heterosexual man to either marry another man, or abstain from marriage and
sexuality for life.
I have yet to meet anyone in the GLBT community who would dream of attempting to prevent heterosexuals from marrying, and providing their families with equal rights and protections under the law.
I have yet to meet anyone in the GLBT community who would dream of attempting to prevent heterosexuals from marrying, and providing their families with equal rights and protections under the law.
The point | 12:56 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
You think that the LDS Church actively campaigning to strip a population of
American Citizens of their Civil Liberties is fair political play? Really? You
can't understand?
God knows plenty of people of different religions view the "choice" to be an adherent to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to be a grave sin, a false church, or worse. Does that negate the government's protection of the "choice" to believe in LDS? Of course not.
Regardless of whether you believe the resounding opinions of Accredited Scientific Bodies that a human's sexual identity is fixed (immutable) by age 3 to 6, I find it a little hypocritical to claim that "choices" are not protected by the Constitution. God knows Joseph Smith wasn't afforded the liberty of "choice"in Illinois...
A same-sex couple being permitted to marry does not force an LDS Adherent to marry someone of the same-sex. An LDS Adherent trying to legislate into the law *their* interpretation of marriage IS forcing their beliefs on others, by the writ of law if necessary. Forsake the Unitarians, Episcopals, UCCs, and other progressive religions: only Conservative Religious Interpretations are apparently Protected Constitutionally...
God knows plenty of people of different religions view the "choice" to be an adherent to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to be a grave sin, a false church, or worse. Does that negate the government's protection of the "choice" to believe in LDS? Of course not.
Regardless of whether you believe the resounding opinions of Accredited Scientific Bodies that a human's sexual identity is fixed (immutable) by age 3 to 6, I find it a little hypocritical to claim that "choices" are not protected by the Constitution. God knows Joseph Smith wasn't afforded the liberty of "choice"in Illinois...
A same-sex couple being permitted to marry does not force an LDS Adherent to marry someone of the same-sex. An LDS Adherent trying to legislate into the law *their* interpretation of marriage IS forcing their beliefs on others, by the writ of law if necessary. Forsake the Unitarians, Episcopals, UCCs, and other progressive religions: only Conservative Religious Interpretations are apparently Protected Constitutionally...
re: help | 1:35 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
their goal is to be able to go to work without fear of being fired due to their
sexual orientation.
their goal is to be able see the person whom they love if that person is in a hospital bed.
"The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."
-John Stuart Mill
Regardless of one's thoughts on morality, the basic freedom to enjoy one's life and live it as they please--without causing harm to others--is universal...someday.
their goal is to be able see the person whom they love if that person is in a hospital bed.
"The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right... The only part of the conduct of anyone, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."
-John Stuart Mill
Regardless of one's thoughts on morality, the basic freedom to enjoy one's life and live it as they please--without causing harm to others--is universal...someday.
Robert - St. George | 5:14 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Re: Help. The goal of the GLBT community is to have equal rights, as they see
it, like everyone else, including the right to marry.
The complaining, fighting will stop when they receive those equal rights. Its just like with any other group (Women, Blacks) who had to fight to get on the same playing field.
The LDS Church, like anyone else, has the right to say what is right and wrong with lifestyle choices. Remember when the LDS Church wanted the lifestyle of Polygamy and the majority thought it was horrible, sinful, lustful, and WRONG? The LDS Church fought it until they finally had to move out of the US to the Mexican Territory to live their lifestyle. When it came time for Utah to become a state they gave up their choice of living a Polygamous lifestyle.
As for the Gays inside the Church, just being accepted and loved is all a lot would ask. That does not mean some lifestyle choices, but just them as human beings. Until the revelation of 1978 on Blacks receiving the priesthood, they were not really accepted by the members, only in words. That needs to change for everyone.
The complaining, fighting will stop when they receive those equal rights. Its just like with any other group (Women, Blacks) who had to fight to get on the same playing field.
The LDS Church, like anyone else, has the right to say what is right and wrong with lifestyle choices. Remember when the LDS Church wanted the lifestyle of Polygamy and the majority thought it was horrible, sinful, lustful, and WRONG? The LDS Church fought it until they finally had to move out of the US to the Mexican Territory to live their lifestyle. When it came time for Utah to become a state they gave up their choice of living a Polygamous lifestyle.
As for the Gays inside the Church, just being accepted and loved is all a lot would ask. That does not mean some lifestyle choices, but just them as human beings. Until the revelation of 1978 on Blacks receiving the priesthood, they were not really accepted by the members, only in words. That needs to change for everyone.
To: JAYEG | 5:41 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
You said, "The last President of the LDS Church was intelligent and honest
enough to admit that not enough research had been done to know one way or
another if homosexuality was a lifestyle choice, or had genetic
causation."
And somehow you think if a genetic link is established that that will change the Lord's mind on whether or not homosexuality is an acceptable practice? It might add another rationalization to the mix, but the Lord already knows whether or not it is a lifestyle choice or a genetic defect. And guess what? He still considers it a sin to act on it. Many men are predisposed to lust after every desireable woman that crosses their path. Maybe I could feel better about myself if the Lord would give me a pass.
And somehow you think if a genetic link is established that that will change the Lord's mind on whether or not homosexuality is an acceptable practice? It might add another rationalization to the mix, but the Lord already knows whether or not it is a lifestyle choice or a genetic defect. And guess what? He still considers it a sin to act on it. Many men are predisposed to lust after every desireable woman that crosses their path. Maybe I could feel better about myself if the Lord would give me a pass.
Eichendorff | 6:59 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
The answer to your question, help, is that the GLBT "community" seeks
to redefine marriage to achieve legitimacy. It has nothing to do with love,
discrimination, or so-called civil rights. Nothing whatsoever.
Any man can marry any woman regardless of sexual orientation, so long as they agree to it. No one asks whether the parties are gay or not. The idea that the Church or any other institution opposing same-sex marriage takes away someone else's rights is a complete red herring. It is the definition of marriage that they want to change.
Any man can marry any woman regardless of sexual orientation, so long as they agree to it. No one asks whether the parties are gay or not. The idea that the Church or any other institution opposing same-sex marriage takes away someone else's rights is a complete red herring. It is the definition of marriage that they want to change.
Sam | 7:33 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I don't really care in the gay community marries. I would be fine with
that if it stopped there. But it wont. We all know that. The next issue they
will push is that this form of lifestyle must now be taught in the public
schools as normal. My children will have to sit in class and be indoctrinated
in this lifestyle. This is only the beginning of what this community will
attempt. It would affect the churches temple marriage "program",
meaning they would next sue to be sealed in the temple, leading to the
government getting involved and shutting that down if they are not allowed equal
representation in the temple. Does not anyone else out there see where this
will lead. It has already started in the schools.
2 of 6 | 7:37 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
People, people! We need BRIDGES! NOT BARRICADES!
P! re: Jayeg at 12:11 | 7:38 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
It is not a question of convenience. We ultimately have the choice of whether
we act on inclinations no matter how strong. Perhaps one heterosexual married
man has extreme inclinations to engage in sexual activity with multiple women -
those inclinations, caused by genes or whatever, do not justify his actions if
he actually does engage in sexual activity with multiple women.
I do not disagree that it is an unfortunate lot for the man with homosexual tendencies. I feel horrible for them. But I feel worse if they feel as though they have no choice but to act upon their desires. If we really believe the scriptures which make it clear that homosexual activity is a sin we must follow or else we are not honest with ourselves. Same goes for the man who is married and has inclinations for sexual activity with multiple women. I believe homosexuals have the harder task to live with no hope of emotional and sexual intimacy. But that makes no difference. The challenge is his and he can either yield to his incliinations and set a trend for the rest of his life or rise above them and never let them define him.
I do not disagree that it is an unfortunate lot for the man with homosexual tendencies. I feel horrible for them. But I feel worse if they feel as though they have no choice but to act upon their desires. If we really believe the scriptures which make it clear that homosexual activity is a sin we must follow or else we are not honest with ourselves. Same goes for the man who is married and has inclinations for sexual activity with multiple women. I believe homosexuals have the harder task to live with no hope of emotional and sexual intimacy. But that makes no difference. The challenge is his and he can either yield to his incliinations and set a trend for the rest of his life or rise above them and never let them define him.
Anonymous | 7:40 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
The Church really needs to address this issue in a meaningful way. I still have
not heard a good explanation of how God makes people gay, and churches reject
them for it. There seems to be an inherent contradiction.
nottyou | 7:41 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
It isn't politics; it's moral values and the Church will NEVER change
its stance on this issue.
Ed Clinch | 7:52 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I understand why these people did the handcart move, it is a smart way to
publicize their cause. I do disagree with same sex marriage as an institution
and I hope a civil union pact could be arranged, per state or federally,
allowing the financial and family decisions to be made.
For instance, if a father has an adult son that he claims as a civil union dependent, he has claims to him not as a conjugal spouse but as an intimate family member. There would be a legal way for those "consenting adults" (no sex implied) for financial benefits that gay couples do not receive yet.
Same sex marriage is not a civil right. But that is what we vote about. Same sex or family financial benefits are a civil right. The institution of marriage is between a man and a woman.
Civil unions are for everyone else: mother/son, uncle/nephew, grandma/grandchild, etc.
I hope that our legislators could figure out these simple yet emotionally hightened concepts of law and rights, according to our Constitutions, both federal and state.
For instance, if a father has an adult son that he claims as a civil union dependent, he has claims to him not as a conjugal spouse but as an intimate family member. There would be a legal way for those "consenting adults" (no sex implied) for financial benefits that gay couples do not receive yet.
Same sex marriage is not a civil right. But that is what we vote about. Same sex or family financial benefits are a civil right. The institution of marriage is between a man and a woman.
Civil unions are for everyone else: mother/son, uncle/nephew, grandma/grandchild, etc.
I hope that our legislators could figure out these simple yet emotionally hightened concepts of law and rights, according to our Constitutions, both federal and state.
Hank | 7:54 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Why are the two men in the picture forcing the kids to do all the pulling? Man
up and pull the thing yourselves.
To: JAYEG | 8:08 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
You just don't get it - Homosexual acts are SIN and a violation of
GOD's commands.
No one is saying any of the others in your list are not sin, nor is anyone judging you directly. But homosexual activity is sin. We do not see those involved in "Pride. Arrogance. Sloth. Lack of charity. Lack of forgiveness. Unrighteous dominion. Unrighteous judgment" espousing that their sin be considered differently or that somehow a prophet (as you inferred) lacks intelligence because he remains steadfast to the Lord's will regarding sin.
We do not see those involved in any other sin espousing for special rights or trying to be excused in some way because they were "born that way."
The bottom line is that all sinners are responsible to repent, and to cease the sin - we all were born with or developed habits that lead to sin, we are responsible to overcome through repentance.
No one is saying any of the others in your list are not sin, nor is anyone judging you directly. But homosexual activity is sin. We do not see those involved in "Pride. Arrogance. Sloth. Lack of charity. Lack of forgiveness. Unrighteous dominion. Unrighteous judgment" espousing that their sin be considered differently or that somehow a prophet (as you inferred) lacks intelligence because he remains steadfast to the Lord's will regarding sin.
We do not see those involved in any other sin espousing for special rights or trying to be excused in some way because they were "born that way."
The bottom line is that all sinners are responsible to repent, and to cease the sin - we all were born with or developed habits that lead to sin, we are responsible to overcome through repentance.
The Constitution v. Ignorance | 8:26 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
It is remarkable to me that there is such an ignorant fuss being made here.
While there are many claims that the GLBT "community" only seeks
equality, these claims operate under the assumption that marriage is a
constitutionally guaranteed right- it is not. States and the Fed. both DO have
the right to legislate morality. The same legal arguments being tossed around
so cavalierly are those that would require the state to lift its prohibition on
polygamy, incest, and bestiality. This is not likely to happen since the
government has a vested interest in regulating prurient activities. Also
interesting is that almost all the "rights" that the GLBT community
claims it is being denied can be contracted into.
Finally, the argument that being gay doesn't adversely affect anyone but the couple is ignorant beyond reason. A few short seconds of searching on the internet points to dozens of accredited studies that show that the effect of gay parentage on children is devastating. While I recognize that the situation may not be as bad as some that exist in abusive heterosexual couples, the fact is that the State doesn't want to legalize either form of abuse on children.
Finally, the argument that being gay doesn't adversely affect anyone but the couple is ignorant beyond reason. A few short seconds of searching on the internet points to dozens of accredited studies that show that the effect of gay parentage on children is devastating. While I recognize that the situation may not be as bad as some that exist in abusive heterosexual couples, the fact is that the State doesn't want to legalize either form of abuse on children.
Alan | 8:28 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
How about a compromise?
Everyone can visit anyone they care about in the hospital. Anyone can leave their estate to anyone they want. No one can be fired for their off-the-job behavior. Everyone can believe and do what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. I think you get the idea.
But marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman.
Everyone can visit anyone they care about in the hospital. Anyone can leave their estate to anyone they want. No one can be fired for their off-the-job behavior. Everyone can believe and do what they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. I think you get the idea.
But marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman.
Anonymous | 8:32 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I'm LDS, but I don't like how Mormons are jumping on the same wagon
with people who call it "traditional" marriage and say "it's
the way it's always been." Those are the same arguments people use to
exclude us from "mainstream Christianity." It just can't be
right. Find a better argument.
Jack | 8:37 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I live in the Bay Area. GLBT reps are regularly invited on school campus'
here to present/promote their lifestyle. Those with "straight" views
are not allowed any such access. If the gay club hits on you and you tell them
to get lost, it is hate speech. The gay's don't want equality, they
want to silence, even punish, any opposing views.
Castoro | 8:50 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Re: JAYEG | 12:37 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
RE: JAYEG | 12:11 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I have a sibling who has the sweetest disposition, but the face of a third-world race-horse. She remains celebate. Is it possible she will someday marry, I guess, likely, not at all.
Is this fair - No. Should we make an exception for her? You say yes, she says no.
We make an exception for her, then we need to make an exception for gays, next we should make an exception for extreamly good looking young man, because hey, with all the women throwing themselves at him, he shouldn't have to endure such temptations for so long... you can pretty much find an exception for everyone if you try.
RE: JAYEG | 12:11 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I have a sibling who has the sweetest disposition, but the face of a third-world race-horse. She remains celebate. Is it possible she will someday marry, I guess, likely, not at all.
Is this fair - No. Should we make an exception for her? You say yes, she says no.
We make an exception for her, then we need to make an exception for gays, next we should make an exception for extreamly good looking young man, because hey, with all the women throwing themselves at him, he shouldn't have to endure such temptations for so long... you can pretty much find an exception for everyone if you try.
Bill | 9:10 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
TO JAYEG:
There is some proof that same gender attraction is genetic but this too has been not be totally proven. Fact is that all of us are born with certain genetic flaws, does this mean that I have to act upon them. "And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness, And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore all things must have vanished away." "Wherefore, the Lord God fave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it be that he was enticed by the one or the other."
If you are LDS the you know what this means. Same gender attraction is not a sin. Action is.
There is some proof that same gender attraction is genetic but this too has been not be totally proven. Fact is that all of us are born with certain genetic flaws, does this mean that I have to act upon them. "And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness, And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore all things must have vanished away." "Wherefore, the Lord God fave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it be that he was enticed by the one or the other."
If you are LDS the you know what this means. Same gender attraction is not a sin. Action is.
BobP | 9:14 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Life is not fair. Homosexual activity is a choice. The other choice is to
remain celibate. This sounds hard but life is often even, usually hard.
I oppose gay marriage, for one simple reason. I do not want my or anyone elses children and grandchildren to feel that such conduct is acceptable.
I have been widowed fro some years. Since I still carry a flaming torch fro my first wife, it would be "unfair" of me to remarry. I remain cleibate.
I oppose gay marriage, for one simple reason. I do not want my or anyone elses children and grandchildren to feel that such conduct is acceptable.
I have been widowed fro some years. Since I still carry a flaming torch fro my first wife, it would be "unfair" of me to remarry. I remain cleibate.
nyca411 | 9:53 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
Wow, there are some real misunderstandings here, so let's clear things
up:
1. God doesn't make anyone born "gay," just as He doesn't make anyone born blind or missing a limb. In the pre-existence, we were male and female entities -- there was no homosexuality -- and we came into our bodies the same way, as male and female. But the development of a fetus is very complex, and subject to earthly forces, and things might not develop properly in some cases. But God doesn't "make" it that way.
2. I lived in NYC for many years, and there were PLENTY of gays and lesbians in my Singles ward, and they were loved and accepted, held callings, etc, but had to abide by the same moral conduct as the heterosexual members. The same standards applied to everyone.
3. My brother lives in Alameda, CA, which just passed the most progressive homosexual curriculum, and parents are NOT given the opportunity to opt-out of lessons that teach homosexuality as "normal." The LGBT community does NOT want tolerance, they want everyone to accept their lifestyle as normal and do it by legal force.
1. God doesn't make anyone born "gay," just as He doesn't make anyone born blind or missing a limb. In the pre-existence, we were male and female entities -- there was no homosexuality -- and we came into our bodies the same way, as male and female. But the development of a fetus is very complex, and subject to earthly forces, and things might not develop properly in some cases. But God doesn't "make" it that way.
2. I lived in NYC for many years, and there were PLENTY of gays and lesbians in my Singles ward, and they were loved and accepted, held callings, etc, but had to abide by the same moral conduct as the heterosexual members. The same standards applied to everyone.
3. My brother lives in Alameda, CA, which just passed the most progressive homosexual curriculum, and parents are NOT given the opportunity to opt-out of lessons that teach homosexuality as "normal." The LGBT community does NOT want tolerance, they want everyone to accept their lifestyle as normal and do it by legal force.
Why do they care? | 10:06 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I find it almost comical that the GLBT community even cares what the LDS Church
thinks. Here's an institution they say doesn't accept them and
won't give them equal treatment. They don't believe in their
doctrine, they don't agree with their "politics." The Church
doesn't withhold any of the rights they are demanding, the government does
(they may have supported Prop. 8, but ultimately it was the people's vote
that decided. They didn't force anyone to vote). It feels like a bunch of
people trying to get accepted into a club they don't even like or agree
with.
I personally wouldn't want to belong to a Church where a petition and a bunch of angry people could cause the doctrine to change. The Lord dictates this Church, so it does no good to petition the leaders of the Church. Sin is sin and that will never change. If you believe it will, go to the Lord, not Church Headquarters.
I personally wouldn't want to belong to a Church where a petition and a bunch of angry people could cause the doctrine to change. The Lord dictates this Church, so it does no good to petition the leaders of the Church. Sin is sin and that will never change. If you believe it will, go to the Lord, not Church Headquarters.
Re: Robert-St.George @10:36 | 10:30 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I think it's interesting that you can judge every single member of the
Church. I have never met you and so you don't speak for me. I have a very
good friend in the Church who obviously is in-active because she is gay and acts
upon it. HOWEVER, when she comes to church, with her girlfriend most of us
welcome her, give her hugs and visit with the 2 of them. We love her for who she
is. She is human. The one thing the church does give us is freedom to choose.
She made her choice to act on it. We love her anyway. I applied to a job in
this state and the owners were a gay couple I would not have had a problem
working for them! What people do with their lives is their business. I try to
find the good in as many people as I can (which includes my friend from the
ward! Don't classify all LDS as non-Christians and haters. We
aren't!!! This girls knows that I don't agree with her lifestyle but
we're still respectful and loving friends.Everyone grow up!!!!!!
Vader | 10:34 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
A call to the LDS Church to open a dialog, coupled with a call for the LDS
Church to stay out of the political debate on marriage law, isn't a plea
for reconciliation. It's a demand to open surrender negotiations.
@JAYEG | 12:37 a.m | 10:38 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
"How many of you heterosexual guys and gals would voluntarily and willingly
face a lifetime of sexual abstinence?"
So is homosexuality based on sex and nothing more - friendships and associations can be quite fulfilling without sexual sin.
So is homosexuality based on sex and nothing more - friendships and associations can be quite fulfilling without sexual sin.
Samurai | 10:40 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
There are lots of Gay group have been misunderstood about this issue. This is
the moral issue but not politics. This is God commandment which was given that
the marriage is only between man and woman. Nobody Can't change. We love
people either they are handy cap or gays. They are all children of God that
doesn't mean we agreed everything what gays people are insisting or making
us believe. We welcome Gays or who ever comes to the Church
JEFFERY | 10:43 a.m. Nov. 5, 2009
I am a gay man whether I'm currently having a physical relationship with a
guy or not. Sure it is a "choice" to participate in sexual activity.
(Bravo to whoever made this comment. No kidding?) I was told that I was an
"abomination", an “evil sinner” literally years before I
ever had physical relationships with another male. Aren't virgin
heterosexuals still heterosexual? I know, "love the sinner while hating the
sin" In this case the verb cannot be separated from the noun. If the LDS
church would make celibacy, isolation, loneliness, childlessness more appealing
to its gay constituents maybe then they'd have more acceptable celibate
homosexual church members. A promise to be "whole in the hereafter"
doesn't cut it here on planet Earth. Why can't we all promote healthy
monogomous relationships gay or straight? If you tell me all my life I'm
bad. Chances are I'm going to be bad.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Advocates for gay groups leave This Is the Place Heritage Park on their handcart trek to LDS Church headquarters.
- Obama: Asia trip a boost to economy 4:44 p.m.
- Uranium from mine in Nev. wells 4:43 p.m.
- Wildcats get style points vs. Cal Poly 4:32 p.m.
- Plan for airport checks 4:14 p.m.
- Playing & playbooks 4:14 p.m.
- Utah composer scores big 4:14 p.m.
- 'Christmas Carols' mark milestones 4:14 p.m.
- Art canvas 4:14 p.m.
- Galleries 4:14 p.m.
- Try tasty culinary mysteries 4:14 p.m.
- Can BYU throw vs. Air Force?
- Cougars cruise to victory in Hawaii
- Huntsman blasts media over trip
- Christian leaders not backing down
- 4A: Timpview wins 4th in 4 years
- TCU still has a chance
- Orem man acquitted in tot's death
- Murder-suicide in West Jordan
- 5A: Miners dig deep, claim crown
- Boozer looking like 'the old Booz'
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
187 - Palin plans tour stop in Utah169
- BYU, Utah struck gold in coaches124
- Lies shatter Utah family123
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified117
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case103
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.99
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio98
- Utes knock off rival Aggies93
- Huntsman pleased with Obama86
A little after midnight Wednesday morning, about 21 hours ago as I write...
There's a lot of reason to leave your plastic home as you shop:
Latest comments
As a close friend to Michelle for over 30 years, I know she will be sorely...
Au revoir Dr. Mortenson.
Hey UTE Fans the silence is so sweet. To the wise fish (Bass) even Hafoka...
Should the assistant coaches decide to go, I wish them well in their next...
If you know what I mean....Anyone who ENABLES this extreme, far-left agenda...
The officiating in this game has clearly been one-sided. First drive,...
Chuck Nunn- Playing 48 minutes isn't going to get him into shape either....
Attempting to deceive the defense? Are the refs serious. That is the WHOLE...
"Massachusetts already shut down the Catholic church's adoption program...
Catholics Rule, and everyone knows this.
Advertisements