We may have issues in Utah with taking care of our less fortunate, certainly
something we should change and become as charitable as we profess to be, but to
draw any conclusion that it is linked with marriage is just silly. Mormons
shouldn't be attacked for keeping to a standard and the rest of the country
shouldn't attack anyone, Mormon or not, for holding to a value.
'Mainstream acceptance'? 30 states have ratified one-man - one-woman
marriage amendments, and EVERY TIME it has been presented to the people,
same-sex marriage has been rejected.Sounds more like
'Mainstream rejection' me.
@ TheWalker: Yes, several years ago when same-sex marriage was on the ballot in
those states, it was voted against.But that is why the story uses
the phrase "increasingly accepts" - to indicate that those attitudes and
opinions are changing.Recent polls indicate that more than 53% of
the US population supports same-sex marriage.
@Kalindra I doubt the validity of those polls. This nation is still a
moral one. It's people will never give up the fight for decency. Homosexual
activity will always be viewed as a dark practice that leads a society down the
road to distruction and if everyone practiced that life style human life would
I used to get really excited about DN articles that had to do with social issues
such as gay marriage... But now I feel that the DN journalists are beating it
into the ground. Gay marriage will eventually become
"mainstream", (as some like to put it); and there isn't anything
that anyone can do about it.Just get over it, and move on. It
doesn't affect your marriage, so leave it be.
A person almost has to be low I.Q. to believe that same sex marriage is a threat
to normal marriage. This doesn't mean however that same sex marriage is a
good thing. If the relationship between gay people is allowed to be called
marriage, with all the rights that married people have, what is to prevent gay
people from standing in line and being successful in adopting children who
otherwise could have had a mother and a father?
@Johnny Triumph;Same-sex marriage is a "value" to me.
I'm holding to it. Should I be praised or castigated?@The
Walker;Can we put your marriage up to a vote?
Mormonism may or may not have a "marriage problem". If mormonism does
have a "marriage problem" it would be interesting to see where it falls
on the problem list.
I’ve often wondered the twisted irony of this myself…Polygyny [one man - plural wives], Polyandry [one woman - plural
husbands],Spiritual Wifery, hundreds of women had themselves
“Sealed” to the martyred Prophet Joseph?I wish I had the
answers [hence my pondering]And I’m not rationalizing, justifying,
or trying to stir the pot of the marriage controversy – But our Mormon
history regarding marriages remains a fact and we need to deal with it. Since it’s going to come to light, we need to be prepared with the
answers – and stick our heads in the sand or ignore the truth.Things to consider, that's all I'm saying...
@cjb;They're being given up for adoption, so clearly, their
"traditional" mother and father didn't want them. Why is it so bad
for a gay couple to adopt them?
What is ironic to me is that the mormon church is doing EXACTLY what was done to
them when they were practicing polygamy. They wanted to do it, and everybody
else persecuted them for how they wanted to live. Now the church, oddly enough,
is trying to prevent gay marriage. Double standard?? Do they not remember what
it was like to be persecuted for living according their beliefs?? It is like
telling somebody they can't drink, or smoke. If you don't like it,
don't do it. but don't tell somebody else not to do it.
To "Brahmabull" actually it is different. Gay Marriage Advocates are
using the hype to force other to accept their way of life. Just look at all of
the lawsuits that go on because a person does not approve of the gay lifestyle
and does not want to do something to promote it. People like fertility Drs,
photographers, to wedding planners have been sued because they do not approve of
gay marriage.There is no persecution going on. The LDS church has
said that the gays can do what whatever they want, just don't call it
marriage. If gays went after the same rights, but called it something
different, and unique, they probably could get what they are after. As it
stands, they have an adgenda that ultimately devalues marriage, and like europe
has found, makes marraige so unimportant that few people actually get married.
@RanchI read an article about a study done at a Texas University that
showed statistics between children raised in heterosexual families and
homosexual families. The study showed a considerable increase of homosexual
tendencies and teen suicide in homosexual families vs. heterosexual. This study
should in no way reflect upon any individual union, but shows a trend we should
be aware of. A simple internet search of such studies should provide more
information to anyone who is really interested in facts rather than conjecture.
@ Leland: Actually, what the study showed was that children whose parents
divorce suffer problems - regardless of whether the divorced parent then
participates in heterosexual, homosexual, or no additional relationships.A recent article in this paper had a link to the study.Of
course, the study also raises a lot of questions - primarily based on the
funding of the study and the method in which the study was conducted. The most
telling thing about the study is the title - before the data was even examined
the author of the study assumed there would be differences. And he arranged the
data to make sure those differences were found.
Redshirt - get real. A person cannot be sued because they do not approve of gay
marriage. You can be sued if you refuse service to somebody because they are
gay, it is called discrimination. It is like turning somebody down because of
their race, rediculous right? And who cares if they call it marriage?? Polygamy
was called plural MARRIAGE. Oponents of plural marriage thought that it devalued
marriage too, hence the persecution.
@Redshirt"To "Brahmabull" actually it is different. Gay
Marriage Advocates are using the hype to force other to accept their way of
life."That's not true at all but hey I understand you need
to legitimize your total hypocrisy since I imagine you think Smith and company
Agreed: Mormonism is headed towards a huge fight over what defines
"marriage"....male/female or are homosexual relationships included in
the definition?As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints I say, bring it on. Pushed into this battle of morality by
militant pro-homosexuals, it has been brewing for quite some time. (and
don't even try to claim it was the LDS church who started this fight with
Prop 8 because if homosexuals had not tried to have homosexual relationships
defined as "marriage" in CA then the LDS church NEVER would have had a
cause/fight to take up) Although, I must warn you, it won't be
a fair fight. It never is when God is on your side.
@LDS LiberalSpiritual wifery was a false doctrine used by apostates
to justify their sins. Joseph Smith Jr. nor any of his contemporaries practiced
nor taught this doctrine.
Societies which honor traditional marriage will ultimately prevail. As the late
British social anthropologist Joseph Daniel Unwin noted in his study of world
civilizations, any society that devalued the nuclear family soon lost what he
called "expansive energy," which might best be summarized as
society's will to make things better for the next generation. In fact, no
society that has loosened sexual morality outside of man-woman marriage has
survived. Analyzing studies of cultures spanning several thousands
of years on several continents, Chairman of Harvard University’s sociology
department, Pitirim Sorokin. found that virtually all political revolutions
that brought about societal collapse were preceded by a sexual revolution in
which marriage and family were devalued by the culture’s acceptance of
homosexuality.Too many politicians are myopic, and fail to see the
long range implications of their actions.
Of course Mormon marriages have problems. Priesthood holders aren't home
enough to keep an eye on the family and their spousal relationship, the
expectation of "perfection" plays havoc with our heads and generally
Mormons marry too young and are not ready for the experience and make far too
many mistakes. Outsiders wouldn't know this but those that live in the
culture know exactly what I'm talking about.
Who is the mainstream that says they accept the word marriage to mean woman and
a woman or a man and a man. Marriage is between a man and a woman. PERIOD.
California voted on this twice and both times the voters said MARRIAGE IS
between a man and a woman. Do we have to vote the third time for a three times
and your out?! Let others call their committment something other than the word a
man and a woman use for their committment to one another. WHATS WRONG WITH THAT?
per Dan Maloy 11:59 p.m. June 15, 2012"As a member of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I say, bring it on." So
much for blessed are the peacemakers, eh? "Although, I must warn
you, it won't be a fair fight. It never is when God is on your
side."Isn't that from the upcoming Osama biography? Last & most importantly; Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
From the point of view of one who has a traditional male/female marriage, my
objection to Gay marriage is not that they are gay or that they want to live
together. The problem is that they are trying to steal my identity. They want to claim that they are "married" because they live together.
I do not believe they are "married" just because they live together, any
more than a man and a woman who live together without a marriage contract. The
original concept of marriage, biblical or otherwise, includes the presumption
that the marriage would (or at least "could") product children, and that
children are an essential element of society.If they want to live
together, "OK". But I prefer that they leave the definition of
"Marriage" alone and find another word to define their
"childless" union. Oh, I know someone will scold me and say they can
have children. But that argument is on thin ice from the get-go because they
must adopt or one of them has to be "unfaithful" in the original
definition of marriage, in order to have children. I believe that a child
deserves to have a father "and" a mother.
What government did not create, government has no right to change. Marriage as
an institution pre-dates every government on this earth. How does the
government presume to change the definition of such an institution?The part of this that scares me is that in my future career I can foresee a
time when I will be sued for not providing certain services to homosexual
couples. I would not deny just any service, bit if the service provided would
violate my most deeply held beliefs, then to force me to provide said service
would be a violation of my freedom of religion. If I had a restaurant, I would
have no problem seating a gay couple. If I had an adoption agency, and were
forced to adopt children to gay couples, then freedom of religion is dead.
@Dennis,I live in the culture you refer to, but I'm not sure I know
what you ar referring to. My wife and I married young, having a baby boy, and
have never been happier in our lives. Sure, severe problems exist
among our young married peers, but such is the result of an unwillingness of
some to keep the commandments of the Lord and the counsel of our leaders.
@ TwoBitsWorth"The problem is that they are trying to steal my
identity". My dear, please come down from your white horse.If a heterosexual marriage of swingers call their relationship a
marriage. Are they stealing your identity?If a heterosexual couple
where there is abuse and whatever else, and they call their relationship a
marriage, are they stealing your identity?I guess no rational person
would agree that these heretosexual people in a far from "ideal"model of marriage would be stealing your identity.Yet, you claim
that a loving same sex couple may steal your identity if they are " not
Called" but they are legally married.It seems you have some
serious identity and security issues. You may need a marriage counselor.
That voters in many states have voted against same-sex marriage and civil unions
cannot be definitive of civil rights. Back in the early 1960s, before the Civil
Rights Act, how many Southern states would have abolished segregation by ballot
initiative? Marriage is between a man and a woman and will continue
to be so. Allowing same-sex marriage isn't going to impact that one bit.
It's a bogus argument.
Mormonism and Catholicism have the same problem with same sex marriage.They both
have their religious scripture that preaches against homosexuals but they
don't want the gays to have the rights to a "civil" marriage
because they preach that Religions are the sole dispensers of the "scrament
of marriage". What's divorce by the way? So be it. Let that be the
LAW. Religions will not be forced to marry anyone in their temples that are not
members of their faith, but , for Pete's sake, don't let religions
claim the marriage grounds as their private dispensation. The ancient marriages
were all political. Marriage ceremonies were never meant to tbe the domain of
any religion. They just "stole " the idea and have brainwashed society
into thinking that marriage originated through the church, regardless of what
church you belong. Well marriage DIDN"T originate with religions. It was
adopted by religions as a control over the flock and as a source of MONEY
I lived near San Francisco for nearly twenty years. As a result, I doubt all
these reassuring words that same-sex gay marriage is not threat to my way of
life. I supported the predecessor to Prop 8, Prop 22. That didn’t amend
the California constitution like Prop 8, just enacted a law defining marriage in
the traditional way. My yard sign didn’t last a week. Found it on the lawn
of the local LDS chapel. Put it back in place. It was burned on the front lawn
of the church, along with the rest in our neighborhood. Prop 22 was
declared unconstitutional, so Prop 8 amended the California constitution. My
friends who had the gall to donate to Prop 8 were hounded and persecuted. If you
owned a business, you could stay open – if you contributed an equal amount
to the gay causes “suggested” by the picketers blocking your
entrance. Others were forced to resign from their jobs. From those observations,
if same-sex marriage is held to be a constitutional right, you can kiss your
first amendment religious freedoms goodbye.
@Counter Intelligence"however they did NOT punish a stylist who
refused to cut the Governor's hair based upon the Governor's
opposition to gay marriage. "Did he even sue? You can't
punish someone unless a complaint is filed. "Canada recently
punished a public official who referred a gay couple to at least five other
officials for marriage"If you take a job you probably should do
your job."Canada is being sued to allow polygamy"Stay on topic."Denmark forces ALL churches to perform gay
marriages."False. They forced the state church to perform gay
marriages, other churches like the LDS church do not. Maybe that's a good
reason to not have a state church."Forcing an agenda is EXACTLY
what the gay marriage debate is really about"I agree, you want
to force your agenda on other peoples' lives.
Describing same-sex marriage as a redefinition of marriage is an anguished word
choice for extending the scope of marriage to include couples of the same