Quantcast
Utah

Former Arizona sheriff blasts ruling that allows gay marriage in Utah

Comments

Return To Article
  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 4, 2014 10:41 p.m.

    My owe my, some where in this favored land, the sun is shining bright, the band is playing some where and some where hearts are light...because the spark of liberty still thrives in a few hearts! The rest will need to read the Constitution and actually come to the knowledge of its impeccable wisdom in leaving the power of government into the hands of the people! don't wait too long Utah or liberty will be just a memory!

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:01 p.m.

    It's people like this who will bring marriage equality nationwide. It's clear they have a strong animus towards LGBT people. One only needs to read Kennedy's ruling to see how he feels about that. Shelby's ruling will stand and this sheriff will go down in the history books with the likes of George Wallace. He only likes the parts of the Constitution that support his beliefs, but he seems to ignore the 5th and 14th.

  • Saguaro Scottsdale, AZ
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:12 p.m.

    Graham County population: 38,000

    Salt Lake County LGBT population: 50,000

    Turnout to see the former sheriff: 200

    Turnout seeking Utah same-sex marriage licenses: 2,000

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:21 p.m.

    No the state does not have the power to tell the federal gov't it won't enforce the law. Nullification is in blatant violation of the Constitution but these neo-Confederates can't figure that out (the Confederates believed strongly in "states rights" and nullification, it's what they say the war was fought for).

  • Kings Court Alpine, UT
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:23 p.m.

    I guess this Sheriff forgot about the separation of church and state in the U.S. Constitution. Like most religious people do with their scripture, politicians also seem to pick and choose from the Constitution.

  • HappyHeathen Puyallu, Wa.
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:24 p.m.

    Richard Mack and his wingnut group that believes sheriffs are the highest executive authority in a country and therefore constitutionally empowered to keep overbearing fedrul gubnmint agents out. The Deseret News scrapping the bottom of the barrel for opinion?

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:45 p.m.

    The economy is growing so everything is not negative in the world; there is good and evil out there however. Just be patient, let the process work its way out. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts gave a gracious gift to Mr. Obama with upholding the health care law (and Mr. Roberts being a smart man made the correct decision- to allow elections to make the decision), yet now after that one gift, Mr. Roberts will show his conservative bend for the next 20 years, and so there is much to hope for in the world.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Jan. 4, 2014 11:48 p.m.

    I'm tired of this topic already.

    Can't we just move on?

    Or is gay marriage the only thing happening in Utah that the dnews will report on?

    How about new pollution regulations? New legislation that gets special interest money out of elections? Swallow? Shurtleff? How about new legislation about payday loans? Or experiences from payday loans? How many elections has Mr Powers influenced?

    Rome is burning and the Dnews is fiddling spending all their time and energy on gay marriage.

  • Grammy3 SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:08 a.m.

    I am not against the Gays and Lesbians I would like to see them have equal rights like being able to go visit them in the Hospital or when they pass away to be able to be part of all that needs to take place. I do though believe totally that Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. This is how God created the World if one believes in the Bible and the creation. I have my rights as well and when someone is trying to take away my rights I am not going to be quite about it. To me I am sick and tired of them throwing this down my throat. Where are my rights. So please do not take mine away. I have friends and family who are gay and I love them all the same. I just believe that with marriage it is how God intended it to be between a Man and a Woman.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:32 a.m.

    I've read the bible, Mr. former Arizona sheriff. I've also read some harry potter, and watched a few hanna barbera and bugs bunny cartoons. I am not obligated by your opinion to take any of them as being true. Indeed, I am pretty much required by the constitution to evaluate all of these things for myself, and myself alone. And I am coming to different conclusions than you are. That's OK; that's part of a functional system. I get to do that. And to no less extent, so do you. But to no greater extent, either.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:39 a.m.

    "Joe Wolverton, who described himself as a 'constitutional' attorney, threw out words like secession and treason while talking about states' rights and federalism in his remarks to the crowd.

    The federal government does hundreds of things every day that are not in the 'contract,' so states have the right to rescind it, he said.

    'We are absolutely within our right to secede from a political union that no longer answers to the demands of liberty and justice," he said.'

    If loose talkers like this actually got their way they would face a revolution directed at them by people who are being crushed by contemporary capitalism - stagnant wages, diminished opportunity for themselves and their children - for whom the only possible relief can come from the Federal government. Attorney Wolverton is indifferent to the concentration of wealth at the top. I guess he likes it.

    If Wolverton succeeds in dismantling the system he's in for some big surprises, like a socialist United States.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:40 a.m.

    danO: At some future date will those who are breaking the 7th commandment be congratulated?

  • Hugh1 Denver, CO
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:57 a.m.

    "Gulbrandsen said the governor and state lawmakers have the power to tell the federal government that Utah will not enforce Shelby's ruling." Really? "'Governor George Wallace had vowed at his inauguration to defend, 'segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever.'" In 1963, Governor Wallace stood in the path of two black students in defiance of a court order. "President Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard", and that was the end of that.
    "We are absolutely within our right to secede from a political union that no longer answers to the demands of liberty and justice." -Joe Wolverton. Mr. (or should I say President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis) was a Mississippi slave holder claiming,"...that each state was sovereign and had an unquestionable right to secede from the Union." 670,000 dead Americans paid that claim.
    Mr. Mack, a former sheriff, is interpreting Bible verses to determine what rights your gay children/grand children should or shouldn't have. I wonder if Gulbrandsen, Wolverton, and Mack will testify before the Supreme Court as expert witnesses for the State of Utah. If you believe what they say, put them on the stand.

  • speed66 Heber City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:28 a.m.

    @ banderson...I'm sure you meant "my, oh my" and not "owe my" but it does speak to your position. The problem with most is that they don't understand the constitution at all...nor do they recognize that the affairs of today can not be meant with the same thinking that was prominent 230+ years ago.

    Gay marriage and equality is here to stay and Utah can be proud that it was at the center of the shift...even if they had to go kicking and screaming.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:33 a.m.

    "If you read the Bible...."

    He loses right there. This country is not a theocracy. Therefore what ever the bible says is irrelevant when it comes to legal matters.

  • Gibster San Antonio, TX
    Jan. 5, 2014 2:52 a.m.

    Its people like this that drove me to leave the State of Utah in the mid to late 80's. However I am thankful that the Political Science faculty at WSU gave me a clear understanding of the 14th amendment before I left. Your understanding of the Constitution is clearly beased. Judge Shelby's ruling is legally sound and and will prevail. Deal With It!!!!

  • David in Houston Houston, TX
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:16 a.m.

    "You're never going to convince us that homosexual marriage is one of those innate, God-given rights. It's not," he said. "If you read the Bible, you will plainly and simply see that it's not."

    Apparently, the former sheriff didn't get the memo that the United States isn't a Christian theocracy, and the government is not obligated to enforce his chosen beliefs.

    Considering that the Bible didn't have issues with the subservience of women, polygamous marriages (which were legal in the U.S. until 1899), and how best to treat your slaves, I think it might be best to keep religion and government separate. Especially considering that some people have differing religious beliefs or none at all.

    Perhaps he should read the Declaration of Independence and its promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I'm fairly certain being able to marry the adult of your choice falls under that category, regardless of the sexual orientation of the person. Such a personal decision between two people is hardly the business of virtual strangers.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 6:11 a.m.

    '"If you read the Bible, you will plainly and simply see that it's not."


    I really want to know…

    why people feel that everyone should follow the bible, when we have a constitution?

    Plenty of other books out there right? Tora, Koran, Bible, BoM.

    What makes one 'better' than another?

    I would rather legislate about there here and now, the facts.

    Than the fabrication that some use to justify discrimination.

    And that is unfortunately what some christian teachings are promoting, discrimination.

    My examples would be woman's suffrage, segregation, human slavery oh…

    and the bible teaches not to eat shell fish or wear mixed fabrics.

    Choose wisely.

  • Cats Somewhere in Time, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 6:37 a.m.

    Just check out what's happened in Massachussetts since the legalization of same-sex marriage. It will scare you to death. See how it has effected schools, the health care system and even Churches and their freedom to practice their faith. It is the slippery slope. We don't want this in Utah. I encourage everyone to support the efforts of the State to fight for the rights of the people to make our own laws. Freedom is at stake.

  • Mayfair City, Ut
    Jan. 5, 2014 6:46 a.m.

    If there was just a way to have Gays and Lesbians understand this one thing (reflected in this man's statement from this article), about what most of the Hetero community has against them.....

    I personally feel to allow all men and women to do whatever and to feel whatever they want.


    But I SERIOUSLY AGREE with this statement--from the article--which is my basis for ALL my disagreement with, and aggravation with the LGBT community:

    "we choose not to teach that to our children and we don't want you teaching it to them either."

  • My house was stolen Roy , UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 6:59 a.m.

    Many are missing the mark here. Whether you agree with the ruling or not, you are still an American Citizen with rights. This is about the Liberty Process that is owed to the Plaintiff and that is where it is at. It seems this sheriff believes in a freedom called "my way or the highway." It is appalling to me that many of our state officials do not understand the Constitution,

  • TimBehrend Auckland NZ, 00
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:20 a.m.

    The Bible, the Qur'an, the Bhagvadgita, the Tripitika, all are part of the human heritage. None are relevant to interpretations of the US Constitution.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:26 a.m.

    @bandersen 10:41 p.m. Jan. 4, 2014

    My owe my, some where in this favored land, the sun is shining bright, the band is playing some where and some where hearts are light...because the spark of liberty still thrives in a few hearts!

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

    Answer Sadly, Richard Mack and those like him are doing their bet to quench that park of liberty, and impose the tyranny of the majority on the USA and its people, to the detriment of the minority citizens. Hopefully they will fail and liberty will therefore thrive.

    =================

    The rest will need to read the Constitution and actually come to the knowledge of its impeccable wisdom in leaving the power of government into the hands of the people! don't wait too long Utah or liberty will be just a memory!

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

    Answer: I have not just ready the Constitution, I have actually studied it in its depth and breadth and know what it really says, means and works. Yes, government should be left to the people but ONLY to the extent that the rights of the minority are not impaired or diminished. Mack would diminish and impair minority rights. That quenches the spirit o liberty, and should be soundly rejected.

  • Pardon-me-twice Tooele, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:41 a.m.

    I wonder how The "Roman Empire Fell Into Hell" Read Romans CHAPTER "1" Bible New testament.
    The Sheriff is right.

  • MrDoyle Tampa, FL
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:45 a.m.

    So if I'm understanding this retiree correctly, the constitution was designed to protect polygamy as found in the Bible?

  • Beverly Eden, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    As a life long law enforcement officer I'm very disappointed in a person that uses their former law enforcement position to add some level of credibility to utter nonsense. The U.S. Constitution supports the rights of all people. Not just bible thumpers.

  • rondonaghe Mesilla/USA, NM
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:53 a.m.

    The problem with this former sheriff's argument is that he mentions the US Constitution in one breath and the Bible in the next. While these are not mutually exclusive, they are when we're talking about innate human rights. The framers of the Constitution did not consult their version of the bibles of the eighteenth century in order to write the constitution. The term "endowed by their creator" does not appear in the Constitution, and even if it did, it is not the fundamentalist Christian god of today. The framers were not Calvinists, either, but rather deists, and were not interested in immortalizing biblical prohibitions in the Constitution. There's been some revisionist history in the last few years that attempts to characterize the Constitution as a Christian-based document. It is not. It's a product of the Enlightenment, which sought freedom from religion in matters of State.

  • Ryfren Coralville , IA
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:11 a.m.

    "Me thinks" the sheriff and his disciples "protest" way "too much", as the old adage goes.

  • Wyomex Burlington, WY
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:12 a.m.

    The issue isn't marriage, gay rights or gun checks. These are just emotionally charged topics where the divide between those calling them Government granted "civil" rights and those calling them God given "moral" rights is the greatest.

    The real issue is State's rights versus federal intrusion.

  • Bereal MADERA, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:20 a.m.

    Thank you Sheriff Richard Mack and supporters in attendance—we need more leaders like you that have the courage to stand up against government officials and same sex couples perverting the sanctity and divine institution of marriage as ordained and defined by God between a man and a woman. America was founded on Christian principles as “one Nation under God.” Furthermore, I agree that Judge Robert Shelby doesn’t have the authority constitutionally to overturn a law and should be removed for abuse of power. We must not be silent.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:24 a.m.

    "The Bible, the Bible!"

    Thank God our Constitution wasn't based on "The Bible". If it were, we'd have adulterers stoned, Sabbath breakers stoned, people who shave stoned...

    This country is NOT a theocracy and "The Bible" is not relevant.

  • byufootballrocks Herndon, VA
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:31 a.m.

    The tenth amendment was passed because the states did not believe that a federal government would not eventually take to itself authority it did not possess, which is the natural path of all centralized governments. Our founders personally experienced this tyranny.

    And no, DanO, your tired worn out ad hominen attacks on the hearts and motives of those who defend traditional marriage are not going to fly this time - that dog is not going to hunt.

    This judge should be removed from office. He overstepped his authority, and has zero right to impugn the motives of those who have every right to defend families and traditional marriage. He has no legal authority to overturn our state constitution.

    The reason our Utah elected officials are not speaking out is because of the phantom wall that been created between free speech and fear of offense. There is so much fear of being attacked as anti-gay that officials are acting as though they are paralyzed.

    We respect all men and women. Nevertheless we have our right to maintain a family-friendly society that honors the God-given right of traditional marriage.

  • waikiki_dave Honolulu, HI
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    What's the point of publishing the caustic homophobic rant of a former sheriff from Arizona in your newspaper? There a tons of other negative comments from people with more noteworthy backgrounds who believe the homosexual agenda should not be shoved down the throat of god-fearing, flag waving, church-going Americans . . . oh wait . . . did you ever stop to think that there are alot of god-fearing, flag waving, church going gay people? It's ok Utah, this too will pass . . marriage equality won't deprive you of any rights that you already have. As far of the homosexual agenda being shoved down your throats . . gay people have had to endure a second class status handed down by the agenda by the christian right for centuries.

  • Darmando Parker, CO
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    'Gulbrandsen said the governor and state lawmakers have the power to tell the federal government that Utah will not enforce Shelby's ruling.' Nullification by any state is NOT constitutional. It is not legal. The belief that states are sovereign and can nullify federal law was first advanced by those who wished to perpetuate slavery in their states. The Civil War was the outcome, and should have settled the issue. One consequence was a significant increase in federal power. The fight over civil rights still continues, and when states act against the civil rights of their people, the eventual outcome is an increase in federal power. Perhaps it is necessary to protect the rights of all people, but it is regrettable, and it shouldn't have to come to that. If freedom means anything, civil union should be recognized as a civil right. The diminution of any citizen's civil rights is the diminution of all citizens' civil rights, and should be resisted by all.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:46 a.m.

    Who cares what a former sheriff from another state who believes in selective application of the Constitution has to say on this issue? Seriously.

  • Disgusted American deptford, NJ
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:52 a.m.

    ..well he can Blast away at it all he wants....but guess what - it's been 2 weeks...and UTAH is still there....people are still goin about their daily lives, living, working...you know - life.......so, what's this man's real animus towards LGBT tax payers?

  • Eliyahu Pleasant Grove, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:53 a.m.

    It was people like Mack who forced us into the Civil War and who forced President Eisenhower to send Federal troops into Burmingham to enforce the abolition of segregation. The primacy of the US Constitution is established by Federal law, by the Utah State Constitution, and by various texts in D&C. Animus toward minority groups will not change that, no matter how much people want to bring America back to a version of "the good ol' days" that never existed except in nostalgia. When folks like Mack start up the rhetoric with veiled allusions to armed insurrection, they need to remember that the "well regulated militia" referred to in the Second Amendment has a constitutional duty to suppress insurrection; not to foment it.

  • my two cents777 ,
    Jan. 5, 2014 9:02 a.m.

    Judge Not.
    Words from the greatest man who ever lived.
    Now, obey Him.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 9:28 a.m.

    By their words shall you know them. This man certainly sounds like an anti-American to me.

  • goodnight-goodluck S.L.C., UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 9:28 a.m.

    So much for the pledge of allegiance's phrase "with Liberty and Justice for ALL" as well as the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution's guaranty of equal protection under the law.

  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 9:55 a.m.

    We the people have the ability to challenge rulings made by unelected Judges who for political gain rule against the will of the people. The process of appealing can be time consuming and costly but it is necessary and needed. It is time for those elected leaders to step up to the plate and support voters who put them in office in challenging Shelby's outrageous ruling.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:15 a.m.

    So all you "federal" government has all the power and must be obeyed no matter what people: So, if "your" Constitutional government understanding allows laws evil or judges that think differently about God-given rights to throw that out the door, then you are O.K. with that? That is why "The will of the people" is paramount in the Constitution. Read it! Words have meaning, or at least they do for those who have read them. This is not about "gay marriage". It is about judges who subverted the will of the people. I will admit that if people choose evil then that will has consequences-both good and bad, but that is what our Constitution allows. The will of the people is paramount! Othewise, you have tyranny. If states lose on this issue, the people's will has been subverted and tyranny exists. This is just one of many issues where tyranny has been happening. Read the Constitution and get off your high horse.

  • EDM Castle Valley, Utah
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:17 a.m.

    Holy cow! I'm nearly speechless - an instinct that will probably save me from getting pistol whipped.

  • PhotoSponge nampa, ID
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:21 a.m.

    The Constitution of the United States of America, was written and based on Christian principles and teachings, for a MORAL society. We have a republic based on this document that was intended to last for all generations to come after it. The more immoral the society becomes, the further it is pulled away from this divinely inspired document. Benjamin Franklin--at the end of the Constitutional Convention in 1787--when asked what this nation had, he replied, "A Republic...If you can keep it!"

    You are free to choose what course your life will take and the things you do during your lifetime. But you are not free to choose the consequences that come with those actions and decisions.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    Furry: You don't understand the Constitution. The will of the people aren't ever subverted in our constitution. Never! Never! Never! If the Will of the people choose evil (in your opinion the will of the people of Utah choose evil), then so be it! The will of the people is never subverted in the Constitution. If it is, Tyranny is what you have! It is simple! You can cry all you want about specifics, but I have to live by the laws that are tyrannical and evil (Abortion comes to mind), but I also have the right to educate and stand up for my rights as a United States citizen! The will of the people is never subverted in a free people!

  • jimhale Eugene, OR
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:47 a.m.

    It's easy to see why the good sheriff is upset. But the Civil War was indeed legally not about slavery but about whether the states have the power to nullify federal law....including Supreme Court rulings.

    Neither Utah nor Arizona are about to do so....any more than South Carolina of old.

  • DanO Mission Viejo, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:10 a.m.

    "He has no legal authority to overturn our state constitution."

    He overturned one amendment. And yes, yes he does have that authority. The 10th Amendment is not absolute. A little further down is the 14th Amendment. Right there in Section 1.
    "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:16 a.m.

    How is it that some people think their rights are being compromised by granting others equal rights. If one doesn't believe in same sex marriage, or are offended by it, then just don't do it; stay away from it and go about your own business and leave others to theirs. The same as with gambling, smoking, drinking and so many other things that are legal but that some protest.

  • kolob1 sandy, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:27 a.m.

    Religion doesn't belong in this argument. Any religion that needs man made laws to exist does not have "Faith" as their basis.The Constitution allows ALL citizens to practice their religion and allows all citizens NOT to practice their religion. The Constitution does not guarantee religions a 100 % free pass along with a free ride.The political fanatics that invoke God as their basis are doing more harm to the religious basis than the Constitution allows. Marriage is not about God. Marriage existed long before the Bible or the Book of Mormons. Religions have poked their nose under the marriage tent.I feel sorry for America because it will be this "religious liberty" argument which will rot us beyond repair. Let God come to all by your example not by your force (laws). When the Catholics were the only Church they tried force and they were sundered by human nature. Don't ever forget it!!

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:29 a.m.

    "The government is us; we are the government, you and I." - Theodore Roosevelt

    But Mack wants to “keep the federal government impotent. . .” That sounds like a bad idea to me.

    Wolverton wants to secede from the Union, and he calls the rest of us traitors because we want to keep the union together. What sense does that make? The Civil War provided some pretty authoritative proof that states can’t just secede from the union.

    Apparently some people are very slow learners. It’s hard to believe that anyone could take these people seriously.

  • EJM Herriman, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:54 a.m.

    Here's the problem with those on here who keep posting about "the will of the people": we keep electing the same people every 2-4-6 years in this country, at pretty much every level of government. They keep promising the same things every election cycle. And, they aren't the problem. It's all those OTHER guys who just won't do the right thing, on both sides of the aisle. So until "we the people" begin to go back to the voting booth nothing will change.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:06 p.m.

    Gay marriage precedes other unimaginable actions.

    Fall of the Roman Empire gives one of many examples.

  • jeclar2006 Oceanside, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    It is interesting to watch how words are used to create conflict. The judge's ruling did not 'destroy' or 'nullify' marriage. Marriage exists and any couple not otherwise married, can apply for a license, provided they are not 'related' or 'under the age of consent'.

    Since the 16th Century, 'marriage' has moved out of the control of 'religion', and especially after the founding of the US and the 'separation of church and state' codified in the Constitution.

    This process has done nothing to 'change' what a specific religious denomination may believe about what constitutes a marriage.

    In Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. (8 Otto.) 145 (1878) the court held that while 'religious beliefs' were 'free and protected' under the Constitution, 'actions' could be legislated.

    Hence whether a man could marry one or more women, in the case of Reynolds, or whether the marriage between same-sex can be officially sanctioned, can be regulated, and any law must comply with elements of the Constitution, such as 'equal protection'.

    The state of course could discontinue defining relationships such as 'marriage' altogether. There are plenty of laws protecting children and defining parents' responsibilities which do not refer to the 'marital status' of the parents.

  • postaledith Freeland, WA
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:19 p.m.

    Gay marriage is here to stay and it's not going away. It will continue to grow and not affect anyone else's marriage. And there will be more couples with equal rights. It's a win-win situation. The world will not come to an end, the sun will still shine, and the birds will still be chirping. It's a great thing!

  • Archie1954 Vancouver, BC
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:24 p.m.

    there will always be those who are stuck in a previous century. The point is we can't allow them to force their narrow mindedness on the rest of society. I will always support the right of individuals to live their own lives in private the way they wish to as long as they are not hurting themselves or others. A late foreign statesman said back in the 1960s that "the State has no business in the bedrooms of the Nation" and I happen to agree with that policy statement wholeheartedly. Imagine ladies and gentlemen, this statement was made in the late 1960s and here we are in this country fifty years later discussing something that should have been settled as social policy a half century ago!

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:45 p.m.

    @bandersen. You are 100% right about liberty soon becoming just a memory. Below is what is coming to Utah if conservatives continue to sit on their laurels:

    Aug. 12, 2013. Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new law into effect on Monday afternoon affording students confused about their “gender identity” a host of new rights, including the ability to use either a boy’s or girl’s restroom and either locker room.
    The legislation, Assembly Bill 1266, authored by Democratic State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano from San Francisco, allows students in grades as young as kindergarten to use “facilities consistent with his or her gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on the pupil’s records.”
    Ammiano’s spokesman, Carlos Alcala, told TheBlaze on Monday afternoon the bill would even permit high school males who say they identify as females, to use a woman’s locker room.

    Utahns, still think same sex marriage laws are harmless?

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:48 p.m.

    Male and Female He Created Them: The Church and ‘Same-Sex Marriages’
    Issue: Why does the Church oppose government-sanctioned homosexual “marriages”?
    Discussion: Two men cannot legitimately marry each other, nor can two women, no matter what any earthly judicial or legislative body may say. Marriage is by nature defined by the conjugal act between one man and one woman, a monogamous or exclusive union in which the two become one in a lifelong partnership (cf. Gen. 2:24; Mt. 19:4-6).This truth is understandable not only through divine Revelation, but also through natural reason. For by nature, man and woman are made for each other. They complement each other both physically and socially. In contrast, homosexual relationships are unnatural and do not contribute to the growth of society. In fidelity to the teachings of Christ, the Catholic Church opposes homosexual activity and state approval of homosexual relationships.
    We Mormons have a lot in common with our Catholic Brothers and Sisters. Let's stand together for our liberty and rights in Utah!. Now is the time to let your voice be heard - contact your representatives!

  • Unreconstructed Reb Chantilly, VA
    Jan. 5, 2014 12:58 p.m.

    "Joe Wolverton, who described himself as a "constitutional" attorney, threw out words like secession and treason while talking about states' rights and federalism in his remarks to the crowd.

    "We are absolutely within our right to secede from a political union that no longer answers to the demands of liberty and justice," he said."

    This rhetoric is straight from 1860. If Mr. Wolverton ever comes to Virginia, I'm more than happy to take him on a tour of Appomattox Court House, where my great-great grandpa and his comrades surrendered to Grant. Wolverton's pernicious brand of politics ended there with a wimper 149 years ago at the cost of 620,000 Americans. I'd rather avoid a rematch, but that doesn't mean I'm willing to let his ilk try it again.

  • Joe Carlin OAKLAND, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:06 p.m.

    "I do though believe totally that Marriage is between a Man and a Woman. "

    And your rights are still intact. Men and women are still able to marry in the great state of Utah. If you don't believe same sex couples should marry, you have absolutely every right not to marry someone of the same sex. Your beliefs and your rights are completely intact.

    But just as someone who doesn't believe in eating pork doesn't have a right to force everyone else not to eat pork, freedom of belief requires that we all -individually- are able to practice our beliefs as we see fit. And some people believe that people of the same gender should be able to marry. If you don't like that, don't practice it. But don't force your beliefs on others and all of us will get along just fine.

  • Joe Carlin OAKLAND, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:08 p.m.

    "But I SERIOUSLY AGREE with this statement--from the article--which is my basis for ALL my disagreement with, and aggravation with the LGBT community: 'we choose not to teach that to our children and we don't want you teaching it to them either.'"

    So teach your children what you want to teach them. It doesn't mean other people don't have a right to live their lives. For heavens sakes, this was the basis of segregation: That white people didn't want to have to live around black people, and they had a right to keep their children from it. Let it be a teachable moment, to explain your beliefs and teach them what you want to. But just as I object to your beliefs that we are not all children of God, all equal in his eyes and deserving of equal rights, it doesn't mean in a free society I have a right to force you not to express yourself. I would just use it as a teachable moment. As should you.

  • Joe Carlin OAKLAND, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    "To me I am sick and tired of them throwing this down my throat."

    Why yes, just two gentlemen came to my door the other day trying to throw their agenda down my throat. They do this quite frequently as a matter of fact! Quite frankly I'm sick of it! I didn't have long to close the door, but I did find it strange that their first names were both "Elder." The nerve of them!

  • Joe Carlin OAKLAND, CA
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:16 p.m.

    "Gay marriage precedes other unimaginable actions. Fall of the Roman Empire gives one of many examples."

    Actually the Roman Empire celebrated gay marriage for centuries. In fact every Caesar was known to practice homosexuality to some extent.

    It was only after the Catholic Church took it over and banned the practice, then it fell.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:36 p.m.

    @ Bereal

    "America was founded on Christian principles as “one Nation under God.” "

    That line wasn't added to the pledge until the 1950's. This country was founded on the ideals of freedom, NOT Christian principles.

  • Gandalf Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:37 p.m.

    bandersen says: "You don't understand the Constitution. The will of the people aren't ever subverted in our constitution. Never! Never! Never! If the Will of the people choose evil (in your opinion the will of the people of Utah choose evil), then so be it! The will of the people is never subverted in the Constitution. . . . You can cry all you want about specifics, but I have to live by the laws that are tyrannical and evil (Abortion comes to mind), but I also have the right to educate and stand up for my rights as a United States citizen! The will of the people is never subverted in a free people!"

    Sorry bandersen, but it's you who don't understand the Constitution. The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, and the additional amendments added since then, are there for the purpose of protecting the rights of the minority. In other words, they serve as a block to ensure the "will of the people" cannot be enforced if it tramples on the rights of the minority.

    Seriously, you need to get a better idea of what the Constitution is all about.

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:37 p.m.

    @Joe Carlin. Sir, the problem with your logic is that the gay community will force your children to be taught what the gay community wants - not what you want. Read what happened in Massachuseetts - just one example:

    Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity which won’t affect the average person should consider what it has done in Massachusetts. It’s become a hammer to force the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.
    Kindergartners were given picture books telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family, like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:43 p.m.

    @ bandersen

    So if the majority of the people decided that we should bring back slavery it would be unconstitutional to not allow it to happen? Not allowing people to take the minorities rights would be tyranny?

    I think you have it completely backwards.

  • JohnPH2 Indianapolis, IN
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:53 p.m.

    Wow. This is one for the history books. I don't know how anyone could see this man talk and not think George Wallace. A satire news site like the Onion probably couldn't make up much of a more rabid supremacist character if they tried.

  • Meckofahess Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 1:54 p.m.

    Utahns, think the gay community will respect your rights?
    In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were taught. The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children, and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter of good citizenship!
    Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal”, a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!
    Concerned about your rights - write your legislative representatives!

  • tigger AMERICAN FORK, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 2:25 p.m.

    Who is Cherilyn Galbrandsen?

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 2:36 p.m.

    'Utahns, think the gay community will respect your rights?'

    Sorry, we have factual examples of people who made it legal to kill a person of the Mormon faith.

    It was not the LGBT community.

    You are free to believe as you choose. Read whatever books of faith you like. And act according to your beliefs, with your own life. It stops there. And should never be applied to others. That, is tyranny.

    I believe you are confusing disagreement, with persecution.

    Common mistake.

    Like confusing 'freedom of religion'….

    with not getting everything you want.

  • 2 tell the truth Clearwater, FL
    Jan. 5, 2014 2:56 p.m.

    Re: "Former Arizona sheriff blasts ruling that allows gay marriage in Utah"

    Well "blast" away. But sooner or later you'll realize you're just 'shooting blanks' as it were.

    Might as well tilt at windmills.

  • 2 tell the truth Clearwater, FL
    Jan. 5, 2014 2:58 p.m.

    Re: "If you read the Bible ..."

    I am reminded that:

    "The things that you're liable
    To read in the Bible,
    They ain't necessarily so."

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:13 p.m.

    I don't support same sex marriage and never will. With that in mind I agree with many of the comments on here. The United States is a Republic not a Christian theocracy. It is difficult to argue against legalizing same sex marriage. To me same sex marriage is a moral more than a legal issue. Freedom of religion means tolerance of others religious and even non religious beliefs. That can be a challenge for people of faith. Conservatives adamantly oppose the power of the federal government to interfere in states rights. The constitution is a federal document and that states cannot deny civil rights as in slavery, racial segregation and the right to vote. Is same sex marriage a civil right. I say it is not.

  • Cherilyn Eagar Holladay, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:16 p.m.

    Pagan: :I really want to know…

    why people feel that everyone should follow the bible, when we have a constitution?

    Plenty of other books out there right? Tora, Koran, Bible, BoM.

    What makes one 'better' than another?"

    If you read those books, they all have something in common: they support marriage between a man and a woman. Common law trumps all jurisprudence in the U.S. And common law was based on this ethic represented in two of these canons of religious tenets: The Tora and the New Testament. The Bible.

  • I think..... any town, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:19 p.m.

    "all is well—and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell". 2 Nephi 28:21
    Yes, the devil is very clever, and can paint immorality with a beautiful paint brush. We ARE being carefully led by the devil. Very carefully.

  • moniker lewinsky Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:36 p.m.

    Nobody is trying to convince anybody that marriage is a God given right. What it is is a STATE given right. Whether or not you believe in God is a moot point.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:48 p.m.

    'If you read those books, (Bible, Tora, Koran, BoM) they all have something in common: they support marriage between a man and a woman.'

    Then why did Utah allow Polygamy…

    until 1890?

    Polygamy is marriage between a man and a woman and a woman and a woman and a woman…

    not much monogamy, is there?

    You can 'believe' as much as you like. Even the Pioneers came to Utah to escape religious persecution.

    And today, you want to 'shove down my throat' your beliefs?

    Those beliefs start with you, and end with you. Otherwise, it is tyranny.

    Also? FYI?

    According to many religious texts, women should not have the ability to vote.

    Before you want to force your beliefs upon others, I want to know why you refuse to even acknowledge anyone else's besides your own?

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 5, 2014 3:57 p.m.

    Wow!

    Pathetic how people are confused between right, and wrong.

    This confusion is leading to our downfall.

    Very shameful.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 4:06 p.m.

    @bandersen 10:24 a.m. Jan. 5, 2014

    Furry: You don't understand the Constitution. The will of the people aren't ever subverted in our constitution. Never!

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

    I studied the law, and got my JD (law degree) cum laude 26 years ago. When did you ever study the law, much less get a degree? From what you said in that post, I'd guess that you never did. It's very clear that you have no concept of what the Constitution says, what it means and how it works.

    The will of the people NEVER trumps the Constitutional protections found in that magnificent document. In act, one of its main purposes is to protect the people against the tyranny of the majority (in other words, the will of the people if that will works to violate the protections of the constitution). That's what the Bill of Rights is specifically intended to do, and the constitutional protections are imposed on state action state action by the 14th Amendment.

    That's basic Constitutional law. Anyone who truly understands the Constitution would know that. It's sad that you don't.

  • Clinton Draper, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 4:33 p.m.

    @Kings Court There is no mention of "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. All it says is that the government can't mandate a religion (like the Church of England), and persecute people for their religious beliefs.

  • Clinton Draper, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 4:37 p.m.

    I read a post on a previous article regarding this particular case. The author's argument in support of this judge's ruling was that Utah's Constitution was amended in 2004 to exclude gay marriage, but that people don't have the same opinions towards gay rights now (inferring that most of Utah supports it now). My argument to that is, if it is indeed true, the proper course of action is to vote on amending our Constitution again, not have our Constitution and the will of the people trampled on by some activist judge.

  • Bruce Alder Corvallis, OR
    Jan. 5, 2014 4:45 p.m.

    The Deseret News MUST be desperate if they've resorted to covering this guy...he single-handedly ignored the 1st, 5th and 14th Amendments, recommends we espouse the Bible as law (legalizing slavery, marginalizing women, etc.) and seems basically the opposite of anything Christian as evidenced by his extreme hatred (a regular modern-day George Wallace).

    It's the job of the Courts to support civil rights (not the legislature and most definitely not the majority vote of the people…if it was we’d still have desegregation in the South). We live in a Constitutional Republic where civil rights are NOT up for popular vote. This same protection applies to any minority in the U.S....including Mormons (of which I am an active one).

  • LiberalJimmy Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:02 p.m.

    Apparently we as citizens can pick and choose what Amendments we decide to apply. Mr Mack seems to blatantly ignore the 5th and the 14th. Possibly why he is an ex- sheriff? Leaders of The South attempted to use the same argument to legalize slavery. Just seems like a lot of hate and very Un American. We are all talking about equal rights. Correct? How strong is your marriage to begin with if another marriage can weaken it so easily?

  • Bruce Alder Corvallis, OR
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:08 p.m.

    Grammy3 posted "I just believe that with marriage it is how God intended it to be between a Man and a Woman."

    The Bible itself highlights that marriage between one man and one woman is anything BUT the way God intended (see the entire 4000 years of Old Testament where the common practice was polygamy and concubinage...not to mention requiring women to marry their rapists…it was anything BUT monogamy...and more akin to slavery).

    Your notion of Biblical marriage being one man and one woman is fantasy (even the polygamous history of Utah itself discredits your claim). If you happen to be Mormon then you know the church still believes in Polygamy in the afterlife and practices it in the sealings of subsequent spouses in our temples (the practice of polygamy on the Earth was all that was stopped by Wilford Woodruff's Manifesto in 1890). Joseph Smith engaged in both Polgamy and Polyandry which in no way would agree with the definition you hold so dearly as the definition "God intended".

  • PhotoSponge nampa, ID
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:10 p.m.

    This quote is from the brilliant Dr. Benjamin Franklin, referring to this nation’s government and our constitution. It applies to this whole situation going on not only in Utah, but in our entire nation:
    “We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings, that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it. I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid, we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel; we shall be divided by our little partial, local interests, our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and a byword down to future ages. And, what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war, or conquest.” (Benjamin Franklin)

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:28 p.m.

    Thank you 'Cats',

    I do not hate the GLBT community, I just am not in favor of Gay marriage - my opinion I realize and I'm not trying to force it down anyone's throat. However, I do see concerns in the way that many laws are being not only enforced, but also installed and too many are coming from the Judiciary bench and from the Executive office. I keep hearing that the ACA is the 'law of the land' get used to it, and yet the President has no qualms about changing the law on a regular basis (only the legislature may change the law of the land).

    Our constitution is a delicate thing. It was created with checks and balances and those need to be maintained and the proper balance ensured. We have a right to become concerned when we see any legislation from the bench or the White House, or if congress is over stepping their bounds. Perhaps we read too much in to it, but we need to be vigilant or we stand to lose a great deal.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 5:51 p.m.

    Thinking about it some more I want to give a lot of credit to the Deseret News for publishing this article even though that event does not put same-sex marriage opposition (the stated opinion of this paper's editorial board) in a favorable light at all and even though it awkwardly contradicts with an editorial on the matter today. Selective journalism would've ignored it.

  • rick122948 boise, id
    Jan. 5, 2014 6:16 p.m.

    I think all the people that want to use legislative power to sustain their right to have it their way need to consider a few seemingly forgotten historical events.

    In Roman times, Christians were fed to lions and killed out of hand.

    In US history we founded our country with slavery firmly entrenched and only men able to vote.

    State and Federal governments sat by as the Mormons were killed and driven out of NY, Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois until they were out of the US.

    Governments role is to protect and serve its citizens, all of the citizens, no matter whether they are of the vocal minority or not.

    Start living the golden rule and do unto others as you would have done unto you.

    Live and let live is still a good way.

  • ParkCityAggie Park City, Ut
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:05 p.m.

    Our rights as US citizens not granted to us by "God" they are granted by the Constitution of the United States of America, which ironically fails to mention "God" or any other deity for that matter. We're not a theocracy, we fought a little war... the Revolutionary War, to make sure of that. The constitution doesn't existing to make sure your heterosexual marriage remains "Sacred" - that's your business. Heterosexual couples can be married by the church of Satan, nothing anyone can do about that, it doesn't invalidate your marriage. Neither does same sex marriage.

  • brightness Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:42 p.m.

    Hitler dehumanized gays, lesbians, jews, and others who were physically disabled during WWII. We know what happened there. Trying to change the gay people to be straight has not been successful, Gays are human, they cry, laugh, tell stories, just like you and I and God created them to be here on Earth. Apparently, there is no way to stop babies from being born gay, we all must accept this and not treat them as sub-humans or second-class citizens. The former sheriff seems to dehumanize them and wants to see them out of the picture, sadly, he does not have the power to turn gays in straight folks.

  • aunt lucy Looneyville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 7:42 p.m.

    Isn't common sense alone enough to know that same sex marriage is wrong. Just objectively look at the human body and the conception process and if you believe in god, then it's common sense. Quit making this so hard!

  • dan76 san antonio, TX
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:01 p.m.

    Ref: bereal & byufootballrocks

    Jim Crow laws once were the standard for most of the country. Your responses indicate a desire to return to such a society.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:04 p.m.

    I feel like I stepped back in time a washed up old country sheriff shows up railing against equal rights to get a bunch of locals all riled up, that has never ended badly, right?

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:07 p.m.

    Aunt Lucy,
    If you are going to bring god into the issue then you are going to have to answer the.question of who created the issue if not god. So is he a imperfect god. Please explain.

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:27 p.m.

    The Bible is more important than the Constitution; one has been around much longer and will last much longer. Religion is more important than politics and university study (Peter was a fisherman and Paul a tent maker and both more bright than the scholars of their day) The Bible encourages the "un-enforceable". (we can't force people to have pure thoughts) The Bible says it is a good idea to marry and have children and be one with community. If we were always one with community (through art and dance and song and poetry and service and through commerce and invention and science), we would not need laws. Love and obedience is the law. The Law is not a piece of paper, it is a Person (perfect and pure).

  • aunt lucy Looneyville, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 8:37 p.m.

    Skeptic

    Oh I only wish you were truly and sincerely seeking that answer. Just know in our perfect Heavenly Father's plan, we agreed to come to an imperfect world and accept the challenges and adversity that comes with it. This means our bodies will be susceptible to illness, addiction, and deformity. Our savior promised no matter how great our challenge, he would not forsake us and we were all in. In these troubling times, there is a great effort to legislate what is sin to non-sin.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 10:58 p.m.

    @cats
    Not sure what you are basing your "insights" on other then maybe the same old propaganda but as someone that has spent a significant amount of time in Massachusetts and other states that allow gay marriage I can assure that they are doing just fine. There is the very occasional person or group that want to ignore public accommodation laws but that is nothing new or unique to gay marriage.

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:02 p.m.

    @ aunt Lucy

    " In these troubling times, there is a great effort to legislate what is sin to non-sin." You mean like the desire to remove free agency? How exactly does that fit into Gods plans?

  • Bruce Alder Corvallis, OR
    Jan. 5, 2014 11:48 p.m.

    @ Aunt Lucy
    I second Spring Street's point...you forget that many many things are 'legal' and 'allowed' which are not necessarily agreed to by our church (and we aren't out fighting to bring back prohibition). Just because something is legal does not mean that our church has to condone it. Nor do others need to agree with your beliefs and be compelled to follow them (it works both ways).
    What we're talking about here is supporting someone's right to choose and not enforcing the majority's opinion on the minority. If gay marriage was in the majority wouldn't you want the freedom to have a heterosexual marriage? If polygamy was in the majority wouldn't you want the freedom to have a monogamous marriage?

  • Jeffsfla Glendale, CA
    Jan. 6, 2014 8:22 a.m.

    Mr. Mack says the US Constitution gives us innate rights. I agree, they are called life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. He further insinuates that the US Constitution does not provide gays and lesbians the right to marry. But it also does not say anything about cell phones or motor vehicles. Then how can the SCOTUS seemingly answer constitutional questions on these issues. This is why have courts staff with our most seasons jurists. I hope one day people like this will stop hurting other tax paying citizens.

  • dustman Gallup, NM
    Jan. 6, 2014 9:11 a.m.

    If you believe the Bible. I would bet money that even LDS people would agree that the Bible is open to interpretation.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 6, 2014 9:32 a.m.

    I don't understand why LGBT people move in and try to change things.

    There are many other states excepting gay marriage.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 10:05 a.m.

    @PhotoSponge

    Your comment...

    The Constitution of the United States of America, was written and based on Christian principles and teachings, for a MORAL society. We have a republic based on this document that was intended to last for all generations to come after it. The more immoral the society becomes, the further it is pulled away from this divinely inspired document.

    My response/question...

    The COTUS permitted slavery.

    So...a divinely inspired document... written and based based on Christian principles and teachings for a MORAL society... intended to last for all generations to come after it...permitted slavery?

  • DHuber Palmyra, NY
    Jan. 6, 2014 10:09 a.m.

    Lets not forget the 100% minus 4 persons turnout at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. Or how about the 100% minus 8 souls turnout for the great flood!
    The attendance at any function or event does not indicate it's importance or value.

  • Alpiner Alpine, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 12:22 p.m.

    Political posturing. Didn't this guy run for office in Utah several times?

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 12:28 p.m.

    worf: "I don't understand why LGBT people move in and try to change things. There are many other states [ac]cepting gay marriage."

    The LGBT people did not "move in." They were here all along. I know several couples who married following the Shelby decision. In most cases, at least one half of the couple was born and raised in Utah. All were long term residents. Regardless, people have established homes and careers here. They have a right to shape their communities to improve their situation. Why should they move to satisfy your whims?

    As to the general (and stale) argument of "why don't you move someplace where you are welcome?" I'm sure you will find plenty of folks to your liking in Uganda and Russia.

  • Inis Magrath Fort Kent Mills, ME
    Jan. 6, 2014 12:30 p.m.

    @worf: you ask, "I don't understand why LGBT people move in and try to change things."

    Gay people don't "move in," they are born in your state, my state, and everywhere. Why should they have to move out in order to enjoy their constitutionally protected rights?

  • J.Trucupey Phoenix, AZ
    Jan. 6, 2014 3:28 p.m.

    FYI-this crazy sheriff is still Sheriff in Maricopa County, Arizona. The title states he's the former sheriff. I have no idea why they even asked for his opinion. Sheriffs don't enforce marriage. He's not from Utah. I guess they just wanted a reliable quote from someone who would reliably toe the GOP line. The church did not invent marriage. They have zero ownership on it. There is no such thing as a god-given right. If you go to court to protect your rights, you take the Constitution, not a bible. Rights are in fact conferred by man. Also, the reference to God given rights is in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 6, 2014 3:52 p.m.

    Many have moved in to enjoy a better economy.

    It's that way in Texas and Colorado also. Many come from near bankrupt states wanting to change the established norm. Texas doesn't want gay marriage and Colorado doesn't want gun control, but the people moving in wants to change that. Pathetic!

  • Jleydsman utah, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 4:18 p.m.

    I am not a constitutional expert but I do have a copy of the constitution and I have read it completely. This along with studies in college make me agree with the former sheriff that the constitution gives no rights to 'unnatural marriage" as defined very succinctly in the scriptures. It appears that some people have been duped by legal over reach.

  • Kate Hutch Kenmore, WA
    Jan. 6, 2014 6:09 p.m.

    What, exactly, is happening in Massachusetts? You give no details. People who complain the loudest about our constitution being ignored seem to be the most ignorant of its contents.

    And Jesus said nothing about homosexuality in your Bible. Not. One. Thing.

  • Lagomorph Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 6, 2014 6:18 p.m.

    worf: "Texas doesn't want gay marriage and Colorado doesn't want gun control, but the people moving in wants to change that. Pathetic!"

    This comment and your previous one imply that there is some static, uniform set of values for a state. I hear that a lot here; politicians love to speak of "Utah values" as if there is some official checklist of the state's values that never changes. Well, the values of a society are dynamic. They change over time as populations migrate and attitudes change. We happen to be in a period of flux when it comes to several issues. Maybe the Colorado of 1995 didn't want gun control, maybe even the Colorado of 2010 or 2012. But there is a sizable portion of Colorado in 2013 that is willing to consider it. Some of the change, as you point out, is due to immigration. Some is internal as people react to incidents like Columbine, Aurora, and Sandy Hook and the population becomes more urban (and less culturally attached to hunting). The point is, state values change. Get used to it. The idea that nonconformists should leave a state rather than change it doesn't fly.

  • scorealot ,
    Jan. 7, 2014 8:56 a.m.

    It takes a man and a woman to make a child. A child therefore, has a RIGHT to require the state to provide that child the opportunity to be raised with a man and a woman. This would be EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW.

    Gay and Lesbian marriage trample the rights of a child since once legal, adoption is then legal for gay and lesbian couples. Regardless of how loving and kind they are, which many are, where is the equal protection for the child? It is GONE! Studies overwhelmingly show children THRIVE best where a father and mother are present.

    The state, or federal government MUST protect the rights of the innocent and the rights of those who cannot eloquently speak for themselves, otherwise, we truly are a degenerate nation caring only for oneself.

    Gay and lesbian couples should form civil unions, but should not be classified as marriage, or our nation protects the right of the adult at the expense of THE CHILD. And that would be equal protection....NOT.

  • dwbme Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:25 p.m.

    Please look past the entire gay thing and look what is REALLY happening here. A judge just "created" his own law. 66% of the vote wanted marriage between a man and a woman. There was a ruling earlier this year from the supreme court that stated that states have the right to decide issues. This so called judge completely ignored that ruling and based on his own opinion decided what is best for the state. That is the real problem. If there is anyway to dismiss this person it should be done right away! Or look at it this way, if 66% of the people had voted for gay marriage and a judge turned that over how would you advocates of gay marriage feel then???

  • 2 tell the truth Clearwater, FL
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:50 p.m.

    Cherilyn,

    Re: "'If you read those books, (Bible, Tora, Koran, BoM) they all have something in common: they support marriage between a man and a woman.'"

    I admit to only having read the Bible, but it largely "supports" marriage between a man and as many women as he could afford (women at the time being legally chattel - objects that could be bought, sold and traded at whim), as in, "A pig and two goats for your daughter, Sir? She would make a lovely addition to our family, and I'll make sure my other wives don't mind."

    The Bible also "supports" a man having to marry his brother's widow.

    Solomon had some 700 wives and 300 concubines.

    "Adam" (the First Man) had TWO "helpmeets" (N.B. not "wives").

    Yes, let's bring back Biblical 'morality' and impose Bronze Age 'thinking' on 21st Century America.

    Not.

  • 2 tell the truth Clearwater, FL
    Jan. 7, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    @ Clinton,

    Re: "the proper course of action is to vote on amending our Constitution again"

    It is NEVER "proper" to subject SOME citizens' (formerly?) "UNALIENABLE" rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness to a popular vote.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    It's interesting (in a sad sort of way) that the majority of early comments to this article are from LGBT supporters... throwing out exagerated numbers to make gay marriage seem much more supported than it really is. 25% of comments on the first page are from out of state... trying to get involved in a Utah matter where they don't live.
    Names like Marxist and Pagan speak for what they really are. They jump on this topic like hungry wolves on a wounded animal. Very sad indeed. Alwlays being the self-appointed spokespeople for all ultra-liberal issues.

    And yet two-thirds of the population of Utah supported our state position in support of traditional marriage. Utah is one of the most conservative states in the union. And yet one liberal activist judge changes all of that... and rams that change down our throats... something solidly against the will of the majority of the people. Once again, the tail is wagging the dog.

    Thankfully, there is now some hope and common sense. The Supreme Court has since put this issue on hold until it can further be decided about the legality of the activist judge's action.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Jan. 8, 2014 11:03 a.m.

    Here are two imaginary conversations:

    Hypothetical conversation #1:
    "Me: Mr. Tea Party Sheriff, isn't it terrible to deport two illegal immigrant parents and to leave their US born children without parents?
    Mr. Tea Party Sheriff: Well, the law is the law. They need to obey the laws and they are here illegally!"

    Hypothetical conversation #2:
    "Me: Mr. Gay Right Activist, isn't is terrible for a wedding photographers in New Mexico to be forced out of business because of their freedom of conscience?
    "Mr. Gay Right Activist: Well the law is the law, if they want to be in the public square they have to follow the law."

    These are hypothetical conversations, but, as anyone can see, they aren't too far-fethched. So I can't really see much of a difference between the attitudes that have formed these two views. Both are as equally right wing as the other.

  • Objectified Tooele, UT
    Jan. 8, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    @ Kate Hutch:

    You sound like you are disowning the Bible... calling it "your Bible", and not "our Bible". And by the way, Christ's apostles and prophets did say something about gay unions... very explicity... in both the New and Old Testaments.

    Romans 1:24-27
    Leviticus 18:22
    Leviticus 20:13

    From these scriptures, there can be no doubt about how God feels toward homosexuality.

    The scriptures later prophecied how in later times (our times) people would call good bad and bad good. That's exactly what I see happening in many of these comments in trying to discount the Word of God and in also trying to justify things they deem as politically correct, while casting aside any morality altogether.

    If such a stance causes me to be called old-fashioned and out of touch, then so be it.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 9, 2014 12:44 a.m.

    @ Objectified

    YOUR bible. Not everybody believes in that book. Sorry to burst your bubble.

  • Crow Sandy , UT
    Jan. 10, 2014 3:15 p.m.

    @atl134 States do have the right to tell the Federal Govt that they will not enforce the Fedral laws prime example Colorado legalizing marijuana. After all they are violating the federal Controlled Substances Act.

  • Bernie04 Pickerington, OH
    Jan. 11, 2014 12:01 p.m.

    Has this sherif or his followers ever heard of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution?