Two gay men have no power to bring a child into this world and no right to take
away a mother's love from the child. A boy likewise needs fatherhood in his
life. There is no "hate" in wanting to give children the love they
deserve.Robbing children of love is something that will never be
tolerated.Creating a new definition of equality, fair-treatment,
rights, and a so-called social class of people who fear morality- these are
tactics to tear us apart. But the truth is that a child's rights are real.
State-recognition isn't.The Family proclamation in 1995 reads:
"WE WARN that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse
spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day
stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the
family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities
foretold by ancient and modern prophets."We still have time to
change. All of us need to. We can all improve, forgive, be forgiven, and repent.
The arm of mercy is extended to everyone... EQUALLY. Turning it down has never
brought happiness to anyone.
I know, etc.......Your post only brings more decisiveness, anger, lack of
compassion, and so on.This is why our country has chosen for it's
citizens to have equal rights. This is why there is the legal division of Church
and State in America.You can think how you choose, belong to what ever
religious faith you wish, but just because you like it, does not translate to
you being able to dictate to others how to live their lives.Is it really
that difficult to grasp this concept?
How is a gay couple wanting to adopt a unwanted child, robbing that child of
love? I just don't get it. Sure I believe that the optimal situation for
a child is to be brought up by a loving mother and father, but when that
isn't a option then why deny two people who love each other the opportunity
to raise a child that needs parents?
And what's your argument against two women having a daughter?I'm sure it's equally invalid."Robbing children of
love" is one of the most absurd claims I've ever read here, and
that's saying a lot. Your line of reasoning implies that the children of
single parents receive half of much love as those who have two parents. Your reference of a church proclamation has no bearing on this
discussion of civil law, as the proclamation does not apply to citizens are not
members of that church.Keep your religious reasons in your religion,
and let the rest of us live our lives and raise our children as we see fit,
without your asinine interference.
Polygamist families went through these same sort of legal road blocks many times
in this nation's history and yet very little was given in support. This
happens to gay non-biological families and it makes the front page news
throughout the country. I understand the gay community wants to only protect
themselves and the straight community wants to do the same, but the hypocrisy
from the gay community as they turned a blind eye to the polygamist communities
Someone needs to intervene.....please!!
The only thing 'clear and certain' in this case is that
plaintiffs’ marriage licenses were issued, contrary to Utah law, but
pursuant to a federal judicial injunction, which has been stayed and is on
appeal.It's particularly egregious that one Judge went out of
his way to disregard the laws of the State. The State has therefore not gone
out of it's way into highly private, highly personal cases but rather is
duty bound to support, enforce and defend the laws.
@i know it "Robbing children of love is something that will
never be tolerated." Yet that is exactly what you are attempting to do, deny
this boy the protections of having two loving parents in his life. Do you
think the bio father is going to magically appear and the bio mother will go
straight just to fullful some fantasy leave it to beaver family? The. Courts are not bound by your churches proclamations or your personal
views of the ideal family, until the state can actually prove that children are
harmed by same sex adoption they will continue to lose.
Mother nature didn't want two people of the same gender to be parents
together. Ever. And I'm with mother nature
riverofsun,My dad taught me to be compassionate and loving. While
I'm as capable as anyone to forget or neglect the truth... I generally
consider how my comments will be read. In this case, I did before posting.To stand up for a moral truth is not unloving just because you
don't want to accept it.To stand up for protecting children from an
institution proven to be harmful is an act of love.To invite others to
stop, repent, and return... without hard feelings or retribution... is SURELY an
act of love. Unlike us, God's love is infinite.To deny a child
the love of both their Father and Mother, not because of extraordinary
circumstance, but to satisfy the choice to live by principles every human being
knows to be wrong... that is surely unloving, without compassion, past feeling,
and unjust.Everyone has the chance to stop hating, stop hurting
themselves and others, and change. The invitation is to live truly happy by
returning to what is truly a good and beautiful thing. I know for myself about
it because I looked for the truth and found it. That isn't religious
LovelyDeseretGilbert, AZ"...the hypocrisy from the gay community
as they turned a blind eye to the polygamist communities is karma."This illustrates now nonsensical the discussion can become.The
polygamists do not support equality for Gays, but when the Gays do not support
polygamist rights, they are bad?There are only 2 reasons for the
opposition to marriage equality and adoption, neither of which is legal, nor
Constitutional:1-- Some folks just do not see that "those
people" are equal, and will do anything to keep them from sitting in the
adjacent seat at the lunch counter, or the same section of the bus.2-- Some churches have no way to integrate their Gay members and their
members' Gay offspring, so they finance anti-rights campaigns, preach
against it, etc.The lds, believing in revelation, actually have an
easier time to change than most other religions, if the prophet will only listen
clearly to God, and be told that equality is His will.
@ I know it. I live it. I love it.Until everyone's god agrees,
the best we can do is base our laws here on Earth on what the evidence shows.
It shows that we have no more to fear from LGBTs parenting children than we do
from heteros parenting children.@ Chris B"Mother
Nature" isn't a person and doesn't have an end goal in mind.
You're seeing intention where there is none. You're also missing the
fact that homosexuality consistently occurs in humans and other species, making
it natural rather than unnatural. And you're missing the fact that the
ability to procreate has no bearing on whether a person will make a good parent.
To the adults and children whose lives continue to be negatively
impacted by our discriminatory laws against LGBTs, I'm sorry. Some still
"know not what they do," but we're working on it and the light on
the horizon is getting brighter and brighter. Justice is coming.
@LovelyDeseretPolygamist as mentioned have never supported SSM, and you
must be forgetting what a wonderful example Warren Jeffs was for the virtues of
Haven't homosexual couples opted out of the child-bearing game? Natural
law says they cannot have children; therefore, adoption goes against nature.
You don't have to appeal to any religious or moral teachings to come to
I'm a dictator? Really? Last time I checked, my legal power to express and
vote my opinions was just as valid as everyone else's.///Children deserve a loving Father and Mother.Using straw-man
arguments actually make your arguments weaker, not mine. I clearly qualified the
love children deserve. Mothers can't be replaced. Fathers can't be
replaced.This is about taking something away from children in order
to satisfy what adults want. There is nothing loving about it. It's purely
selfish.///Ryan T. Anderson articulated it perfectly
before the Indiana House Judiciary Committee. If you can handle 10 minutes of
respect, reason, fairness, and actually putting children first for a change...
then watch it. Google is your friend.
@ I know it. I live it. I love it."To deny a child the love of
both their Father and Mother, not because of extraordinary circumstance, but to
satisfy the choice to live by principles every human being knows to be
wrong...Your religion and others have held other beliefs as
"truths" that were later revised or recanted. The most generous way to
look at this is that the religious often misinterpret what their god is telling
them. They're human - they make mistakes. So I don't think the
confidence with which you state your position is warranted. Having
said this, I do believe you are sincere when you say your intent is to be
loving. Unfortunately, good intentions do not lessen the harmful effects of the
actions you take or don't take as a result of your belief.I do
hear your fear, but you will see that all will be okay. Little will change
except that a small minority of people - my beloved nephew included - will no
longer be treated as second class citizens. He isn't. He's first
class all the way. His god thinks so too.
Despite the many here that continue to post hate and use hate as a tool to get
their points across (regardless if they have one or do not) justice is soon
arriving in Utah and nationwide! The same logic and weapons were used during the
civil rights movement. We all know how that turned out.
@chris b Are you also with Mother Nature when it comes to couples
coming together just long enough to procreate then go thier seperate ways. How
about mother natures drive some animals to leave their unborn alone and never
Once again Utah is a national embarrassment and becomes the punch line of jokes
on late night television. We should all be so proud.
We raised cows when I was young and you need a bull and a heifer to propagate
the species.Two bulls cannot reproduce and could not raise a calf if they had
one which is impossible.
Bob K you said "The lds, believing in revelation, actually have an easier
time to change than most other religions, if the prophet will only listen
clearly to God, and be told that equality is His will." How do you know this
is God's will? According to LDS doctrine only the Prophet has the authority
to speak for God here on the Earth. So far to the church only male and female
relationships have been permitted, not the same gender. I have homosexual
friends and family who are wonderful people and I love them dearly, but
religiously I don't know how their orientation fits or could fit into basic
LDS doctrine of "The Plan of Happiness" of having a family being sealed
together for eternity and one day having spirit children together and becoming
as God. Our bodies are designed strictly to reproduce with opposite genders not
the same. Believing in God, I believe this was done on purpose, Otherwise why
did God not just make only one gender that could reproduce? Then everyone would
be truly equal in all aspects of life. There would be no father or mother role
it would just be blurred together.
trekkerSalt Lake, UT"Bob K you said "The lds, believing in
revelation, actually have an easier time to change than most other religions, if
the prophet will only listen clearly to God, and be told that equality is His
will." How do you know this is God's will?"--- I
believe that God would not create people who are 2nd class--- I believe
that relgions, in order to be fair to their own Gay children and not deny that
God made them, must look with fresh eyes on the issue.Perhaps I am
dwelling in Outer Space when I say that men who were already adults in 1950 or
so ought to do better at understanding 2014, or pass the job to younger men.And You might realize that the original formulation of ANY church is
centered not just aroung serving God, but on growing the church. 180 years ago,
it was necessary to make it all about procreation to do so. In
today's world, with Utah having a much higher divorce rate that Gay-
marriage Massachusetts, people are no longer willing to lie to stay in a church,
and we realize that not everyone can have an honest heterosexual marriage.
I am LDS and I have seen more children from unhappy typically Mom/Dad homes than
you can even believe; so the theory that children all need a mom and dad is
kaput with many, many unhappy families. Children are best off with happy, stable
and loving parents- regardless of their sexual orientation. All those who feel
inclined to judge those who don't live exactly the same way as themselves
are in for a huge surprise when they stand before the Lord. He will not be
pleased with the pettiness, hatred and mean spirited venom these people spit
out. He makes no mistakes; if homosexuals are created then HE created them. Do
you want to call him out for it? Exactly as I thought. NO. I've worked for
Child Protection and believe me- there are plenty of LDS mom/dad homes that are
so dysfunctional the children are being destroyed from within. So, don't
pretend that they don't exist because any honest Bishop or Stake President
will tell you they are inundated with "happy families". Let others be.
Judge Not. It's not your call.
It is disheartening to see the unbelievable amount of anti-gay animus in these
posts page one in particular. I fear those poor souls that are yoked to dogma
will never reach an enlightened state - at least not until they are taught
otherwise.The LDS church has successfully dealt with this type of
social upheaval in the past, when it became socially impossible to continue
denying equal treatment toward African-Americans. In 1978, church leaders led
by Spencer Kimball declared they had received a 'revelation'
instructing them to reverse the racial restriction policy.The same
thing will eventually occur with this marriage equality issue - LDS leaders will
have another 'revelation' that will allow them tell their flock that
marriage equality, like black Mormons in the priesthood, is now okey-dokey. This
will eliminate the angst many LDS folk currently feel on this issue.
Danclrksvll----So what is your point?
Does Utah law prohibit adoption by same sex couples or does it prohibit single
people from adopting? I thought it was single people. (I'm not giving an
opinion I'm just genuinely curious)