Wow. The Deseret News running photos of actual people on a gay rights article
rather than the standard pair of hands. Are they beginning to realize that real
actual American type people are involved here? In any case, well done DN, there
is hope for you yet. :o)
Disrupting the legislative process is a great way to wind widespread publicity
for your cause. However, it also tends to really irritate legislators who must
deliberate any changes to our laws.It seems that many in the LGBT
community are really more interested in calling attention to their (outlandish,
in my opinion) demands and personal publicity that in explaining any rational
arguments in favor of their requests, or rather demands backed by the threats of
violence if they are not granted.Just because a tiny minority of
people get a lot of publicity about their demands does not make it right or
proper to accede to those demands. If they find a sympathetic judge to give
them a win, that may make it legal, but still does not make it right, moral or
proper.I hope that LGBT demonstrators who break the law with their
demonstrations are treated the same as any other group of out of control
activists, be they animal rights, folks, gun nuts, "underpaid" teachers,
or religious zealots protesting liquor laws.Behave and argue the
merits of your desired legislative changes, not showboating anarchists.
Yup, this ill thought out protest indeed does hurt the gay cause and makes them
look sort of un-civil. Kind of appears like many efforts by the gay community to
attempt to force their voice upon everyone else while simultaneously
disregarding the concerns of the majority of citizens who oppose many aspects of
the gay agenda. Another wake up call that this small minority of citizens does
not appear to be sensitive to the feelings, rights, and concerns of others.
If we don't get our way, we will fight and pout, just like children, not
adults. Good for them, their real agenda is starting to show and it is nor one
of tolerance but one of force.
This whole thing seems quite strange. The State of Utah keeps saying that
Amendment 3 is the will of the people. Doesn't refusing to allow a vote on
a Gay anti-discrimination bill that has even more popular support defeat that
The defense of "you made us do it" really doesn't go over well with
those in power, ever!
RE: Mecho "Another wake up call that this small minority of citizens does
not appear to be sensitive to the feelings, rights, and concerns of
others."So I guess Mecho you are afraid your religious
"right" to discriminate against LGBT persons is being threatened?The legislators involved seem to agree with you. So what is this
community supposed to do? Just roll over?
Why do they call them "gay rights activists"? Aren't they
promoting gay marriage? One thing Judge Vaughn made clear was that
legally promoting/enforcing homosexuality through marriage is not about civil
rights, visiting rights, insurance rights, or etc. Gay marriage
advocates don't seem concerned with gays rights to vote, work, drink water
and live where they want, etc. We can already do that in Utah, and in CA
etc.(unless they are Black, overweight, Asian, etc. since gay bars still
discriminate, segregate, send Blacks to the end of the line, refuse to hire
based on race, religion etc. AND without being fined). But, as
Vaughn pointed out (after he supplanted the morality of The People with his own
morality-taking the right of Californians to truly have a voice or vote on their
future), gay marriage isn't about "rights" it's about
mainstreaming homosexuality, and one of his justifications for gay marriage was
that he didn't believe in "conversion" therapy, and there were some
other unfounded speculations (born that way, identical love, homosexuality
should be tax promoted etc. etc.) Yes, I know, born that way etc.
have nothing to do with marriage, but there it is..... :)
Marxist, apparently you agree then that breaking the law is the best way for all
of us to 'get our way' or to deal with political differences?And
how far do you go to justify your actions LGBT? Until you get everything your
way?The false premise of just wanting equality and tolerance has
long since been buried by the actions of the LGBT movement. After
each conflict we have seen what truly lies beneath the thin veneer of their
agenda starting with prop 8 in CA.If they win, they only become more
threatening as it justifies their success.If they lose, they look for
people to intimidate and ruin financially or threaten legally.Can
you imagine if all of the non gays or those who respectfully disagree with the
gay lifestyle were to use the same tactics? Like finding all businesses,
corporations or any organization this is pro gay and boycotting it simply
because it is gay?This continues to be epitome of hypocrisy.
I have found it interesting that whenever a Traditional Marriage rally has taken
place at the Statehouse, it has always been attended by SSM supporters who
holler and carry on, yet when SSM people have their rally, Traditional Marriage
people do not try to interrupt their proceedings. It tells which side is
willing to be civil, and which side will go to any length to get their way.It also is a telling sign of our day--not just with this issue but with
others--that if a group has enough episodes of civil disobedience, agitation,
and even rioting, then that group must be right. In other words, the ends
justify the means.
I am proud to say my 16 year old daughter and I walked in the Pride parade with
the Capitol 13 group. Go Gail!
Marxist,Not surprising that you would confuse religious doctrine with
discrimination. Actually wrong-headed courts have used such
“anti-discrimination” statutes to force religious discrimination.
They care not for the religious liberties guaranteed in the constitution. Your
comment tells me you do not, either.So long as there are such
wrong-headed judges, our religious liberties are in peril ANYWHERE there are
such laws that demand we accept a gay lifestyle.
One day my boss took me off to the side and fired me. He first gave me a long
speech about how he had a problem with people like me. Of course he never used
the word gay, but it was clear what he meant. I believe somebody I know passed
along information about me. Anyway, I wasn't out at the time. I was active
in the LDS church and I can not explain how painful that experience was to me! I
still have a hard time when LDS people discriminate like he did! I just never
seen it until it happened to me. We should all know better than treating
somebody in certain ways, but unfortunately there are those who feel that it is
just fine to discriminate. I will never understand what they think. I feel that
growing up Mormon, I learned a great deal that is good. It is hard for me to see
that many people feel that it is ok to degrade and hate others and discriminate.
Most gay people in Utah demonstrate peacefully. I hardly ever go. I just
don't like it, but it is important to speak out.
firstamendment Lehi, UTWhy do they call them "gay
rights activists"? Aren't they promoting gay marriage? ------------No. This was not about gay marriage. It was about
the legislature not bring up the non-discrimination bill that has over a 60%
favorability with the citizens of Utah. This has absolutely nothing to do with
Lane Myer,acutally it has everything to do with gay marriage. The
legislatire has looked at the bill and also looked at the appeals process for
amendment 3. They decided to wait until the amendment 3 issue was settled
before acting on such legislation. I think they were wise to do so. As I mentioned in my previous post, wrong-headed judges have used such
statutes to trample religious liberties. If Utah is ultimately succsessful in
its appeal, which I pray will happen, then I suspect the legislature will pass
such a statute. If Utah is not successful in its appeal, I would hope the
legislature which not pass such a statute as it would force people to violate
their conscience or give up their livelihood if they are in anything at all
related to the wedding industry.
lost in DC said: "They decided to wait until the amendment 3 issue was
settled before acting on such legislation. I think they were wise to do so.
"No they were afraid of what our representatives would say, that
would help prove animus towards the LGBT community.Because they knew full
well the same hateful, bigoted comments posted here would be said on the
floor.While wise not to show your true self, if your bigoted and
trying to convince the courts you aren't, it's still justice delayed.
@firstamendment/VanceoneWhy do you care so much about gay bars? @kmtown" It tells which side is willing to be civil, and which
side will go to any length to get their way."It's not
really surprising that the side that has its rights restricted will be more
angry about the issue. @lost in DC"If Utah is not
successful in its appeal, I would hope the legislature which not pass such a
statute"So if you don't get your way you want the
legislature to keep discrimination legal?
HVHyou KNOW why they did that? Really?You KNOW they were
afraid?you KNOW the thoughts and intents of their hearts?no, you are just making the usual hateful, bigoted liberal accusations because
many of them do not agree with you.I read in the DN the reasons I
stated for them delaying the vote.What was your source, other than
your own disdain for them?"if your bigoted and trying to
convince the courts you aren't, it's still justice delayed."I am having a hard time understanding what you meant by this.did you mean "if you're bigoted..."?your see,
"you're" is a contraction of "you are", but "your"
is second person possessive. It does make a difference and makes your comments
more easily understood.But I see you do not argue the fact that such
statutes have been used to deny religious liberties, you just went on the attack
against the legislature and posters who do not agree with you.
They have a right to peacefully protest and petition the government for
change.... but they DON'T have the right to force people to do what they
want, or physically prevent them from getting to their work.When you
get physical and won't let people get to their work... you have broken the
law.At least it ended short of assault. If they had gotten more
physical with people as they tried to get through... they would be facing more
than a misdemeanor.This is no big deal. Let's just hope the
protests stay peaceful and civil, and don't turn into the kind of riots and
stuff we had in Wisconsin when the Liberals didn't get their way...
@firstamendment"Why do they call them "gay rights activists"?
Aren't they promoting gay marriage?"Isn't the right to
marriage for gay couples a part of gay rights? then why cannot call them gay
right activists?and FYI, just because you would like to interpret
Judge Walker's ruling in a certain way, does not mean it is the right way.
At least 30+ different courting rulings don't share your
"interpretation". and not even a single federal court shares your
These people were fighting for their civil rights and the right to not be
subject to discrimination. I don't see Clive Bundy being
arrested for violating the law?I do see a lot of people under the
"guise of religious freedom" promoting hateful and yes bigotry. You
have the freedom to believe whatever you want. You do not have the freedom to
push your religious beliefs on citizens of this country. Isn't that what
is happening in Iraq and Syria?
Why did they need to disrupt the legislature? So far things seem to be going
their way in the courts.
Though I personally believe the states should be able to hold whatever laws and
ammendments their population is in agreement for against gay marriage, i would
like to see the utah legislation approve these sorts anti-discriminatory laws. I
think it is short-sighted and petty to continue to hold back on popular
reformations because of the ongoing legalities in the courts regarding
tangential issues. We know a lot more about LGBT people than we used to, and
they do experience discrimination, and yet most contribute positively to our
communities. It's time to stop knee-jerk ignorance and opposition where we
it has no impact upon social re-engineering or advocacy. I think the activists
are right to stage a demonstration, which i think was very effective. I
don't think they should even attempt to avoid the legal consequences of
their civil disobedience--cuz that's all part of the cost of civil
disobedience. Still I applaud their efforts in this regard. I wish we could have
a more respectful dialog all the way round--disagree where we disagree, and find
commonground where possible, regarding most these social issues.