Same-sex marriage coming to Utah

[SeattleUte]

LOL, mocked in the media and DISMISSED by intellectuals. Wait till they hear that. I am sure that will change their thinking.

Like my buddy Tom said one time when I told him the intellectuals would call him a hick. I think I will go out and buy me 50 of those intellectuals and I will bet they start agreeing with me.

Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Jeff Bezos (who has a degree from Princeton) all support gay marriage. I wonder how easily any one of them could buy your friend. It seems to me the LDS Church is already bought. It's been strangely silent.

One thing I love about you is you're a walking time capsule. Mormons always hated intellectuals out of fear, and it turns out the paranoia didn't mean they shouldn't be afraid.

[byu71]

Yep, it's just the opposite. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1147290.html

Gays want to embrace a fading institution.

That has been the issue that goes back and forth in my mind. Is traditional marriage worth saving? What value does it add to a society? Hard for me to kiss off that discussion as lightly as some do.

Of course with progressives it is always about what feels right. It does feel right to correct income inequality and take from the haves and give to the have nots. It is odd to me that people who pride themselves on their thinking ability often do not go beyond the consequences of their "fairness" themes. I wonder if any of them even realize if they tax the upper 1% at a 100% rate, they still can't pay for all their wonderful ideas.

[Nakoma]

Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Jeff Bezos (who has a degree from Princeton) all support gay marriage. I wonder how easily any one of them could buy your friend. It seems to me the LDS Church is already bought. It's been strangely silent.

One thing I love about you is you're a walking time capsule. Mormons always hated intellectuals out of fear, and it turns out the paranoia didn't mean they shouldn't be afraid.

You might want to follow the news a little closer. http://www.lds.org/church/news/churc...-utah?lang=eng

[byu71]

Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Jeff Bezos (who has a degree from Princeton) all support gay marriage. I wonder how easily any one of them could buy your friend. It seems to me the LDS Church is already bought. It's been strangely silent.

One thing I love about you is you're a walking time capsule. Mormons always hated intellectuals out of fear, and it turns out the paranoia didn't mean they shouldn't be afraid.

I am actually touched you love something about me. I love how you consistently make generalizations and do so with the air of actually knowing what you are talking about.

All of them could buy my buddy 50 times. And if he were calling them names and acting like they were inferior because they had a different opinion from him, I wouldn't blame them for doing so.

Gates and Allen graduated from where by the way. I knew about Bezos.

[UVACoug]

Few want to admit it, let alone discuss it, but the fact remains that all of this "states should have their own marriage laws" stuff coming from Mormons and Utahns is very much about polygamy.

It's time for me to write an article, I guess.

I didn't realize Justice Kennedy was a Mormon polygamist from Utah. You learn new things every day.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[imanihonjin]

I didn't realize Justice Kennedy was a Mormon polygamist from Utah. You learn new things every day.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

As it relates to gay marriage, I think Justice Kennedy will not allow states to "have their own marriage laws."

[UVACoug]

I'm questioning the intelligence of some who I thought were thoughtful, intelligent people. At least if F. Scott Fitzgeral's test is the test for intelligence: "The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." And by function, I mean the ability to see where those with differing views are coming from, and have enough creativity, or understanding, to not be clouded by prejudice.

The gay rights movement is the final flowering if the sexual liberalization movement of the 60s. Sex has been placed on the center pedestal. Sex, above all else, is the means of self-actualization and self-realization. For those who think that sex is not the central act of mortality, but rather self-denial and restraint of the natural man, they take a different view. They think that no matter the orientation of the natural man, there is a higher law. Obviously the law of chastity. They take an eternal perspective: "For it is better that ye should deny yourselves of these things, wherein ye will take up your across, than that ye should be cast into hell." That is, sex is not the pathway to ultimate self-actualization in this life. Rather, the assertion of will is, the bending of one's will to conform --- at least try to make it conform --- to the faith in a higher law, for self-actualization in the next. But that's an old debate: whether mortality should require this, and whether it is worth denying oneself, and how could God ask that of a person, and how destructive it is to ask that of a human, etc. But some people believe that, and believe it very sincerely. In fact, many gay people believe that, and try to live accordingly.


The sanctioning effect of law is huge. If the law sanctions an act, that has a huge effect on public opinion, and public behavior. There is no debate on that point. And the sanctioning of gay marriage sanctions not marriage, but the sexual act. Marriage is already sanctioned; we already as a society have decided that marriage is important. And so adding a group of people within its bounds strengthens marriage, it does not diminish it. So I think the opposition to gay marriage is not an opposition to marriage, ultimately, but an opposition to gay sex. How could it be otherwise? If you believe in marriage, the conservative thing to do is to strengthen the institution by letting committed couples --- no matter the gender --- enter it. But that also sanctions gay sex. You would not ask a married couple to be celibate.


And so there are people who find themselves in this position: they believe that gay marriage should be a civil right, but who do not want society to sanction gay sex, because they believe in a higher law. Strange place to be in, but I think there are a lot of people like that. The answer, I think, is to acknolwedge that we live in a civil society where individual choice in such matters should not be up for debate, but rather should be a matter of individual conscience.

So the bottom line question is: are those who support civil marriage, but believe gay sex is a sin, bigots?

Or the more simple question: Are those who believe gay sex is a sin, are they bigots?

A marriage without sex is not a marriage at all, according to the law. Failure to consummate is grounds for annulment.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[byu71]

A marriage without sex is not a marriage at all, according to the law. Failure to consummate is grounds for annulment.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

So does non-marital sex actually constitute marriage?

[Flystripper]

So does non-marital sex actually constitute marriage?

it did in the bible

[UVACoug]

So does non-marital sex actually constitute marriage?

No. Sexual intercourse is a necessary, but not sufficient, element of a legal marriage

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[byu71]

No. Sexual intercourse is a necessary, but not sufficient, element of a legal marriage

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

I like the part about being necessary. I hope when the leaders of the church pronounce it is natural and OK for men to have sex with men and women with women, that they will also come to realize it is OK for men to have sex with women whether married or not. I still though do no wish for it to be allowed between one who is married and one who is not. I am still enough of a traditionalist to not wish for that.

[San Juan Sun]

To all those who think the church ended polygamy, remember that every day there are polygamous sealings done in the temple. WW simply deferred the polygamous marriages among living members.

Or they did them in Canada and Mexico. Or just did them in secret.

[SeattleUte]

whoops. now they will all be excommunicated for having sex without being married

This issue is probably one of federal procedural or Constitutional law. I don't think Governor Wallace, er what's his name? can decide this.

[imanihonjin]

This issue is probably one of federal procedural or Constitutional law. I don't think Governor Wallace, er what's his name? can decide this.

The Governor actually agrees with you and that is why he placed the hold, so that the Courts can decide the issue.

[SeattleUte]

You might want to follow the news a little closer. http://www.lds.org/church/news/churc...-utah?lang=eng

Milquestoast. What happened to "our Gettysburg"? Are they going to hire the LDS law firm to do an amicus and pretend its from an ecumenical group?