Same-sex marriage coming to Utah

[scottie]

I need to figure out a way to work that into a talk.

[Moliere]

I need to figure out a way to work that into a talk.

Maybe the next time you are asked to speak on talents?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Embedded Tweet

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Embedded Tweet

What, back to 2012 when Barack Obama publicly stated his opposition to gay marriage?

[pellegrino]

Maybe I don't see the issue. As LDS, you or I don't have a right to get married in a Catholic Church by a Catholic Priest. Even a Catholic may not have that right if he or she has been divorced. Their church, their rules. I see more of an issue with something like the BYU honor code that stipulates a student can only have sexual relations within marriage with the threat of expulsion if they break that rule. Now that gay marriage is legal, what happens to a gay BYU married student? Could BYU get away with expelling gay students who marry? Could BYU deny their application to live in married student housing?

They have already excommunicated gay members who are legally married. I think they'll stop performing legally sanctioned marriages like thwy do already in many countries. Regardless of how anyone feels about the issue, today's ruling will in some way impact religious freedom. Exactly how has yet to be seen.

[Uncle Ted]

An odd coincidence.

On this day in Salt Lake City in 1848, Porter Rockwell rode a handmade unicycle around the temple lot six times wearing nothing but his cowboy boots, a leather holster and and a cowboy hat. He fired two shots into the air, one from each pistol, every time he passed a giggling Eliza R. Snow. Brigham Young watched from the center of the lot, remarking to Wilford Woodruff, "What a goddamn idiot." (Brigham Young Diaries. Volume 7, page 83. LDS Church Archives).

Saw that on Facebook a few days ago so it has to be true. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...07253373236893

Yet another coincidence relating to marriage...

June 26, 1982 - Marie Osmond marries Steve Craig in the Salt Lake Temple. Elder Paul H. Dunn of the First Council of Seventy, who performed the ceremony, wryly estimates there are 5,000 uninvited guests surrounding Temple Square. Among the crowd are anti-Mormon demonstrators who pass out pamphlets with a drawing of Marie Osmond and Steve Craig in temple clothes. After the wedding the 22- year-old bride emphatically declares, "I'm definitely Marie Craig," and leaves four days later on a tour that does not include her new husband. Elder Dunn, a close friend of the Osmond family is quoted by the Latter-day Sentinal as saying: "I really feel for Steve Craig. He's marrying a three-ring circus." The couple divorces a few years later

I wonder if Elder Dunn told any good war/baseball stories at the ceremony.

[Jeff Lebowski]

What, back to 2012 when Barack Obama publicly stated his opposition to gay marriage?

Southern governors vowed to fight over that?

[Uncle Ted]

Given some of the comments on the Mormon Newsroom Facebook page the upcoming open mic Sunday might be an interesting one:

https://www.facebook.com/MormonNewsroom?fref=ts

Sodom and Gomorrah had the same problem.......just be prepared. Turn away from sin and you'll be fine. The righteous need not fear.

I don't care whom it comes from ...it's still the truth ....God's Law trumps all Supreme Courts .... I thought it funny a justices remarks included the word Family ...I have news for him ...Two men can't make a baby ..neither can two women .... Guess that makes God descrimitory !!!

Not to worry. Jesus will separate the goats from the sheep!

Jesus is coming

[Uncle Ted]

Possibility the next Darwin Award winner...

Texas Pastor Says He Will Set Himself On Fire In Protest Over Gay Marriage

The pastor made the bold declaration during a conference call with a former Virginia GOP politician that he would rather burn himself to death than sanction same-sex marriage.

Just two weeks ago, a Christian couple in Australia vowed to divorce if same-sex marriage is legalized in their country.

However, a former Baptist pastor from Texas, who is also against same-sex marriage, has taken it one step further - and beyond - by declaring that he will set himself on fire if the Supreme Court rules in favor of marriage equality.

Rick Scarborough, a Christian political activist, made the bold declaration during a conversation with right-wing minister and politician E.W. Jackson on the National Emergency Coalition Show, a podcast that is linked to the Staying True to America's National Destiny (STAND) group.


"We are not going to bow. We are not going to bend, and if necessary we will burn," Scarborough said during the podcast, though he did not explicitly state that he would self-immolate in protest of gay marriage, the Independent UK reported.
[...]

http://www.hngn.com/articles/103690/...y-marriage.htm

[CardiacCoug]

It's so funny to me that some people see legalization of gay marriage as a decline in morality. In ten years everybody is going to acknowledge it as an improvement and advancement in morality except for hard-core bigots.

Also these pseudo-academic legalistic arguments against gay marriage are so ridiculous, just embarrassing to those who advance them. People should be treated the same. No decent, moral society would stop people from marrying because of their sexual orientation. Duh!!

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Southern governors vowed to fight over that?

Ken Jennings is acting like this is some decades old prejudice only held by a few southern governors, Obama publicly held the same position 3 years ago. You must be confused about a lot of things apparently it you didn't get the gist of that.

[cowboy]

this is the reason why courts exist

Not to go all Donuthole on you, but 'why' is unnecessary in your statement. Just trying to help. Also, I'm pretty sure the courts weren't established for the purpose of short-circuiting the democratic process...but of course I'm no legal scholar.

It's so funny to me that some people see legalization of gay marriage as a decline in morality. In ten years everybody is going to acknowledge it as an improvement and advancement in morality except for hard-core bigots.

Also these pseudo-academic legalistic arguments against gay marriage are so ridiculous, just embarrassing to those who advance them. People should be treated the same. No decent, moral society would stop people from marrying because of their sexual orientation. Duh!!

It is the nature of many to form an opinion and insist that their's is the only opinion based upon a sound logical foundation. For many, their hubris and lack of self-awareness prevent them from seeing the hypocrisy of calling on those who oppose them to be embarrassed by their position.

[LA Ute]

Same-sex marriage coming to Utah

Not to go all Donuthole on you, but 'why' is unnecessary in your statement. Just trying to help. Also, I'm pretty sure the courts weren't established for the purpose of short-circuiting the democratic process...but of course I'm no legal scholar.

It is the nature of many to form an opinion and insist that their's is the only opinion based upon a sound logical foundation. For many, their hubris and lack of self-awareness prevent them from seeing the hypocrisy of calling on those who oppose them to be embarrassed by their position.

From Roberts' dissent:

Stripped of its shiny rhetorical gloss, the majority’s argument is that the Due Process Clause gives same-sex couples a fundamental right to marry because it will be good for them and for society. If I were a legislator, I would certainly consider that view as a matter of social policy. But as a judge, I find the majority’s position indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.

Nothing to be embarrassed about in that analysis.

[CardiacCoug]

Nothing to be embarrassed about in that analysis.

We were talking to our teenage kids about the court ruling yesterday and their attitude is "Why would anybody ever think it's OK to deny some gay people from marriage? Why is this even a thing? What is wrong with people?"

It's a special brand of middle-aged and elderly person, fundamentalist religion-inspired stupidity that could ever come up with "I'm sorry, we believe in the Constitution and in protecting due process and legal rights for all people. To us that means that means straight people have the legal right to get married but gay people do not have that legal right."

[creekster]

We were talking to our teenage kids about the court ruling yesterday and their attitude is "Why would anybody ever think it's OK to deny some gay people from marriage? Why is this even a thing? What is wrong with people?"

It's a special brand of middle-aged and elderly person, fundamentalist religion-inspired stupidity that could ever come up with "I'm sorry, we believe in the Constitution and in protecting due process and legal rights for all people. To us that means that means straight people have the legal right to get married but gay people do not have that legal right."

Your reasoning here displays a lack of understanding of the concept of due process. Just because you support a legal idea doesn't mean it is necessarily embodied in substantive due process