Obama administration recognizes Utah same-sex marriages

Comments (18)
Psyllicon wrote:

Congratulations Obama, you have unequivocally divided the branches of your government

Jan 10, 2014 1:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse

@Psyllicon, how so? this has always been the right of the Executive branch to determine until the law is settled.

Jan 10, 2014 1:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

“In the last days people will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God—having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.” – 2 Timothy 3:2-5

Jan 10, 2014 1:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bethedge wrote:

Did anyone besides me hear of the term “separation of church and state”? The courts of the state that you get married in gives the marriage license, gives the permission for a minister to perform a marriage ceremony, and grants a divorce. No member of any church can perform a marriage without the permission of the courts nor can they legality declare a person divorced from another person. Why? Because a marriage isn’t about religion, it is a legal contract between two people that creates a bond between the two just like a partnership in a company. I have heard politician claim that the voters don’t want gay marriage so the state has the right to deny marriage to same-sex couple. Well, that’s the funny thing about voters and a “majority rules” line of thinking, the majority is never concerned about the rights of the minority. The majority will always look out for their own interests and protect their own believes to the determent of the minority. Over the course of the American history, the courts have always had to set in to protect the rights of the minority against the oppression of the majority. One recent case, Loving v Virginia. A couple was prosecuted for being married because one partner was white and the other was black. The bible points out that races (tribes) should not intermix, but we are a national of people that live by a standard of equal protect under the law and due process. Interracial couple have the right to marry not because of the voters. They have the right to marry because the US Supreme Court recognized that the color of a person’s skin is not a legitimate reason to oppress and single out people who love someone that has different skin tone. I hope that US Supreme Court has the clarity of mind to realize that skin tone is the same as sex. They don’t make a difference when you love a person and that the state has no vested interest in denying the freedom and rights that other enjoy because of the couple sex. No one should be allowed to legislate morality. Because if I could, I would make a law about adultery and put 95% of those screaming about the sanctity of marriage in jail for all of the affairs they have.

Jan 10, 2014 1:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TOTL wrote:

Really? It’s the president’s authority to make laws while the court decides? Really?
Article 2, Section 3 of the Constitution: “…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed..”. Go read Article 2, nowhere does it say that he can make law. That power is reserved to Congress, and only Congress. It also says “Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:–”I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Obama’s proclamations and executive fiat are nothing more than his attempts at power and vote gathering.

Jan 10, 2014 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
WhyMeLord wrote:

I’ll bet God isn’t pleased with all this foolishness.
We’re pretending that we know all aspects of his will.
Let’s reserve judgment on this until the fat lady sings.

Jan 10, 2014 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cdj1 wrote:

Obama and his I’ll do anything for a vote is getting real old, No wonder Mrs Obama is staying way .She can’t stand to be around him anymore.

Jan 10, 2014 2:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sderf wrote:

Screw the state rights as long as we have a dictator in Washington is there is no state rights.

Jan 10, 2014 3:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

>>We’re pretending that we know all aspects of his will.

God’s will is that marriage and sex is only between a man and a woman. This is what he clearly spells out in the Bible. anything else including same gender sex, pre-martial sex, debauchery and anything else is a sin and unholy. We know what God thinks on the subject because he told us.

Jan 10, 2014 3:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sderf wrote:

What happened to states rights??? I guess as long as we have a dictator in DC they have none.

Jan 10, 2014 3:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
digressor wrote:

Rich_F – I can kinda see your point if you are Jew. You’re quoting the Old Testament.That’s the Torah. The Old Covenant before Jesus came. Has nothing to do with Christians. If you aren’t a Jew you really need to get a grip on your beliefs. Jesus gave you no right to judge anyone. posting ANYTHING is judgmental. Judging gays is fatal to you soul.

Jan 10, 2014 3:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
digressor wrote:

Rich, get an education . You are way off in your beliefs.

Jan 10, 2014 3:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PortlandME wrote:

TOTL….great you get can use Google. Yet, you did not provide any evidence that Obama Adm. violated any law. Why? Because they did not do so. As a quick reminder, the US Supreme court, last year, over turned DOMA. Thus, making your point totally null and void. Have a good day!

Jan 10, 2014 3:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OnTheGround wrote:

The Obama administration continues its program of support for special rights for special interests. This special interest is the homosexual lobbying group. This activity is cast by proponents as “inclusive,” but as it plays out it is very divisive. The agenda is for gays and lesbians to be seen as “normal,” which they aren’t. That’s why they call themselves “queer.”

Jan 10, 2014 4:56pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Rich, the bible also defines marriage as between a rapist and his victim, a man and his late brothers widow, and so on. Not only are you ignorant to your own religion, you fail to realize that it deserves absolutely no respect, as do all belief systems that exist without evidence. The ability to believe in something despite a lack of evidence, bad evidence, or evidence to the contrary is very dangerous.

Jan 10, 2014 6:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gregbrew56 wrote:

The world will be a better place when people stop believing in bronze-age mythologies.

Join the 21st century…PLEASE!

Jan 10, 2014 8:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

bethedge, you make a lot of good points but consider the following:

The courts were set up by our constitution and represent both the majority and minority, but are in reality supported by the majority. Thus, the majority does care about the minority.

You are right, marriage isn’t about religion – it’s about a physical and spiritual union. Yes the government “has legal control” over marriage and divorce, but ask, did the government take this over from the religions. You will probably have to go back before the existence of the US to determine this. Thus, has government forced itself on the religious sector, i.e, crossed the line of separation of church and state and actually taken control of a spiritual union (and made it civil union).

Concerning comparisons between Biblical principles, the supreme court, the constitution and separation of church and state – Generally folks (including most Christians) don’t understand what the Bible actually provides for us (i.e., most people look to find a scripture to support their opinion or find a verse that they can surely show how it is antiquated, (i.e., it doesn’t address slavery as we believe it should, it encourages war, has different views about homosexuality than what is politically correct)). Are you saying that if a religion does not believe in murder, there should be no law that supports that belief? Thus how can you have separation of church and state if they are, by nature, concurrent – unless you earnestly want to provide for true separation of church and state and develop a country of ethics rather than morality (but keep in mind, those supporting Hitler under his regime can be considered as ethical.

Lastly, anyone knowing the meaning of the scriptures understands it is about forgiveness, acceptance. However, those who are immoral by choice have no standards of their own to be compared to – and thus cannot be judged. Those who choose to have standards but fail to reach continuously are “persecuted” for actions that the immoral do daily.

Also, you even use the scriptures to support your views (pointing out their perceived antiquated principles) – you must fully understand their intended purpose for the time they were written. Although most guidance in the Bible is spiritual in nature, it is also practical for the time it was given. You must avoid the anachronistic evaluation of the Bible – (i.e., applying social issues today as if they were significant or were applicable in the time of the Bible).

Jan 11, 2014 10:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
weBhere wrote:

Rich F: Your obligation to His Word is to live your life according to it. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” is THE rule to live by if you want to proclaim Him as your own. You who believe you have the right or responsiblity to make sure OTHERS live by His Word violate His command to do unto others as you have them do unto to you.

Number one: how can you be a Christain when you violate Christ’s “Golden Rule” and encourage others to do so. Every one knows that you would never want anyone to do to your marriage what you are trying to do to others. The rest of us recognize hypocrisy when we see it.

What would Jesus do? He would be telling you that His Word is a personal revelation, and it tells YOU how to live YOUR life. It is not for telling OTHERS what to do. Live your life according to it, do not trample on others, and get the tree out of your eye.

Jan 11, 2014 4:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.