Salt Lake OKs gay rights laws with Mormon backing

With a historic endorsement from the Mormon church, the Salt Lake City Council unanimously passed a pair of ordinances making it illegal to discriminate against gays in housing and employment.

[humor me here]

Will this do?

[Pahoran]

humor me here wrote:

Will this do?

Of *course* it won't. Have you seen the other threads on this topic?

While some or even many "gay" people might be decent about this, the shrill, noisy ones, if Topix is anything to go on, will not be satisfied with anything less than complete surrender to every demand. There is, in the minds of extremists, no such thing as compromise; no possibility of an agreement to disagree on any point. Their sense of entitlement is such that as soon as they decide they want something -- even if they've never wanted it before -- it *immediately* becomes a "right," and everyone who disagrees or even questions that assumption is a target for instant vilification.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Beautiful]

Okay I'll bite since Mr. P seems to be playing the victim again in his own unique arrogant condescending way.

The fact that a so-called church has to be intimately involved with the politics of a city and a state in our nation in this day and age such as to literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years until its official pronouncement could be issued from the ivory temple, immediately upon which the ordinance's passage was unanimously issued by said governing body, says far more about the inappropriately-placed political power invested in said so-called church than anything about the ordinance itself.

Would the officials of the political action corporation masquerading as a church to sit on things a while longer, the people would simply be forced to wait. Because, quite simply, nothing happens in the theocratic state of Utah without the blessing of said corporation. It's today's equivalent of power invested in the Pope in the days of the Holy Roman Empire. One has to go back to the days of Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation to see any parallels to the political situation in Utah today.

This undue political influence by a religious corporation on the non-religious activities and actions of any civic legislative body and executive office far eclipses any single issue that I, who happen to be gay, would care about personally - even the marriage equality issue. That the corporation decided to toss a small, overdue olive twig the way of a group of people that it has repeatedly kicked, bullied, marginalized, hated, and disparaged for decades in and of itself is good. But it's not sufficient to silence critics such as me.

To continue to use its -your term, not mine- "shrill" rhetoric in declaring that gays are doing "violence" to the institution of marriage is equally ludicrous. More violence was done to those two young men who were simply engaging in activities of physical affection on Main Street, SLC than would ever be done to the institution of marriage were equality to be allowed in more states than those who already do so.

Show me the body bags and the physical injuries from all the violence done to religious people who happen to live in Massachusetts, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut. The sun still shines, their churches are still open, free to accept or turn away any candidates for marriage within their walls they wish. Heterosexual families are still permitted within their borders.

[Pahoran]

Beautiful wrote:

Okay I'll bite since Mr. P seems to be playing the victim again in his own unique arrogant condescending way.
The fact that a so-called church

Pardon my interruption, but it's an *actual* church. This is a completely non-controversial *fact*, and admitting it does not entail acceptance of the Church's truth claims or acquiescence to any of its positions with which you disagree. All it requires is a very minimal amount of fundamental honesty.

Can you manage it?

Beautiful wrote:

has to be intimately involved with the politics of a city and a state in our nation in this day and age such as to literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years until its official pronouncement could be issued from the ivory temple, immediately upon which the ordinance's passage was unanimously issued by said governing body, says far more about the inappropriately-placed political power invested in said so-called church than anything about the ordinance itself.

Holy run-on sentence, Batman!

The Church did not "literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years." You are, as usual, imagining a vast and sinister conspiracy where one does not exist.

Beautiful wrote:

This undue political influence by a religious corporation on the non-religious activities and actions of any civic legislative body and executive office far eclipses any single issue that I, who happen to be gay, would care about personally - even the marriage equality issue.

"Marriage equality" is not an issue; it's a reality. Every unmarried adult has the same right to enter into the mixed-sex institution of marriage as any other, and there are no "orientation" tests applied.

And the Church does not exercise "undue political influence." It occasionally makes its views known on issues that are in the public square; and some politicians, particularly those that have large LDS constituencies, take notice. I know some people think that is utterly disgusting, and would like to either silence churches or disenfranchise religious voters -- or both -- but, until the revolution, we have the same rights as everyone else.

Beautiful wrote:

That the corporation decided to toss a small, overdue olive twig the way of a group of people that it has repeatedly kicked, bullied, marginalized, hated, and disparaged for decades in and of itself is good.

Now who's "playing the victim again in his/her own unique arrogant condescending way?"

Beautiful wrote:

But it's not sufficient to silence critics such as me.

Thank you for proving me right.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Pahoran]

Beautiful wrote:

To continue to use its -your term, not mine- "shrill" rhetoric in declaring that gays are doing "violence" to the institution of marriage is equally ludicrous. More violence was done to those two young men who were simply engaging in activities of physical affection on Main Street, SLC than would ever be done to the institution of marriage were equality to be allowed in more states than those who already do so.

That's ridiculous, and you know it. The scofflaws in question were on Church property *and they knew it*; they *deliberately* set out to behave in an inappropriate manner, in order to provoke a response.

They were asked to leave, and so they refused.

Here's something you just might understand: you people claim to value something you are pleased to call "diversity." Now while some of us have come to suspect that "diversity" may be a left-wing codeword for "people like us," in the normal English usage of the word, "diversity" means that not every town in the US has to be a clone of San Fransisco. You ought to be "celebrating" that fact, instead of trying to change it.

Beautiful wrote:

Show me the body bags and the physical injuries from all the violence done to religious people

Again: that's ridiculous, and you know it. The violence spoken of was violence being done to the *institution of marriage*, not to people.

Beautiful wrote:

Heterosexual families are still permitted within their borders.

Oh, how remarkably generous of you.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Beautiful]

Pahoran wrote:

<quoted text>
That's ridiculous, and you know it. The scofflaws in question were on Church property *and they knew it*; they *deliberately* set out to behave in an inappropriate manner, in order to provoke a response.
They were asked to leave, and so they refused.
Here's something you just might understand: you people claim to value something you are pleased to call "diversity." Now while some of us have come to suspect that "diversity" may be a left-wing codeword for "people like us," in the normal English usage of the word, "diversity" means that not every town in the US has to be a clone of San Fransisco. You ought to be "celebrating" that fact, instead of trying to change it.
<quoted text>
Again: that's ridiculous, and you know it. The violence spoken of was violence being done to the *institution of marriage*, not to people.
<quoted text>
Oh, how remarkably generous of you.
Regards,
Pahoran

Go on with your "you people" cuts. It only shows how bigoted you are and continue to be. Keep it up. Enlightened persons everywhere of all races, ages, genders, sexual orientations, and belief systems recognize the racist and hateful undertones to your speech everytime you open your mouth or tap on your keyboard.

[Pahoran]

Beautiful wrote:

<quoted text>
Go on with your "you people" cuts. It only shows how bigoted you are and continue to be. Keep it up. Enlightened persons everywhere of all races, ages, genders, sexual orientations, and belief systems recognize the racist and hateful undertones to your speech everytime you open your mouth or tap on your keyboard.

Oh, so "you people" is "bigoted", is it?

How, exactly?

*We* aren't the ones who talk about "diversity" while actually meaning sameness; that is a left-wing affectation.

And I gather you have nothing to say about the *substance* of my post, only to whine about a question of *style*.

I understand.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Beautiful]

Pahoran wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh, so "you people" is "bigoted", is it?
How, exactly?
*We* aren't the ones who talk about "diversity" while actually meaning sameness; that is a left-wing affectation.
And I gather you have nothing to say about the *substance* of my post, only to whine about a question of *style*.
I understand.
Regards,
Pahoran

No. I don't waste time arguing with small-minded twits who can't think beyond what is pronounced from their leaders in Salt Lake. Not gonna belabor it further for you to create some more long-winded drivel. In other words, I try to avoid feeding the troll.

[Pahoran]

Beautiful wrote:

<quoted text>
No. I don't waste time arguing with small-minded twits who can't think beyond what is pronounced from their leaders in Salt Lake. Not gonna belabor it further for you to create some more long-winded drivel. In other words, I try to avoid feeding the troll.

But you condescend to make spiteful remarks without substance.

Just so you know, "you people" is simply the standard way to disambiguate "you" as a plural. Clearly it's all you've got to go on to support your accustion of "bigotry;" in contrast, I can show *textbook* examples from the abundance of your posts.

Don't let your hatred fester, "Beautiful." Getting your way is not the be-all and end-all of life; and nobody else is under any obligation to see the issues the same way you do. Not seeing those issues your way does not automatically make anyone a "bigot."

And that's the way things are.

Regards,
Pahoran

[Beautiful]

Moron the Jaredite wrote:

<quoted text>
Pardon my interruption, but it's an *actual* church. This is a completely non-controversial *fact*, and admitting it does not entail acceptance of the Church's truth claims or acquiescence to any of its positions with which you disagree. All it requires is a very minimal amount of fundamental honesty.
Can you manage it?
<quoted text>
Holy run-on sentence, Batman!
The Church did not "literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years." You are, as usual, imagining a vast and sinister conspiracy where one does not exist.
<quoted text>
"Marriage equality" is not an issue; it's a reality. Every unmarried adult has the same right to enter into the mixed-sex institution of marriage as any other, and there are no "orientation" tests applied.
And the Church does not exercise "undue political influence." It occasionally makes its views known on issues that are in the public square; and some politicians, particularly those that have large LDS constituencies, take notice. I know some people think that is utterly disgusting, and would like to either silence churches or disenfranchise religious voters -- or both -- but, until the revolution, we have the same rights as everyone else.
<quoted text>
Now who's "playing the victim again in his/her own unique arrogant condescending way?"
<quoted text>
Thank you for proving me right.
Regards,
Moron the Jaredite

Quit saying there is marriage equality now and I just may start calling your political action corporation a religion. At least in your country there are civil unions. We can't even get that second-class treatment here due to your PAC's political funding and hysteria-stirring activities.
BTW, if you are so clever to rename someone else Dogbreath II, how do you like mine? I thought so.
Bye for now.

[Beautiful]

...other drivel excised....

Moron the Jaredite wrote:

<quoted text>
nobody else is under any obligation to see the issues the same way you do. Not seeing those issues your way does not automatically make anyone a "bigot."
And that's the way things are.
Regards,
Moron the Jaredite

You are correct in this particular bit above. Bigotry isn't automatic, it's earned. And you've quite earned the label.

[Rainbow Saint]

The mormon mafia still has those "church"-owned handcuffs they slap on people who aren't mormons.

To make matters worse, they disguise unmarked "church"-owned property as city-owned public spaces and use it to entrap non-mormons with their "church"-owned handcuffs.

Whats next, "church"-owned paddy wagons, fences and guard houses around their "churches", and secret hatcheries churning out prepubital girls for the "prophets" to chase around the "church" and make 'em scream?

You bet your magic underpants that's what they're up to.

They think throwing a few crumbs our way keeps us from looking their direction so closely, but we *all* know what they do inside those fake temples.

We're not easily fooled.

[NoMo]

Beautiful wrote:

Okay I'll bite since Mr. P seems to be playing the victim again in his own unique arrogant condescending way.
The fact that a so-called church has to be intimately involved with the politics of a city and a state in our nation in this day and age such as to literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years until its official pronouncement could be issued from the ivory temple, immediately upon which the ordinance's passage was unanimously issued by said governing body, says far more about the inappropriately-placed political power invested in said so-called church than anything about the ordinance itself.
Would the officials of the political action corporation masquerading as a church to sit on things a while longer, the people would simply be forced to wait. Because, quite simply, nothing happens in the theocratic state of Utah without the blessing of said corporation. It's today's equivalent of power invested in the Pope in the days of the Holy Roman Empire. One has to go back to the days of Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation to see any parallels to the political situation in Utah today.
This undue political influence by a religious corporation on the non-religious activities and actions of any civic legislative body and executive office far eclipses any single issue that I, who happen to be gay, would care about personally - even the marriage equality issue. That the corporation decided to toss a small, overdue olive twig the way of a group of people that it has repeatedly kicked, bullied, marginalized, hated, and disparaged for decades in and of itself is good. But it's not sufficient to silence critics such as me.
To continue to use its -your term, not mine- "shrill" rhetoric in declaring that gays are doing "violence" to the institution of marriage is equally ludicrous. More violence was done to those two young men who were simply engaging in activities of physical affection on Main Street, SLC than would ever be done to the institution of marriage were equality to be allowed in more states than those who already do so.
Show me the body bags and the physical injuries from all the violence done to religious people who happen to live in Massachusetts, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut. The sun still shines, their churches are still open, free to accept or turn away any candidates for marriage within their walls they wish. Heterosexual families are still permitted within their borders.

Amen, Beautiful..and I'll believe it when the Legislature ends its next session and doesn't pass something to usurp this.

[NoMo]

Pahoran wrote:

<quoted text>
The Church did not "literally hold a basic rights ordinance hostage for months and years." You are, as usual, imagining a vast and sinister conspiracy where one does not exist.

And the Church does not exercise "undue political influence." It occasionally makes its views known on issues that are in the public square; and some politicians, particularly those that have large LDS constituencies, take notice. I know some people think that is utterly disgusting, and would like to either silence churches or disenfranchise religious voters -- or both -- but, until the revolution, we have the same rights as everyone else.

You really have no clue about the LDS and its legislative stranglehold in Utah. Not a clue, Pahoran. Unless they deem it ok, it doesn't happen, period.

[Pahoran]

Rainbow Saint wrote:

The mormon mafia still has those "church"-owned handcuffs they slap on people who aren't mormons.

There is no "mormon [sic] mafia." There are security guards.

And if a person is being disruptive, they don't ask their religion.

Rainbow Saint wrote:

To make matters worse, they disguise unmarked "church"-owned property as city-owned public spaces and use it to entrap non-mormons with their "church"-owned handcuffs.

That's nonsense. The scofflaws in question knew they were on Church property, because one of them had previously been active in protesting against it.

And the Church Plaza was never "disguised" or "unmarked"; it always had signs. They just weren't obvious enough for the city attorney's taste.

Rainbow Saint wrote:

Whats next, "church"-owned paddy wagons, fences and guard houses around their "churches",

I would devoutly hope not.

Snip insane fantasies.

Rainbow Saint wrote:

We're not easily fooled.

If you actually believe the garbage you've spouted, you certainly are.

Regards,
Pahoran

[PLok]

I wonder if Lamb Chops would cream his pants if he was able to set foot on Temple Square?

[NiteClerk]

I'm always amused at how the homosexuals and atheists get so upset with the LDS for having a lot of influence in the Utah region. They won't acknowledge that that area was settled and developed mostly by members of the LDS. But now that there is wealth already created and it's a beautiful place to live the minority parasites get upset that they don't get to dictate the laws for the majority.

With their lack of morals and foresight they have turned California into a disease infested, bankrupt, polluted cesspool. Now like rats fleeing a sinking ship and spreading the plague they are trying to contaminate any other place where decent people just want to live, raise their families and worship GOD.

[Beautiful]

NiteClerk wrote:

I'm always amused at how the homosexuals and atheists get so upset with the LDS for having a lot of influence in the Utah region. They won't acknowledge that that area was settled and developed mostly by members of the LDS. But now that there is wealth already created and it's a beautiful place to live the minority parasites get upset that they don't get to dictate the laws for the majority.
With their lack of morals and foresight they have turned California into a disease infested, bankrupt, polluted cesspool. Now like rats fleeing a sinking ship and spreading the plague they are trying to contaminate any other place where decent people just want to live, raise their families and worship GOD.

Don't worry, Jim Crow. I think you're quite safe in good ol' Saint Louie. Oh wait - are there actually GAY people there too??? Just where can you run and hide from us? Answer - NOWHERE. Well, I suppose you can go to Iran, where the president SAYS there are no gay people (even though there really are).
Here's the issue in a nutshell - I have absolutely no problem in you worshiping whatever racist, sexist, gay-hating God you wish. Just don't expect me or other gay people to roll over while you try to dictate that I MUST worship your God in like fashion. Nor tell me that my relationship cannot stand on equal footing with yours OUTSIDE of your church. In the eyes of the state and federal governments in other words. And that SHOULD include states such as Utah, since last I checked Utah DID belong to the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom OF and FROM religion applies to ALL 50 STATES. That should also curtail influences religious organizations have in legislatures and executive offices of states, cities, and counties.
Only because you may agree with what Joseph Smith and Company, Incorporated is doing to gays and lesbians these days doesn't mean that someday some religion that you don't subscribe to will one day come forth and try to hold your own life hostage in some other way you might not exactly find comfortable. THEN you'll hope for the same kinds of religious separation we're hoping that Utah enjoys someday.
And this comes from a gay guy who's never been anywhere near California. Though if you're going to blame the gays for the problems out there, I think you'd better think about that for a while - News Flash - PROP H8 was DEFEATED. This means that gays are heavily outnumbered EVEN THERE. You're going to blame the pollution and the fiscal recklessness on the gays. I won't even get into the "disease infestation." Another news flash - if by that you mean AIDS, it exists in all 50 states, Missouri included.
Gays aren't running en masse to "invade" Utah any more than they are anywhere else. You really ought to get out more. Gay people are in your city, in your workplace, heck they probably even live in your neighborhood. There are no "gay ghettos" and if there were, they'd be so fashionable that straight people with any degree of taste would be clamoring to get in and immediately integrate it. That's exactly what has happened to neighborhoods in Chicago that were gentrified by gay people. Property values went up, and the straights bought a good number of the renovated homes.
And I know of haters like you who play it straight, are married with children and spout off the same types of hate you've just said here and then steal away to parks and public restrooms to try and get some elicit anonymous homosexual loving. Actually those types are much more dangerous to society than the open and honest ones who are out of the closet and live honest, loving lives as themselves.
So go on back and listen to Rush Limbaugh. I think he's on now.

[Beautiful]

NiteClerk wrote:

I'm always amused at how the homosexuals and atheists get so upset with the LDS for having a lot of influence in the Utah region. They won't acknowledge that that area was settled and developed mostly by members of the LDS. But now that there is wealth already created and it's a beautiful place to live the minority parasites get upset that they don't get to dictate the laws for the majority.
With their lack of morals and foresight they have turned California into a disease infested, bankrupt, polluted cesspool. Now like rats fleeing a sinking ship and spreading the plague they are trying to contaminate any other place where decent people just want to live, raise their families and worship GOD.

If this is a duplicate post I apologize. Original didn't show up.
Don't worry, Jim Crow. I think you're quite safe in good ol' Saint Louie. Oh wait - are there actually GAY people there too??? Just where can you run and hide from us? Answer - NOWHERE. Well, I suppose you can go to Iran, where the president SAYS there are no gay people (even though there really are).
Here's the issue in a nutshell - I have absolutely no problem in you worshiping whatever racist, sexist, gay-hating God you wish. Just don't expect me or other gay people to roll over while you try to dictate that I MUST worship your God in like fashion. Nor tell me that my relationship cannot stand on equal footing with yours OUTSIDE of your church. In the eyes of the state and federal governments in other words. And that SHOULD include states such as Utah, since last I checked Utah DID belong to the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom OF and FROM religion applies to ALL 50 STATES. That should also curtail influences religious organizations have in legislatures and executive offices of states, cities, and counties.
Only because you may agree with what Joseph Smith and Company, Incorporated is doing to gays and lesbians these days doesn't mean that someday some religion that you don't subscribe to will one day come forth and try to hold your own life hostage in some other way you might not exactly find comfortable. THEN you'll hope for the same kinds of religious separation we're hoping that Utah enjoys someday.
And this comes from a gay guy who's never been anywhere near California. Though if you're going to blame the gays for the problems out there, I think you'd better think about that for a while - News Flash - PROP H8 was DEFEATED. This means that gays are heavily outnumbered EVEN THERE. You're going to blame the pollution and the fiscal recklessness on the gays. I won't even get into the "disease infestation." Another news flash - if by that you mean AIDS, it exists in all 50 states, Missouri included.
Gays aren't running en masse to "invade" Utah any more than they are anywhere else. You really ought to get out more. Gay people are in your city, in your workplace, heck they probably even live in your neighborhood. There are no "gay ghettos" and if there were, they'd be so fashionable that straight people with any degree of taste would be clamoring to get in and immediately integrate it. That's exactly what has happened to neighborhoods in Chicago that were gentrified by gay people. Property values went up, and the straights bought a good number of the renovated homes.
And I know of haters like you who play it straight, are married with children and spout off the same types of hate you've just said here and then steal away to parks and public restrooms to try and get some elicit anonymous homosexual loving. Actually those types are much more dangerous to society than the open and honest ones who are out of the closet and live honest, loving lives as themselves.
So go on back and listen to Rush Limbaugh. I think he's on now.

[Beautiful]

Don't worry, Jim Crow. I think you're quite safe in good ol' Saint Louie. Oh wait - are there actually GAY people there too??? Just where can you run and hide from us? Answer - NOWHERE. Well, I suppose you can go to Iran, where the president SAYS there are no gay people (even though there really are).
Here's the issue in a nutshell - I have absolutely no problem in you worshiping whatever racist, sexist, gay-hating God you wish. Just don't expect me or other gay people to roll over while you try to dictate that I MUST worship your God in like fashion. Nor tell me that my relationship cannot stand on equal footing with yours OUTSIDE of your church. In the eyes of the state and federal governments in other words. And that SHOULD include states such as Utah, since last I checked Utah DID belong to the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights guaranteeing freedom OF and FROM religion applies to ALL 50 STATES. That should also curtail influences religious organizations have in legislatures and executive offices of states, cities, and counties.
Only because you may agree with what Joseph Smith and Company, Incorporated is doing to gays and lesbians these days doesn't mean that someday some religion that you don't subscribe to will one day come forth and try to hold your own life hostage in some other way you might not exactly find comfortable. THEN you'll hope for the same kinds of religious separation we're hoping that Utah enjoys someday.
And this comes from a gay guy who's never been anywhere near California. Though if you're going to blame the gays for the problems out there, I think you'd better think about that for a while - News Flash - PROP H8 was DEFEATED. This means that gays are heavily outnumbered EVEN THERE. You're going to blame the pollution and the fiscal recklessness on the gays. I won't even get into the "disease infestation." Another news flash - if by that you mean AIDS, it exists in all 50 states, Missouri included.
Gays aren't running en masse to "invade" Utah any more than they are anywhere else. You really ought to get out more. Gay people are in your city, in your workplace, heck they probably even live in your neighborhood. There are no "gay ghettos" and if there were, they'd be so fashionable that straight people with any degree of taste would be clamoring to get in and immediately integrate it. That's exactly what has happened to neighborhoods in Chicago that were gentrified by gay people. Property values went up, and the straights bought a good number of the renovated homes.
And I know of haters like you who play it straight, are married with children and spout off the same types of hate you've just said here and then steal away to parks and public restrooms to try and get some elicit anonymous homosexual loving. Actually those types are much more dangerous to society than the open and honest ones who are out of the closet and live honest, loving lives as themselves.
So go on back and listen to Rush Limbaugh. I think he's on now.