Gay Couple Detained After Kissing On Plaza Owned By Mormon Church

SALT LAKE CITY — A gay couple say they were detained by security guards on a plaza owned by the Mormon church and later cited by police, claiming it stemmed from a kiss on the cheek.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said that the men became argumentative and refused to leave after being asked to stop their "inappropriate behavior." The men say they were targeted because they are gay.

Matt Aune said he and his partner, Derek Jones, were walking home from a concert nearby on Thursday night, cutting through the plaza near the Salt Lake City Mormon temple.

Aune, 28, said he gave Jones, 25, a hug and kiss and that the two were then approached by a security guard, who asked them to leave, telling them they were being inappropriate and that public displays of affection aren't allowed on the property. He said other guards arrived and the men were handcuffed.

"We asked what we were doing wrong," Aune told The Associated Press.

Church spokeswoman Kim Farah said in a statement Friday that the men were "politely asked to stop engaging in inappropriate behavior _ just as any other couple would have been."

"They became argumentative and used profanity and refused to leave the property," she said. The church did not immediately respond to a request for more comment.

Police later arrived and both men were cited with misdemeanor trespassing, Salt Lake City Police Sgt. Robin Snyder said.

"It doesn't matter what they were asked to leave for," Snyder said. "If they are asked to leave and don't they are ... trespassing."

The church has been the target of protests over its support of a ban on gay marriage in California.

Comments

[lizzytushy]

Gay or not they were trespassing. They had not right to be on private property. And it doesn't matter what they were doing they had not right trespassing.

[nartheon]

You're right. I'm an openly gay man who lives in downtown Salt Lake 5 blocks from Temple Square. I think its stupid that people are trying to make an issue out of this. Does the LDS church support gay people? No. Do they have the right to control their own property? Yes.

As a gay man who lives in Utah I'd much rather spend my time ane see my community around important causes like employment discrimination, housing discrimination, hospital visitation and other things that actually matter instead of wasting my time trying to win the right to kiss on someone elses religious site.

And to all the people on here who feel like they need to insult Salt Lake - get a life. I've lived here 4 years now and have had very positive experiences as a gay man. The people here are great. Yes, there are homophobes but I'm sure there are a bunch wherever you live too.

[tremendo]

I am proud of this couple. If more gays refused more often they'd have gay rights a lot sooner.
May more of them stand up for their rights in this so called Godly country of Utah that revers in creating hatred and violence.

[emsk]

You're proud of this couple for going onto private property in a drunken stupor and displaying inappropriate behavior?

The actual police report has been released to the public, you know. You might want to go and read it. That way you won't have to speculate about the situation or the "Godly country of Utah".

[tremendo]

The highest suicide rate in the country stems from gay people not wanting to be gay because of society's pressure. The highest rate within that rate is gay mormons. So gay mormons are the highest suicide rate in the country.
I am not a mormon and I am not gay but I have a mormon friend who's grandparents refused to see him any longer because he is gay.
The mormon church also discriminated against blacks for the longest time and would still do so today if it wasn't that it's become such a liability for them. Yet they condoned poligamy. To me it's been a very hypocritical doctrine.
I am not black either by the way and I do condone poligamy as long as everyone is aware.

Don't get me wrong, I love Donny and Marie, and I am glad that Jimmy made it through all of this, but can't everyone see that this is not loving and that this is not what God would want them to be like?
Creating such a big suicide rate is not good.
Yes, these two guys might have yelled back at the guards and refused to leave and taken out for trespassing, but didn't Plessy and Rosa refuse to leave their seats in the bus? didn't Wong Wing refuse to leave the USA? (Wong Wing vs. The United States of America, 1896).

[egbdf]

Where did you get your facts about gay Mormons and suicide?
As for your friend, that is his grandparent's doing, not the Mormon church. And who is to say it isn't just because they are "old fashioned"? Yet, it is tragic that they would do that and a loss on both sides.
Ah, the black argument again. Actually, there was a black man in the beginning of the Mormon church..
Elijah Abel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elijah_Abel
But it was partly because America wasn't ready to deal with acceptance of blacks that the Mormon church couldn't deal with it-it would have made many divisions amongst its members, amongst other reasons. Thank goodness for the Civil Rights Movement it made it possible.
The whole bit is that the Mormon church isn't against gay people. More so, it is for protecting how it defines marriage- A thin line and one that is easily blurred. Even with testimonials from both sides, we will never know the exact truth of what happened with the couple and the security guards, but for all I can tell, there is fault on both sides, especially since I don't remember reading that Plessy and Rosa were inebriated and swearing at people, and I know a lot of men, Mormon or not who have their gaydars on.

[Forest]

The Mormon missionaries work to indoctrinate new members into their church. When they encourage
undocumented citizens to join their church do they pay for their healthcare and schooling? Otherwise,
while the Church benefits from new membership paying 10% tithing, the rest of US citizens are left with
those costs.

[emsk]

the rest of the US citizens? What have you been smoking?
When did you donate any money to the LDS Church?
You and other US citizens haven't paid anything that has to do with the LDS Church.

As a member of the church some less fortunate people can get a "loan" for further education. But the intention is for them to pay it back when they are in a better situation. That's what LOANS do.

[jmidnightwarrior]

Since when should someone have to take out a loan for their kid to get schooled K-12? We aren't talking college age here. At least, if I read this right. They are talking about baptizing illegal aliens into their church, and the Mormons reap the benefits of the added tithing from these members, while the rest of us US citizens, outside of the church, pick up the tab for the public education, healthcare, etc.

Sounds like you need to check that Mormon stuff you seem to be smoking, not the other way around.

Yet, another excellent argument for losing their tax exempt status.

[4 Real]

I'm a lesbian and living in the N. East. I've visited many a gay community as well as NYC and Boston and the sight of LBGT showing affection is quite common. I've also visited Salt Lake and the not too subtle cultural differences are there, including censoring Family Guy (I only mention it because it cracked me up), lots of LDS gift shops with "my first mission" gifts right along side first communion and baptism cards, alcohol restrictions and tons of churches every few miles, just to name a few.
It's not an enlightened town and I would not want to be gay growing up there.

[LintLass]

In the city, we got a *lot* of refugees from Utah and Mormon families. Horror stories aplenty.

Not that mainstream churches are necessarily any bargain when it comes to abuse of LBGT kids and women, but the *severity and frequency* of cases, (not to mention religiousl­y-organize­d pursuit by abusers) is something that I really think the LDS church ought to acknowledge, and maybe look for one of those 'new revelations' about. I'm sure a lot of well-intentioned Mormons can't even see this, but, I assure you. There's a problem.

It's not good.

And especially after the major injection of funding to lie to Californian voters about what Prop 8 would do, you're very short on credibility with anyone LBGT, obviously.

I know it'll just be taken as 'hostility toward righteous we,' but, really, you lose your 'oppressed minority' privileges when you try joining up with the bullies and think going after another minority will help you.

[tomcatv1]

Of course they were detained. Isn't this Utah, the Afghanistan of the West with the the Mormons running the place like the Taliban?

[4 Real]

Pretty much.

[tremendo]

LOL!!

[Mormondude]

The story doesn't pass the smell test.

They claim that they were walking home, and only used the plaza as a shortcut. And yet, when a security guard approaches them and asks them to continue on their way, they engage in a confrontation rather than continuing home? Makes no sense unless they were trying to create a scene.

Their story is like saying they were offended by a traffic cop waving them through a busy intersection. Laughable.

[Gnrshrtd]

Blaming the victim doesn't help anyone. I want to see the tapes of their alleged misbehavior - not questionable accusations by prejudiced private police hired by known homophobes.

[MSNichols]

Would it not be possible that when confronted with blatant discrimination they might themselves have been offended and stood up for their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

[VoiceOfConcern]

Your smell test doesn't pass the smell test

[4 Real]

This happens all the time to gays, even in gay friendly towns. Some of us are used to it, some of us overlook it to avoid a confrontation (some of us have been badly beaten up) and some of us are just sick of it. If these guys felt like they were being singled out because of who they are, they had every right to object.

[emsk]

Give me a break. You people are commenting on something you know nothing about. They were on PRIVATE PROPERTY...owned by the LDS Church. Please...according to real laws...they have the right to accept what they want on private property. Anyone is accepted there as long as they go by the rules the church has stipulated.

Oh...and by the way the police report has now been made public. Looks like it was more than just a kiss...and secondly...they were drunk!

Think it might have been to make a scene? DUH!

[LintLass]

I think too many of us here are familiar with the passive-aggressive with-badge technique of religious-­conservati­ve police harassment that attempts to stay just-this-­side-of-th­e law, (not always expertly) while still being threatening and intimidating, ...people who stop you walking down the street in a threatening manner just this side of deniable, to demand ID or your home address, then say , 'Move along, you're loitering. '

Quite often they'll use slurs, or imply such, ...try to get *you* to volunteer some information about your religion or sexuality, ....playing dumb while looking like you know both your rights and and what they're talking about, tends to cheese *them* off, but also works pretty well.

Asking for badge numbers with great courtesy before they have a chance to escalate is a good idea in these situations. Actively-bigoted people with badges are often considered problem-children in their local department, especially rookies, who'll tend to have more zeal than experience, (And less sense of what to just let go, in the first place. Not all people in uniform are bad guys, but some do use them to continue bullying when out of school, or try to advance agendas which are not the public trust. )

If it's just about an affectionate kiss or you holding hands, then make *them* say what it's about.

[Rimaroka]

I think the guard's, and by extension, the Mormon Church's, stance of the reason for detaining the couple was "inappropriate behavior" should be tested with a hetrosexual couple or two being sent, in the same area, with the same guards, doing the same thing. Let's see if the guards detain them. I highly doubt it. This same kind of action occured recently in, I think, El Paso, or in Texas somewhere. A gay couple kissed in a restaurant and were told by the security guard there to leave. An actual police officer, who was called to the scene, even threatened the couple with a citation for "homosexual behavior", even though the Supreme Court ruled such a ban unconstitutional years ago.
I'm sensing a pattern here, in these recent news reports.

[JackNasty]

Demonstrators were not allowed to enter the Main Street plaza. Linked below is a photo taken today of a straight couple kissing in the Main Street Plaza with two plump Mormon security guards watching in the background, taking no action.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/photo.php?pid=432403&o=all&op=1&view=all&subj=102149812893&aid=-1&id=1453263161&oid=102149812893

[Disuberence]

I can't see that. No Facebook :(

[Freethinkinggal]

Big deal, I personally don't want my children to see two gay people kissing in public. I am sure there are alot of people who agree with me.

[MSNichols]

Thank you for posting the pictures.
I was happy to see all the straight people joining in and supporting the community and demonstrating that in even in strongholds of bigotry, that progressive people are willing to take a stand against discrimination.

Awesome!

[Mort]

"... should be tested with a hetrosexual couple or two being sent, in the same area, with the same guards, doing the same thing. "

Ok, send in a hetero couple and have them go ballistic, yelling profanities and refusing to leave, which is what the other couple did. I bet they'll get the same result!

Kissing is NOT the reason they were ejected from the plaza.

[Disuberence]

Please. If they were a heterosexual couple they wouldn't even have been approached.

[LintLass]

It's the reason they were stopped as they passed through Main Street and had some religious police intrude on their evening and demand they obey the dictates of their religion, though.

The couple didn't just up and 'go ballistic' at rent-a-cops.

[Natashavcxz]

So on private property, non-owners start swearing and arguing with the owners, and then refuse to leave private property when asked, and then they are the victims? People confuse where they stand on marriage vs. homosexuality -- with the other issues of basic civility, property rights, etc. If you think the gays were right, then do Bible preachers have the right to enter the yard of some gay person's house and start preaching repentance and hurling insults and profanity -- and then refuse to leave even if the gay person asks them repeatedly? If you have intellectual integrity, you would support both or oppose both. But legally, independent of what you choose, our laws support private property rights.

[Sepulchre]

Yeap, and I bet when Mormon couples are married they harrase them for kissing.

[Mort]

Mormon couples aren't married on the plaza.

[VoiceOfConcern]

1) Context is important.

2) The private property in this case was formerly public property & is commonly used by the Pubic, for pedestrian travel.

3) A "Plaza", that is the property of a Private Concern (LDS), that used to be a public street is a far cry from the home & yard of a private person.

4) therefore the example you cite is not similar in context, to the actual situation that occurred.

5) That being the case, why do you bring up the issue of intellectual integrity?

[emsk]

Just because it "was" public doesn't mean it's public any more. The ACLU tried to push this down the people throats, too. And lost in court!

[Smokin32]

They have every right to ask them to leave and they have every right to even ban gay kissing from their street (debatable since there are discrimination laws out there). But they have NO right to unlawfully detain anyone for "trespassing". They can call the police, but private security CAN NOT cuff you and treat you like a criminal for kissing someone on the cheek.

[LintLass]

It's still a public right-of-way. Much like the legally-problematic city streets which were turned into de facto 'malls' masquerading as city centers full of local business, but which suddenly fall under 'private property rights' if rent-a-cops want to hassle 'undesirables' or keep journalists away.

The deal under which the LDS church 'acquired' this section of Main street is known to have been shady and against the public interest, anyway. It was meant to use just this loophole to prevent anyone from ever protesting anything they do. Perhaps it should be re-examined.

[LintLass]

It's not that dissimilar to the Christian Science Church complex in Boston, (though they have a far better legal claim to own the property, and I suspect this is much more about 'image' than trying to impose 'morality' on passersby,) ...but they try to encourage 'desirable' people to pass through and hang out there by the big reflecting pool, (it happens to be the shortest way between a train stop and the Mass Ave bus lines) but if they decide they don't like the look of you, 'security' might stop you halfway and have you go back as you came and walk all the way around the complex. In the case I'll not soon forget, it was probably about looking a little too *homeless* rather than anything about LBGT, ...since I was alone and limping along with some exhaustion, hunger, and physical ailments that occasioned my going through that space to begin with just to try and get somewhere.

The guards were ....unsympathetic, to say the least, to my obvious physical distress. Guess 'moral people' aren't supposed to have any of that or something.

When we talk about this, we hear a lot about what some 'don't want to look at.'

Maybe these churches who claim such authority in the name of Christ really ought to take some perspective on what their actions say about them.

*Especially* the Mormons, who pretty much make a *sacrament* of going onto other people's private property and insulting them with a smile.

[akkadian]

everyone knows these particular church members were immaculately conceived, not a kiss in sight...
kiss me quick!

[Gnrshrtd]

Was the property posted as private?
Were behavior guidelines posted?
If so, what behaviors were proscribed?
If so, what consequences were posted?
Were non-gay couples ever treated the same way?
Where do 'public accommodations' rights fit in here, since it appears anyone is free to "trespass" on this semi-public property at will.

Just questions . . .

[LintLass]

It's a public right of way the LDS Church shouldn't even *own* given how the deal was done. Straight couples kiss in that area all the time, it's been reported. Clearly the church feels it has a right to accost anyone with a bunch of private cops if they don't like a minority, though.

[jjfaux]

Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project, Harvard Centre for Population and Development Studies, said that 'the evidence confirms the Pope is correct in his assessment that condom distribution exacerbates the problem of AIDS. Or to put it a better way, the best evidence we have supports the Pope's comments.'

The Harvard AIDS Project's webpage on Dr Green lists his book Rethinking AIDS Prevention: Learning from Successes in Developing Countries. Green reveals: 'The largely medical solutions funded by major donors have had little impact in Africa, the continent hardest hit by AIDS. Instead, relatively simple, low-cost behavioural change programs - stressing increased monogamy and delayed sexual activity for young people - have made the greatest headway in fighting or preventing the disease's spread.'

[LintLass]

Relevance to this topic?

[MSNichols]

Exactly.

[Sepulchre]

So I am wondering why the CDC among others lists the rates of teen pregnancy highest among the abstinence only teaching states? I hardly think it's a coincidence.

[HumeSkeptic]

Mormons experienced intolerance from Christians.
Mormon Church should be ashamed of their intolerance of gays.

[Mort]

Haven't more than a couple of people actually read the article? The headline is misleading. No one was harassed or detained for kissing. They kissed and a security guard politely asked them not to. However you feel about the public display of affection (I don't have a problem with it) the whole thing was short, well mannered and should have been over with.

But the two guys decided to take it to the next level by going ballistic, loud and vulgar. They were asked to leave and they refused and escalated. That's why they were removed.

I'm all for tolerance and equality across the board. A militant approach does nothing to foster those goals.

[HumeSkeptic]

Does the Mormon Church support equal rights for gays and lesbians?
Yes or no?

[zetacplus]

No they do not believe in equal rights, the Mormons were behind the huge yes on prop 8 campaign in California. What sickens me is the Mormon church HQ is in SLC so why are they putting their nose into something that deals with California? If you don't think that is scary, you should. Why are they meddling in the affairs of other states? Now they are sending money to Maine because they just allowed gay marriages and the Mormons are trying to get another anti gay marriage measure passed there, why? If they want that in Utah then let them and their citizens vote on it, I just don't see how they can be allowed to push for anti gay laws in other states. But I guess if they want to throw their money away they can because it will eventually be ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I just don't get it. How does allowing gays to marry affect someone elses marriage? Marriage is a contract between two people, it shouldn't matter if those people are gay or straight.

[emsk]

NO...just like most Christian Churches. Not a big surprise. They're a church!

[VoiceOfConcern]

I read the article.

You say the Security Guard was polite. On what do you base that statement? Certainly not on the text of the article? We don't know what words, nor the manner the officer used. There are a whole range of ways it could have been done. Based on the above article, that information is simply not available to us.

We do know that Matt Aune asked what they were doing wrong. Which is a perfectly reasonable & not particularly "militant" question. Many do not like it when the basis for their authority is questioned. Some respond poorly. Some respond well. Given that this issue has National attention, I'd have to say, in this case, the Security Officers responded poorly.

And for what it's worth, I have had to ask folks to leave private property dozens of times.

[loutreverte]

Based on what I have read and seen any rational person would assume they were on public property (i.e. a normal street) in that situation. Only the corruption in the state of Utah has even allowed the Mormons to control this land and use it to silence free speech and free conduct.

If rent-a-cops come up and hassle me on ostensibly public property, then I am unlikely to comply. Funny how conservatives hate government 'intrusion' but then expect others to be meekly submissive to authority figures.

[somsoc]

It is Utah, the LDS church controls the state. Major legislation does not get to the floor of the legislature without passing before the hierarchy of the mor0n church. They control the elections at every level of government with very rare exception, that even includes at the state colleges and universities. They are the gest@po.

[JackNasty]

Mort's version of the story omits statements by the couple that the security guards never did ask them to leave. The couple says they and were prevented from doing so by the security guards who pushed one of the victims the ground and handcuffed both of them. As any reasonable person can see, there are two very different accounts of this story.

No where any any of the published accounts I have read does any witness state that the victims "went ballistic and were loud and vulgar" as Mort claims. The Mormon church spokesperson only said, ""They became argumentative and used profanity and refused to leave the property,"

What exactly constitutes vulgarity to a Mormon Church spokesperson? What constitutes argumentative? Any disagreement with authority is problematic for the Mormon Church. Why the vague, inflammatory generalizations "argumentative" and"vulgarity" that could mean anything when a specific description would clear things up?

Does holding hands or a giving someone a kiss on the cheek constitute vulgarity to Mormons? They haven't applied that standard to heterosexual couples who kiss and cuddle on the Main Street Plaza. Why should it apply to gay couples?

Demonstrators were not allowed to enter the Main Street plaza. Linked below is a photo taken today of a straight couple kissing in the Main Street Plaza with two fat Mormon security guards watching in the background.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/photo.php?pid=432403&o=all&op=1&view=all&subj=102149812893&aid=-1&id=1453263161&oid=102149812893

[Mort]

"went ballistic and were loud and vulgar" as Mort claims. The Mormon church spokesperson only said, ""They became argumentative and used profanity and refused to leave the property,"

I say tomato, you say tomahto.

[jmidnightwarrior]

Out of personal experience, I can state that the phrase "shut up" is considered swearing by Mormons. And before Mort the Ignorant wants to contradict me, my own husband has been called in by his superiors at the high school he used to teach at and raked over the coals for using this phrase on his classes when they will not follow the simple instructions of "Please be quiet" or "Quiet please" etc. Because of the lack of discipline in the students at least in the northern end of Happy Valley, this was the last resort.

Results--at least one student got her knickers in a twist and cried to Mommy and Daddy, who in turn blasted the principal, who in turn blasted my husband for 'swearing' at the students. This was the beginning of the end at that high school, and anyone who read his post on them 'boycotting' him out of his position there, would know we found out it was because he wasn't Mormon, and the parents didn't want him teaching their children.

The current principal has even stated "if I were man enough, I would put an end to this, but I'm not man enough". He knew this discrimination was wrong, but he chose to do nothing. My husband has transferred to a principal who has the (equipment) to oppose this kind of abuse.

I'd love to hear from the spokeperson of THE church , as to what constitutes vulgarity, inappropriate behavior, and being argumentative.

[jmidnightwarrior]

I think the main thing about your redundant comments is that you can't let it go. At least not until everyone on this forum agrees with you. Which won't happen.

Yes, they had the right to tell/ask them to leave. No, they did not have the right to detain them. The display of affection is only a secondary issue, and others have been brought up because of it. They get brought up also, because some members refuse to let things drop, refuse to get out of other people's faces. And this kind of attitude opens the Mormon church up to negative media coverage every time because of it.

Is this right? Not necessarily. If the members were behaving appropriately, living their own religion instead of always trying to cram it down other people's throats, then the Mormons would find themselves in the media hardly at all. The Mormon religion, contrary to what bull the members get fed, are a very small minority in this nation. They are not worth mentioning by other Christians, Pagans, Jews or Muslims or any other religious beliefs interests.

The issue is now, whether the detainment was lawful, and it does look as if the bigotted actions of a couple of security guards may have cost the church, yet again, a 'settle out of court' lawsuit. This happens so often, and yet many outside of Utah aren't aware of it. The Mormon church is constantly having to settle many lawsuits against them, out of court.

[MSNichols]

Any word on the "kiss in" in SLC today?