|
||
Deseret News :
A "kiss-in" drew about 60 people sporting pink paper hearts to the sidewalk just off of LDS Church property near Main Street and South Temple Sunday to protest actions taken by church security late last week.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The street in question was sold to the LDS church in a back door deal by the city counsel a few years back. Lawsuits failed to reverse the deal. Many of us in SLC still resent this.
"God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom."
I'm an atheist too. I swear to god.
You would think the Mormons are being forced to kissed other men and/or women on the cheek.
Nobody is telling them what to do.
We are saying the Mormon Church (nor any church) can tell anyone else who they can or cant CONSENSUALLY kiss on the cheek in public.
James Madison said:
".. no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. "
....so, neither should they presume to force their religion on innocent passers by.
Do you have a source for that quote? I like it.
Salt Lake City is actually a very nice place but I could not imagine trying to live there as a non LDS member. You would be relegated to permanent second-class citizen status.
ya think?
"No species has been found in which homosexual behaviour has not been shown to exist, with the exception of species that never have sex at all, such as sea urchins and aphids. Moreover, a part of the animal kingdom is hermaphroditic, truly bisexual. For them, homosexuality is not an issue."
"Petter Bøckman"
Just wondering how the religious/anti-Gay people on this post, square this information with their beliefs.
You know, God having created all things, etc. Man in his image, etc.
How does this fit with your whole "Gay is a choice" mantra?
How about the old anti-Gay saw: "it's against nature since Gays can't reproduce"?
I think those are logical questions.
Matthew 7. 3, 4, 5
"And why behold you the mote that is in your brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in your own eye? Or how will you say to your brother, Let me pull out the mote out of your eye; and, behold, a beam is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of your own eye; and then shall you see clearly to cast out the mote out of your brother's eye"
ah, quite the overlooked quote
church of 'false prophets' if ya ask me.....,
talibangelicals.....,
Why would anything else be expected from the LDS cult? Kudo's to the "kiss-in", but these folks will dig in and do what is expected, recoil in fear and loathing.
It's about respect, if you want respect GIVE IT. Visiting the Temple grounds and then show casing your intolerence for the L.D.S. belief system is as bad as what you think the L.D.S. did. The Temple grounds is owned by the LDS church, therefore it is considered private property. You're invited to come and visit, as long you have respect.
"Visiting the Temple grounds and then show casing your intolerence for the L.D.S. belief system is as bad as what you think the L.D.S. did. The Temple grounds is owned by the LDS church, therefore it is considered private property."
From what I understand, this couple was using a public access walkway while leaving a concert, at 10PM at night. This wasn't some attempt to disrespect the Mormon church, if it was, the couple would have walked through the path in the middle of the day to attract attention.
lds is a bunch of talibangelicals. they don't warrant respect.
They weren't on Temple Grounds.
I sympathize with gays wanting equal rights to marry but attacking a church is ridiculous. The Mormans and Christians have a right to their views even if you don't agree. This kind of behavior does nothing to change hearts and minds. It only solidifies the belief that gay people are evil and immoral.
yes they have a right to their views but not when they use that right to infringe upon others
I'm always amazed how many homophobes read the huffingtonpost.
Of course many of them don't realize they're homophobes.
Don't flaunt it, indeed. Well don't flaunt your heterosexuality, then! No weddings, no wedding announcements, no wedding rings, no woman shall change her name, ever.
Then we can talk about "don't flaunt it."
They trespassed on private property. Refused to leave when asked. Wasn`t anything about flaunting. They broke the law.
Do some research... harrassed and illegally detained.
AND... it was a public easement.
This is not about public vs. private property, or easements. This is plan and simply, two homophobic LDS church security guards seeing two men (gasp) hold hands, walking through a public right away that the church had bought from the city, and harrassed two gay men because they could.
Why is that conservatives will invariably side with property rights over human rights? This is about ethics, not property rights. You people throw morality out the window. Nothing is more important than capitalism, property, and cash.
So if I open a restaurant, can I put a "no Mormon's allowed sign on it?" What if I catch them praying and ask them to leave? Totally acceptable right? Had this been the case, you'd be up in arms about the "assault on religion."
Can you cite the exact law that says one person cannot kiss another on the cheek, in public? (NOT church law, civil)
If not then their tax exempt status should be REVOKED nation wide.
They have used the Police force to enforce Church dogma.
This is a horrendous abuse of the separation and state mandated in the FIRST AMMENDMENT of the US Constitution.
Why shouldn't we "flaunt" our heterosexuality? It's normal.
"Why shouldn't we "flaunt" our heterosexuality? It's normal."
Than you're argument is that homosexuality is not, despite reams of scientific evidence to contradict you? Let me guess... the gay agenda has infiltrated the scientific community right?
Remember it's on private property that the prompting incident happened, I dunno how clearly marked it is but ya see the same thing at the entrance to shopping malls. If they are so upset, where's the rich LGBT person to go out and buy the strip of land with the crossing walkway and 'donate' it to the public,
I'm sure the MC has their price.
This organization operated very similarly to a cult. They would not do that, and they certainly wouldn't sell their property for that purpose, especially this particular property. I am going to assume that maybe you don't know much about this religion. Think Scientology, but older.
"Remember it's on private property that the prompting incident happened"
Yeah not exactly. It's a public easement, so the private property argument isn't so clear cut.
Not to mention it appears they were detained illegally by the rent-a-cops.
How ignorant and intolerant is the ........."best country in the world"
But, when Christians attempted to preach at a gay rights parade in Pennsyvania, they were charged under a "hate crimes" law.
But, gays do this, and disrupt a Church service in Michigan, and get away with it.
Prove this with a link please.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/feb/05021808.html
Read here. The charges were eventually dropped. But, I don't don't see where ANYTHING is being done to stop gays harassing Christians.
Yes, those damned gays, with their intolerance of hatred and bigotry, and their affection toward each other.....time was we could just arrest or enslave those different from us and have the lord's blessing to do it, too. Damned progress. It's downright un-American.
Praise Jeezis and pass the ammunition.
Sources please.
That's what I figured... Now the crickets are chirping.
I read both stories before myself. They may just not be able to find the links.
One side is trying to deny civil rights to the other. The religious are the aggressors in this scenario.
Not that all religious people are hateful homophobes.
Who were the aggressors in this one?
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4504/anarchists_go_to_church/
And, in this case, there were no "hate crime" charges.
|
||
Loading comments…
First Posted: 07-12-09 06:08 PM | Updated: 07-12-09 06:11 PM