Comments

  1. says

    being from salt lake city, i’ve been paying a bit of attention to the kiss-ins and the actual first arrest which caused the rest of the rigamarole, and honestly, i’m ashamed of the gay community’s response.

    the two men were trespassing. simple fact. the LDS church has a right to their own rules on their own private property. they were asked to leave. twice, by security, and i’ve had this done to me, personally, when i lit up on temple square/main street plaza, not really thinking, and when my boyfriend and i were holding hands. the security team was very nice about it both times i was asked to put out the smoke/refrain from PDA with my boyfriend. the gay couple…was not so nice. and were drunk.

    part of the reason, i think, that this is being blown out of proportion is because the whole thing played out on the main street plaza section of the LDS property downtown. it’s kind of confusing for some people, i suppose, to accept that the city sold the property there to the LDS church. so what if it’s open air, no real ‘gates’ to speak of, it’s still their private property, and states so on either entrance on either side of the plaza

    so we’re celebrating a couple who doesn’t allow a private organization their private property rights? and a couple of belligerent drunks, at that? shameful. pathetic. whiny. embarrassing.

    they’re not martyrs.

    this whole ordeal makes me kind of want to shrink from the gay community for a while.

  2. says

    Well David, they have every right to tell us what to do on their own property and we have every right to protest the LDS church for their bigotry off property. The fact is, whether it is their property or not, they are guilty of discrimination. If two black people were asked to leave because they are black and don’t want to be seen, I’m sure it would also cause an even bigger nationwide incident.

    This “land” the LDS church owns is a part of a public area. If the LDS aren’t going to allow something that is perfectly legal to happen in their public area then the city needs to rezone them out.

  3. Paul R says

    I really question whether kiss-ins are an effective form of protest. They seem kind of immature.

    I don’t think it should be a big surprise that the LDS doesn’t like men kissing on their property, and I don’t think kiss-ins will make them rethink their stance.

  4. says

    “so we’re celebrating a couple who doesn’t allow a private organization their private property rights?”

    No. Since the couple was busted and kicked off the property, they hardly prevented the church from doing anything. What the Mormon church has the right to do and what they should do are two different things. This “private” property is a public thoroughfare. It is a public square in a city, privately owned. It’s not like the guys were making out on a Mormon’s private doorstep. (On the other hand, I’ve had uninvited Mormons on my doorstep many times with propaganda I find much more offensive than a kiss. They’ve also behaved rudely when asked to leave my property. Perhaps next time I’ll arrest them for trespassing? That would be as silly as what the church did.) The question is whether a straight couple engaging in exactly the same behavior would have been treated the same way? Highly unlikely. As Aiden Raccoon said, the Mormon church has the right to unreasonably enforce their double standards, but we also have a right to protest it. Policing kissing seems to me much more shameful behavior than anything the gay community is doing in response.

Leave A Reply