‘Marriage sovereignty’ bill proposed in Utah could infringe on rights of same-sex couples

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SALT LAKE CITY -- A new bill was introduced at the State Capitol Thursday, and some say that, if passed, the bill could infringe on the rights of same-sex couples.

The bill, HB 393, is sponsored by Representative LaVar Christensen, R-District 32.

"The bill seems to claim that even though same-sex couples can now marry in Utah and in all 50 states, that they might not be able to adopt children in the state of Utah," said U of U law professor Clifford Roskey.

Lisa and Trudy Hardin-Reynolds have two adopted daughters. They said this new bill makes them feel like second-class citizens.

"It's frustrating, I thought we had it made, I thought it was done, I thought it was a done deal," said Trudy Hardin-Reynolds.

"Yeah, we shouldn't keep having this same conversation," Lisa Hardin Reynolds said. "We are entitled to those same rights, the Supreme Court has ruled on families everywhere."

According to Rosky, HR 393 declares that even though same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, the state of Utah still has the ability to hold onto every last bit of authority when it comes to family law.

"I don't think this bill does much," Roskey said. "I think it's Rep. Christensen trying to send a message to the Supreme Court that he doesn't like what they decided this summer on same-sex marriage."

FOX 13 News reached out to Christensen several times Thursday for comment on this story but has yet to receive a response.

27 comments

  • Daniel Gray

    Ok ONE MORE TIME for the peanuts that dont get it. ALl the Supreme court did was to say that laws that ban SSM have to be removed. They did NOT make this legal as they CANT make it legal. According to the US Constitution Article 1 Section 1, only the US CONGRESS can make a law-give weight of law or change a law. Not the President nor the Supreme Court. So until the Congress passes a law the way the US Constitution requires, then it is NOT legal an cant be legal as it is NOT a law!

    • allthumbs

      The religious right seems to have grown fond of sound ass kickings. Too bad we’re all stuck with the legal bills.

  • ERIC ANDERSON

    What percentage of gays even want to get married? In the Bell and Weinberg study 28% of homosexual men had more than 1000 partners, 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, and 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners. 79% of homosexual men say over half of sex partners are strangers.

    https://carm.org/statistics-homosexual-promiscuity

  • Jeff Anderson

    “Good grief!” groaned the ones who had stars at the first.
    “We’re still the best Sneetches and they are the worst.
    But, now, how in the world will we know,” they all frowned,
    “If which kind is what, or the other way round?”
    Then up came McBean with a very sly wink
    And he said, “Things are not quite as bad as you think.
    So you don’t know who’s who. That’s perfectly true.
    But come with me, friends. Do you know what I’ll do?
    I’ll make you, again, the best Sneetches on beaches
    And all it will cost you is ten dollars eaches.”

  • T

    Conservatives will never let up on bills that introduce discrimination in one way or another. Time to move out of the state.

  • sobu

    No, Eric Anderson, I don’t have any plans with my husband and kids this weekend. I am 25 and haven’t let the LDS church, or any church for that matter, influence my preparedness to settle down. And I know you’re brainwashed but you’re probably not stupid so stop making yourself look it by stating to the world “gays in san francisco” are the only one with AIDS. AIDS affects everyone dink. Also, in case you didn’t realize, there’s a larger population of gays here. Maybe YOU should move…to the middle of nowhere preferably.

    • bob

      Correction: AIDS can theoretically affect anyone, but the odds of a non drug user in a mutually monogamous relationship getting AIDS are on a par with getting hit by a meteorite.

      99% of HIV infections are the result of lifestyle choices. I have no realistic chance of ever getting HIV. It’s not even on my most distant radar screen of things to worry about.

      Just because you CAN get it doesn’t mean you’re “at risk.” The people who are “at risk” are the same ones who have always been at risk. And we all know who they are.

      • ERIC ANDERSON

        @NAME
        Correction Name: People who cross with the light instead of against it are far less likely to get run over.

    • ERIC ANDERSON

      @SOBU
      Yes SOBU thank you for making my point. Homosexuals generally have little interest in settling down with just one husband. It would cramp your style.

  • ERIC ANDERSON

    @NAME
    We don’t want to force our religious lifestyle down your throat Name. We are just disinterested in the deviates in San Francisco that have received the gift of HIV or AIDS. It comes with the territory.

Comments are closed.