Gay couple detained near MORMAN plaza

[voggmo]

Every paragraph was relevant to topic related article. No lie. Title deleted, therefore not whole article posted.


& this below isn't trolling & offtopic?


Urine can be used as fertiliser. Urination in public parks should be considered tax deductible.


Someone's picking on Voggy again.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Every paragraph was relevant to topic related article. No lie.


& this below isn't trolling & offtopic?


Urine can be used as fertiliser. Urination in public parks should be considered tax deductible.


Someone's picking on Voggy again.

Was "Comments to PM" unclear?

 

[voggmo]

Clear enough, but not sent to other non topic posting troll posters. Please include others in rule enforcement instead of discriminatory procedure.

Will PM you.

 

[iguana_tonante]

A simple kiss on the property of one of the most anti-homo churches out there. The single biggest source of revenue for the Salt Lake Region and the Faith of many of it's lawmakers. [...]

What I see happening here is two gay-rights activists trying to make a name for themselves by snogging on church property and resisting arrest. All we have is their word vs the guard's words.

Frankly, the issue simply boils down to this: They are looking for attention they got attention and this thread will be nine pages by this time tomorrow.

And rightly so. As the song goes, times are a-changing. Sometimes you have to make a stance.

Scoffing at the law for the sake of "causing trouble" ranks rather low in my opinion. The Latter Day Saints church represents less than 30 million people worldwide, so it's not like you are protesting/trying to overthrow a far-reaching repressive regime.

Civil disobedience is recognized way of making your point and pushing your issues into the spotlight.

Plec, you are a cool guy. But I don't agree with your church's stance on this, and I think people has the right to protest it.


Following section deleted in the name of justice and good will.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Alright, let's not hit voggmo when he's down please. Let's get back on the original topic. Thanks.

 

[J.T.B.]

Re: Gay couple detained near Mormon plaza

J.T.B. - It is also legal in most places to resist someone who assaults you, and I'd say trying to put someone in handcuffs qualifies as just that.

You would be wrong. Under Utah law assault requires bodily injury or the threat of bodily injury. Placing handcuffs on a person causes no bodily injury, and neither of the arrested parties has claimed they were injured.

Privte security personnel put handcuffs on people like shoplifters and disorderly drunks all the time, it is well established that it is legal. You're barking up the wrong tree, there.

--Justin

 

[exodus]

I've got a question: Just how private is private property that can be used as a public thoroughfare? The Plaza is used by the general public and not fenced off. So since it is open, is it truly private?

Does my home and yard have to be fenced off to still be private property?

Cutting through my yard is still by law trespassing.

Your yard is open to the public?

What?

Your home and yard are private property just like this church was.
A fence isn't a requirement to declaire private property.
Look it up, it's part of the law.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Something I should have raised earlier

It is sad to think that the Mormons think that acts of affection should not be seen when it was quite normal for two men to kiss in the culture that Jesus himself belong to.

 

[exodus]

Something I should have raised earlier

It is sad to think that the Mormons think that acts of affection should not be seen when it was quite normal for two men to kiss in the culture that Jesus himself belong to.

As was persecution and brutal punishment.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Something I should have raised earlier

It is sad to think that the Mormons think that acts of affection should not be seen when it was quite normal for two men to kiss in the culture that Jesus himself belong to.

As was persecution and brutal punishment.

But Jesus didn't indulge in persecution and brutal punishment but he did allow men, amd women, to kiss him.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Does my home and yard have to be fenced off to still be private property?

Cutting through my yard is still by law trespassing.

Your yard is open to the public?

What?

Your home and yard are private property just like this church was.
A fence isn't a requirement to declaire private property.
Look it up, it's part of the law.

His point was that even though it is private property, the square represents a major thoroughfare through the city, at least from what I gathered by the description earlier in the thread.

It would be as if your property extended from your house and yard through the street to the house on the other side, which would make going around it extremely inconvenient.

It kind of muddies the issue a bit.

 

[exodus]

Your yard is open to the public?

What?

Your home and yard are private property just like this church was.
A fence isn't a requirement to declaire private property.
Look it up, it's part of the law.

His point was that even though it is private property, the square represents a major thoroughfare through the city, at least from what I gathered by the description earlier in the thread.

It would be as if your property extended from your house and yard through the street to the house on the other side, which would make going around it extremely inconvenient.

It kind of muddies the issue a bit.

Under law, isn't it still trespassing?

 

[exodus]

Something I should have raised earlier

It is sad to think that the Mormons think that acts of affection should not be seen when it was quite normal for two men to kiss in the culture that Jesus himself belong to.

As was persecution and brutal punishment.

But Jesus didn't indulge in persecution and brutal punishment but he did allow men, amd women, to kiss him.

If we go by the police report, they were doing more that kissing plus publically intoxicated to boot.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

What?

Your home and yard are private property just like this church was.
A fence isn't a requirement to declaire private property.
Look it up, it's part of the law.

His point was that even though it is private property, the square represents a major thoroughfare through the city, at least from what I gathered by the description earlier in the thread.

It would be as if your property extended from your house and yard through the street to the house on the other side, which would make going around it extremely inconvenient.

It kind of muddies the issue a bit.

Under law, isn't it still trespassing?

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that if you're going to buy what was formerly a major street in a large city you should be a little more lax in cracking down on what happens there. Would a couple kissing be off limits in any other park or street? Do they come down equally hard on heterosexual couples kissing in the plaza? Are there signs clearly visible stating that any public displays of affection are off-limits and that this area is owned by the LDS church?

 

[Miss Chicken]

Were the police there?

It is solely thw word of the security guards against the word of the two gay guys.

If the police thought that the two guys had behave indecently and were also intoxicated why were they only charged with trespass?

As far as I can see that report only has the two gay guys admittting they had been drinking not that they were intoxicated.

Also, according to the guys, when they were asked to leave they didn't realise that the men in the suits were Church security. Unless the security guards (who were dressed in suits) properly identified themselves (which the security guard said he did, but the gays said they didn't at first) than would the guys be expected to obey the order to leave.

It also looked like the guys mistakedly believed that the Plaza was a public space. That imight be the truthif it had always been open to the public.

It seems that one of the gays told the security to call the police. If the gays were quite willing to wait for the police why the need for handcuffs?

 

[exodus]

His point was that even though it is private property, the square represents a major thoroughfare through the city, at least from what I gathered by the description earlier in the thread.

It would be as if your property extended from your house and yard through the street to the house on the other side, which would make going around it extremely inconvenient.

It kind of muddies the issue a bit.

Under law, isn't it still trespassing?

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that if you're going to buy what was formerly a major street in a large city you should be a little more lax in cracking down on what happens there. Would a couple kissing be off limits in any other park or street? Do they come down equally hard on heterosexual couples kissing in the plaza? Are there signs clearly visible stating that any public displays of affection are off-limits and that this area is owned by the LDS church?

..but they weren't charged with any of that, just trespassing.

This problem wouldn't even be a issue if they just kept walking.
We don't even know if what's in the article is factual.

 

[exodus]

Were the police there?

It is solely thw word of the security guards against the word of the two gay guys.

If the police thought that the two guys had behave indecently and were also intoxicated why were they only charged with trespass?

Don't know, wasn't there.
Just like everyone here, the information is only based on what is written in the article and the police report someone posted.
None of us know the actual truth.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Under law, isn't it still trespassing?

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that if you're going to buy what was formerly a major street in a large city you should be a little more lax in cracking down on what happens there. Would a couple kissing be off limits in any other park or street? Do they come down equally hard on heterosexual couples kissing in the plaza? Are there signs clearly visible stating that any public displays of affection are off-limits and that this area is owned by the LDS church?

..but they weren't charged with any of that, just trespassing.

This problem wouldn't even be a issue if they just kept walking.

Again, fully acknowledged on the trespassing issue. Not arguing that.

What I'm saying is, the LDS church should be a little more understanding of public displays of affection on a major pedestrian thoroughfare through a city. Also, I somehow doubt the rules are applied evenly toward heterosexual couples.

 

[exodus]

I'm not disputing that. I'm just saying that if you're going to buy what was formerly a major street in a large city you should be a little more lax in cracking down on what happens there. Would a couple kissing be off limits in any other park or street? Do they come down equally hard on heterosexual couples kissing in the plaza? Are there signs clearly visible stating that any public displays of affection are off-limits and that this area is owned by the LDS church?

..but they weren't charged with any of that, just trespassing.

This problem wouldn't even be a issue if they just kept walking.

Again, fully acknowledged on the trespassing issue. Not arguing that.

What I'm saying is, the LDS church should be a little more understanding of public displays of affection on a major pedestrian thoroughfare through a city. Also, I somehow doubt the rules are applied evenly toward heterosexual couples.

As I said, we don't know how much of the actual report in the article is factual. It's unsure if the public in that area is aware of this rule on the churches grounds or if the two men did this with the intent to start controversy.

 

[Da'an]

Something I should have raised earlier

It is sad to think that the Mormons think that acts of affection should not be seen when it was quite normal for two men to kiss in the culture that Jesus himself belong to.

What's the Mormon view of the story of David and Jonathan?