Marie Osmond seems to support same sex marriage during radio interview


Story Comments Share
Updated: 5/06/2009 11:08 am | Published: 5/05/2009 8:32 pm
Reported by: Chris Vanocur
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - The headlines are all over the internet, suggesting that Marie Osmond has a gay daughter and that the singer supports same sex marriage.

And that's exactly what Osmond seemed to be saying in a radio interview which aired in Los Angeles Tuesday.

In that interview, Marie Osmond talks openly about her daughter, her faith and gay marriage.

And her comments do seem to suggest she supports what the LDS Church does not.

Marie Osmond told KOST 103.5 in Los Angeles,

"One of the things that we have to be careful of is that we don't create hate. Because people believe certain things and we can’t make everyone become homogenized."

Osmond found herself on the radio responding to recent reports that her daughter is gay.

And while Marie Osmond's assistant told ABC 4 the singer would not comment on this further, the radio interview soon led to a discussion of same sex civil unions and marriage.

Marie Osmond: "Everybody has a right to believe what they believe. But I do think everyone has a right to have civil rights."

Marie's comments also seem to stand in stark to contrast to those of her brother, Donny.

On his website, Donny Osmond fully supports the LDS Church's oft stated belief that marriage is between a man and a woman.’

But listening to his sister's comments Tuesday, it appears Donny and Marie do not agree.

Marie Osmond: “I believe everyone should have the right to share homes and finances with somebody that they care about. You know, on those types of things, I am very supportive. When it comes to marriage, you know, I think civil rights need to be for all."

Now, in the interview, Marie Osmond also says it’s important to follow the Commandment, "Love Thy Neighbor."

And she also makes clear that she loves her daughter very much.

Story Comments Share
31 Comment(s)
Comments: Show | Hide

Here are the most recent story comments.View All

The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of ABC4

dontbeanidiot - 1/20/2012 10:08 AM
If it is solely a civil rights matter, then why are gay people so hell bent on wanting it to be a marriage? Marriage is not a civil right, it is religious based.. But why should the majority have to bend to the will of the minority at all, as is the case in our republic? disgraceful is what it is!!

rickdoctor - 5/19/2009 6:27 PM
One must wonder just how freely reporters can determine what someone "seems to be saying", when they don't like the answers. This goes for non-reporter-gossipers who do the same. Rather than just quote IN CONTEXT what the person says, they have to put their own spin on what the person said. WHY NOT WAIT UNTIL YOU CAN ASK THE PERSON THE EXACT QUESTION YOU WANT TO ASK, AND THEN ACCEPT THE ANSWER?? Do you get to put your own definition into what Ms. Osmond said? Do you get to define what she meant at that time and in that place by "civil rights"? Do you get to substitute your own meanings for the words she used? Do you get to substitute your intent for her intent? Do you get to say what she meant to say if she did not say it expressly? If you like scriptures: "Do you know the intentions of her heart?" Are you willing to be judged the same way you are doing, when words come out of your mouth? (another scripture, I believe). Check the scriptures also for the fate of the "self-righteous"...choose...come on, make some serious choices...don't think you can take the r. limbaugh approach and simply criticise, ridicule, judge, condemn, hate---risky example to follow---cannot find any support for that in the scriptures, despite diligent search! "Civil rights" are and have been under the purview of the majority, in a democracy, i.e. they don't exist automatically. If you want to discuss "inalienable rights", that is another matter. But they are two different sets of "rights". And do some serious soul-searching to see what you are really willing to stand up for--at least Ms. Osmond has done that much. For that she deserves respect.

equalitynow - 5/14/2009 6:37 PM
To flashback: Your question is either incredibly naive, or blatantly defensive, I don't know which. But assuming your question is sincere, let me just say this; gay people have no visitation rights in hospitals for their gravely ill partners without permission from their partner's families. When my life partner was dying, I was only allowed to see him with his mother's permission. Gay people may not serve openly in the military without being disgraced with a dishonorable discharge. Where I live, I cannot marry the person I'm in love with. I cannot legally adopt a child. If a life partner dies and leaves no will, we have no claim on what would normally be granted to a husband or wife. The list goes on ad infinitum. All we are asking for is the same protection under the law that the U.S. Constitution gaurantees every American. Please don't preach or testify at me, no one is asking you to change how you feel about the Gay community. This is about obtaining the civil liberties we are entitled to.

flashback - 5/13/2009 6:33 PM
Just exactly what rights don't you have that married people do?

equalitynow - 5/7/2009 10:30 PM
To commonground: That's what I hope for too. Thank you for reminding me.

commonground - 5/7/2009 9:22 PM
To equalitynow: To address the inequality of those states that embed discrimination in their constitutions, my take is that the US supreme court will eventually restore equality (as an equal protection issue). Couples move to Utah from Iowa and then lose their marriage rights, hopefully won't play well at the US supreme court.

commonground - 5/7/2009 9:20 PM
To equalitynow: To address the inequality of those states that embed discrimination in their constitutions, my take is that the US supreme court will eventually restore equality (as an equal protection issue). Couples move to Utah from Iowa and then lose their marriage rights, hopefully won't play well at the US supreme court.

LookClosely - 5/7/2009 12:48 PM
Chris: What "seems" to me is that you are saying "headlines" as if they are news headlines instead of gossip columns and blogs. It "appears" to me that you're attempting to put words in Ms. Osmond's mouth. If you listen to the entire reording she does NOT talk "openly" about her daughter. She says she doesn't want to talk on her daughters behalf. She never says the words "gay marriage." Then it "seems" to me that you imply the assistant interrupted the live radio interview to say Marie wouldn't comment further. I was listening. No one interrupted. It "appears" to me that you must be taking a correspondence class with Perez Hiton. Your journalistic standards are plummeting, Chris. Northwestern University must be a-glow with what "appears" to be pride, or would that be in "stark contrast" to their beliefs. You're craftiness as a wordsmith must make you grin. I hope your awards melt off the wall.

LookClosely - 5/7/2009 12:38 PM
xxx

equalitynow - 5/7/2009 4:13 AM
To commonground: Do you really think that's possible? I think if we could, then life would sure be a lot easier, and it would make a lot more sense. It seems to me that the U.S. Constitution is very clear when it says that we are all created equal, and that we all deserve the same protections under the law. Also clear is the definition of the seperation of church and state. Logically, there should be no question about who can legally marry and who can't. Unfortunately, The Gayle Ruzikas and the Chris Butters of the world are always going to get enough people to listen to them, and laws are going to be written accordingly, based solely upon personal opinion. Prop 8 and Utah's Amendment 3 are shameful examples of that. So, here we are, mired in this struggle for equality and civil rights, beating our heads against the brick wall that is the majority opinion. We have an uphill climb to get what we deserve, and there are going to be casualities along the way, and in the end, who knows how it will turn out? But I'm not going to let that stop me from getting there.
Are you having trouble receiving ABC 4? Before you fill out a trouble report below, try these troubleshooting steps first.
  1. Disconnect the antenna from the box or digital TV.
  2. Rescan the box or digital TV without the antenna connected. As with any scan follow the on-screen instructions or owner’s manual for your device.
  3. Unplug the box or digital TV from the electrical outlet for at least one minute.
  4. Reconnect the antenna to the box or digital TV and plug the unit into the electrical outlet.
  5. Rescan the box or digital TV one more time.
If you are still experiencing problems receiving ABC 4 or CW 30, please fill a reception problem report.

ABC 4 / CW 30 will get in touch with you to help identify the problem.
ABC 4 Poll
Inergize Digital This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.
Mobile advertising for this site is available on Local Ad Buy.