Heads up OC, the No on Prop 8 protests are coming to you

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Can a pro Prop 8 defender explain to me, a straight, married, conservative, redneck how Trooper's (or any other person's) relationship can affect me in a negative way?



Do crooked politicians, drug users and dealers, unethical business dealings, thieves, child abusers, and other lawbreakers affect me? Absolutely they do. Trying to change their behavior might have a better and higher result if an improvement in society is your real goal.



That would affect me in a positive way.



Life here is short and happiness scarce so why would one person want to restrict others enjoyment?



Try to think of better uses for the time, money, and emotional feelings spent to restrict another person from wanting to have a fulfilled life.



I must be a simple country boy since I just don't get it.
 
[quote author="SoCal78" date=1226365188][quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1226365061][quote author="SoCal78" date=1226317501]I was just reading <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-church-prop-2222946-laguna-people">this article</a> in OCR about the protest at Saddleback Church.



I must admit... I find it difficult to reconcile that people who do not like protesters at their gay pride parades or other events... would have no trouble protesting at someone else's event.... during a Sabbath day and during worship times which is a holy thing for many attendees. That just seems so tacky, and as with the protesters at gay pride parades... I do not think it helps their image one bit. (A candlelight vigil might be ok... holding up a swastika... not so much.)</blockquote>


If I was trying to get my message across to the members of a certain congregation, I would find it more useful for me to deliver that message when the congregants were at the building rather than when they were not.</blockquote>


Does the same apply to protesters at gay pride parades?</blockquote>


Everyone has their first amendment right to peaceably assemble. That said, I do not think they are equivalent situations. Why do gay pride parades exist in the first place? Because society as a whole has said that being gay is different, deviant, unacceptable. To stand up in your community once a year and say "Here we are and we are not the bizzaro scary people you think we are and we are deserving of basic human rights too," is, in part, to challenge the stereotype and to say that while society may think we are different, deviant, and unacceptable, I have respect for myself regardless of what you think and am not ashamed to identify myself as gay. The protesters at the parade, however, seek to rob the participants of their self respect and make them feel ashamed.



OTOH, Christians have been a dominant force in our country since its founding, and I don't know of any Christian that is ashamed for choosing their religion. The No on 8 people, as best I can tell, are not trying have congregants think they are "lesser" human beings, but rather call out their discriminatory acts that they claim stem from their theology. (To which I say two things: (1) what did Jesus say about gay people, and (2) do y'all follow the rest of the Bible to its letter, or are you picking and choosing?)
 
[quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1226407800](2) do y'all follow the rest of the Bible to its letter, or are you picking and choosing?)</blockquote>


Stolen from EvaL on a earlier thread.



<em>Caycifish, please pick up the white courtesy phone.</em>
 
Correct Eva. The Pride Parades are a way we re-affirm each other....b/c sometimes we need to remind ourselves that we're ok.



And yeah, the picking and choosing of bible chapter/verse.... why were some retired, and some kept. (See the youtube vid I posted a few before this - Dr. Laura one)



And I keep thinking about what exsocal wrote. "<em>Life here is short and happiness scarce so why would one person want to restrict others enjoyment?</em>"



Word.
 
Keith Olberman's emotional comments on the passage of Prop 8. Perhaps knowing that Rachel Maddow just had her rights snatched away, caused him to get emotional... because he nearly loses it in the commentary. Thanks Keith.



<object width="325" height="250"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/youtube" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="325" height="250"></embed></object>
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1226408056][quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1226407800](2) do y'all follow the rest of the Bible to its letter, or are you picking and choosing?)</blockquote>


Stolen from EvaL on a earlier thread.



<em>Caycifish, please pick up the white courtesy phone.</em></blockquote>


I was VERY active in the evangelical Christian church for the first 20 years of my life. I went to AWANA clubs as a kid, sang in the praise band (several, actually), went to youth group during the week as well as regular services on Sunday as well as attending the lunchtime meetings for my high school Christian club as well as band rehearsals...you get the picture. My disagreement with the modern Christian church, as a man-made and highly-flawed institution, comes solely from being educated about the church itself, and its teachings, from within. In other words I eventually spotted the holes in the arguments. And there are plenty to choose from.



My father always said "Hate the sin. Love the sinner."



That being said, I was first taught that homosexuality was a sin BECAUSE homosexuals could not be married. The whole adultery commandment came into play there as I was also taught that any sex outside of marriage was considered adultery against your future spouse. Seemed like a stretch at the time, but I went with it. However, I was also taught one day about the new commandments that Jesus gave his church: (to paraphrase) love god, love each other. Wait a minute...? What about all the other ones? Oh, and then later I learned about the whole "abomination" verse. So wait...if gay people can get married, is it no longer an abomination? Or...what? A mixed message for sure.



Sometimes the pastor would go through an entire book of the Bible over the course of several months. This meant that the verses that detailed parts of the Tribes of Israel's/Hebrew/Roman/whatever culture that modern day Christians would find distasteful (see Dr. Laura letter posted elsewhere for a short list) had to be explained away. Or sometimes, as was often the case with those pesky, horrible Romans, the culture was damned and everyone told to not be like them. Again, wait a minute here...so some of these verses we have to follow, but we can ignore others as cultural or historical differences? Was Paul just pissed at the Romans and their oppression? Are we supposed to follow the cultural rules followed by a desert, tribe-based, nomadic society? Was this a historic, cultural difference? Or do we take the writings at face value? I thought God's word was infallible? Hmmm....who exactly gets to choose which verses detail sins and which are to be ignored as now irrelevant?



I saw the church linking itself to politics, which I think made its hands dirty. A poor choice in my very strong opinion.



And with that, I'm done for now.
 
[quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1226407800][quote author="SoCal78" date=1226365188][quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1226365061][quote author="SoCal78" date=1226317501]I was just reading <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/articles/marriage-church-prop-2222946-laguna-people">this article</a> in OCR about the protest at Saddleback Church.



I must admit... I find it difficult to reconcile that people who do not like protesters at their gay pride parades or other events... would have no trouble protesting at someone else's event.... during a Sabbath day and during worship times which is a holy thing for many attendees. That just seems so tacky, and as with the protesters at gay pride parades... I do not think it helps their image one bit. (A candlelight vigil might be ok... holding up a swastika... not so much.)</blockquote>


If I was trying to get my message across to the members of a certain congregation, I would find it more useful for me to deliver that message when the congregants were at the building rather than when they were not.</blockquote>


Does the same apply to protesters at gay pride parades?</blockquote>


Everyone has their first amendment right to peaceably assemble. That said, I do not think they are equivalent situations. Why do gay pride parades exist in the first place? Because society as a whole has said that being gay is different, deviant, unacceptable. To stand up in your community once a year and say "Here we are and we are not the bizzaro scary people you think we are and we are deserving of basic human rights too," is, in part, to challenge the stereotype and to say that while society may think we are different, deviant, and unacceptable, I have respect for myself regardless of what you think and am not ashamed to identify myself as gay. The protesters at the parade, however, seek to rob the participants of their self respect and make them feel ashamed.



OTOH, Christians have been a dominant force in our country since its founding, and I don't know of any Christian that is ashamed for choosing their religion. The No on 8 people, as best I can tell, are not trying have congregants think they are "lesser" human beings, but rather call out their discriminatory acts that they claim stem from their theology. (To which I say two things: (1) what did Jesus say about gay people, and (2) do y'all follow the rest of the Bible to its letter, or are you picking and choosing?)</blockquote>


Ok, yes, I do agree with what you are saying about the gays feeling like they are the oppressed group and therefore a double-standard is more okay. But, I don't ever want another gay person telling me not to protest them because they would never dream of protesting the other side in a tacky or disrespectful way. I think if they want to they should at least be honest. You said that the protesters at the parades seek to rob the participants of their self-respect and make them feel ashamed. Are you going to say that those holding up swastikas and shouting hostile words in front of the church do not?? We <a href="http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2008/11/n-word-and-raci.html">can not ignore the hate and hostility being spread </a>at the protests. To be clear, my argument is not that the protesters at gay pride parades are well-received. Obviously, they are not. Same here. I can honestly tell you that I have heard from several people now who were fence-sitters and sympathizers before and the tacky protests at the churches and Mormon temples have caused them to lose respect for the protesters. I would think that is the last thing they want. It is bad ?marketing? no matter how you look at it.



?I don?t know of any Christian that is ashamed for choosing their religion?? then I am going to guess you may not know very many Christians. Especially for the younger crowd, it is ?cool? and easier to blend in with what society says is ok and with what the world says is right rather than what the conservative values are. Many are not vocal. When you have people accusing you of being a bigot, a supremacist, and a hate-monger before you?ve even cast a vote, why would you??



You?re going to have to clarify who you?re referring to when you say use ?y?all?. As you know, not everyone who voted ?yes? is a religious person. You could be talking about anyone from an atheist to the likes of gay male and talk-radio-show-host <a href="http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/11/140806.shtml">Al Rantel.</a> You may not like the answer I give you because it is isn?t a very convenient one. I get the feeling your question may be rhetorical, but if it?s not, I would suggest you go one week and seek out the info you are looking for. If you were so inclined to want a friend to go with, I would even treat you to breakfast. (Muffin and coffee at Mimi?s, anybody??) It will not give you an answer in ten words or less on a message board but it might give you some perspective. If you are going to suggest I do the same, I?d love to? and I have. I have had more gay friends than I can count on both hands. I do not live in some bubble. I enjoy learning about other people and will always love and value them.



Cayci -- thanks for sharing. Are you a Christian? I have a feeling you would not have thrown the baby out with the bath water.



Happy Veterans' Day tomorrow, everybody.
 
<blockquote>Cayci?thanks for sharing. Are you a Christian? I have a feeling you would not have thrown the baby out with the bath water. </blockquote>


I do still believe that Christ lived and died for my sins. I also believe that sleeping is a better use of my time on a Sunday morning than attending church. Take it for what you will.
 
I don't understand the protests. The matter was put up for a VOTE. There was ample time to schedule time off work to go vote. The majority of votes were in favor pf prop 8. There really is nothing to protest here. It's not like there was some rogue circuit court that ruled against gay marriage.



Personally, I voted against every single proposition on the ballot. I will never vote to take rights away from someone, but th evote was cast democratically and the majority wins. Sad situation
 
[quote author="SoCal78" date=1226412547]Ok, yes, I do agree with what you are saying about the gays feeling like they are the oppressed group and therefore a double-standard is more okay.</blockquote>


My point was that they are not the same because of the context in which they arise, thus no double standard. Either you feel differently, or I didn't explain it well.





<blockquote>But, I don't ever want another gay person telling me not to protest them because they would never dream of protesting the other side in a tacky or disrespectful way. I think if they want to they should at least be honest.</blockquote>


Um, ok. You do realize that no one person speaks for everyone in the gay community, yes? I hear people's representations all the time, but I can say it never occurred to me that they were entering into contracts (informal or otherwise) on behalf of their gender, religious affiliation, age cohort, sexual orientation, etc. Unless a person is acting in the role of a spokesperson, I generally think they are speaking only for themselves. And I am curious, what are your ground rules for protesting? What's tacky or disrespectful?



<blockquote>You said that the protesters at the parades seek to rob the participants of their self-respect and make them feel ashamed. Are you going to say that those holding up swastikas and shouting hostile words in front of the church do not??</blockquote>


I don't recall defending them, but if you can find it, please link it. I haven't followed the protests, so I don't know about the swastikas. I certainly don't think those folks are helping their cause. Are all of the protesters doing that, or just a few? If it's just a few, that really is too bad, because it allows people to focus on that rather than on discussing the inherent inequality that arises from the passage of Prop 8.



<blockquote>We <a href="http://rodonline.typepad.com/rodonline/2008/11/n-word-and-raci.html">can not ignore the hate and hostility being spread </a>at the protests.</blockquote>


Who is doing the ignoring? Maybe the site was updated after you linked it, but at the top of the post there is an update stating, <em>"(UPDATE Truth Wins Out's Wayne Besen condemns racial intolerance within the LGBT community and says it is "reprehensible to look for scapegoats." People for the American Way president Kathryn Kolbert also releases a statement. Both after the jump.)"</em>



<blockquote>To be clear, my argument is not that the protesters at gay pride parades are well-received. Obviously, they are not. Same here. I can honestly tell you that I have heard from several people now who were fence-sitters and sympathizers before and the tacky protests at the churches and Mormon temples have caused them to lose respect for the protesters. I would think that is the last thing they want. It is bad ?marketing? no matter how you look at it.</blockquote>


I have to say, I don't really know what you mean by "tacky." Could you explain, please? Is there any protesting at a church that you would deem acceptable?



<blockquote>?I don?t know of any Christian that is ashamed for choosing their religion?? then I am going to guess you may not know very many Christians. Especially for the younger crowd, it is ?cool? and easier to blend in with what society says is ok and with what the world says is right rather than what the conservative values are. Many are not vocal. When you have people accusing you of being a bigot, a supremacist, and a hate-monger before you?ve even cast a vote, why would you??</blockquote>


Well... First of all, just about every tween and teen I've met is ashamed of something. I think it's just part of puberty. I would also suggest that "conservative" is not synonmous with Christianity. You are probably aware of the many splits that exist within just about every Christian denomination. Heck, you've even got Methodist and Episcopalian congregations cutting off their affiliations over various issues, including the ordination of gays. What I would say is that if one's theology leads them to treat people differently rather than equally, then they should have the courage of their convictions. The Baptist Church split over the issue of slavery, that's how strongly they felt. If one has the courage of their convictions, then other people calling them a bigot shouldn't really matter to them because they know what they believe. Look at the early Church. You want martyrs? <em>Those</em> were some martyrs, and not just of the "sticks and stones" varieties.



<blockquote>You?re going to have to clarify who you?re referring to when you say use ?y?all?.</blockquote>


That would be those who engage in "discriminatory acts that they claim stem from their theology." Sorry, I thought the sentence structure made that clear.



<blockquote>As you know, not everyone who voted ?yes? is a religious person. You could be talking about anyone from an atheist to the likes of gay male and talk-radio-show-host <a href="http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/2/11/140806.shtml">Al Rantel.</a></blockquote>


Don't I know. One of the Yes on 8 votes was probably cast by my non-church going uncle based on the "'ick' factor."





<blockquote>You may not like the answer I give you because it is isn?t a very convenient one. I get the feeling your question may be rhetorical, but if it?s not, I would suggest you go one week and seek out the info you are looking for. If you were so inclined to want a friend to go with, I would even treat you to breakfast. (Muffin and coffee at Mimi?s, anybody??) It will not give you an answer in ten words or less on a message board but it might give you some perspective.</blockquote>


In my [no, I'm not going to mention how many] years, I've been a Catholic, a Born-Again, an Evangelical, and a Methodist. I also attended an American Baptist church for awhile. I really liked the Methodists, but there were no Reconciling congregations in OC when I last looked. Yeah, it's that important to me. So now I'm a lapsed Methodist. I've also been partial to the Quakers and probably would have joined up with them by now except that I'm too lazy to go to Yorba Linda (which I believe is the closest meeting house), and I can't completely sign on to pacifism. The Shinto/Buddhism blend as practiced by the Japanese is really beautiful, and with <em>much</em> practice I might even overcome my "J" (of INTJ fame).



<blockquote>If you are going to suggest I do the same, I?d love to? and I have. I have had more gay friends than I can count on both hands. I do not live in some bubble. I enjoy learning about other people and will always love and value them.</blockquote>


I wasn't going to. I don't really think it's my place.
 
Okay... I am going to add my ?2, which despite Panda's hopes, is not worth as much as it once was.



First, I am an ardent supporter of NO on 8 on so many levels, that I could start (gasp) another thread on it alone. I love Trooper, no really... I love her, she has been a friend to me well before the forums were ever created and she has been on my side in many facets that the forums have never seen. Her story alone makes me extremely passionate about it, let alone the fact my aunt, who has been with her life partner for over 40 years, that everyone should know how much I support equal rights. With that being said, I have to agree with SoCal to an extent.



I would be more than willing to join a protest, and I will probably join one as soon as I can find the time and agree that it will make a point. But, I will not join a protest in which I believe will be ineffective. I took myself out of my own shoes and put myself in the shoes of the protesters at Saddleback, and I found that I would not associate myself with people who use swastikas as a means to protest, nor would I protest a church that would view me as sore losing whiner even if it were sans swastikas. This is ineffective marketing. If I am going to make a point, then I plan on educating people, and not let the emotion of it take hold to make the other side miss the root of my point. Judging by SoCal's reaction, and the comments I have read, this only harms the cause. I don't want people to hate me more, I want them to love me more.



I donated a little bit to NO on 8, and I wish I could have donated more and spent some time supporting it, but I feel as if my money was not used wisely, nor would my time have been used wisely. Any political consultant worth their salt, would have hit the minority communities hard. This wasn't something that could be used as excuse, seriously, everyone knew (including the conservative WSJ) that minority turn out would be high. Hello! African American dude running for prez is going to get a bunch of "his" people to come support him. I don't give a rats a$$ if this doesn't come across as PC, but this demographic is homophobic. Then, you add in the Latino voters, and their machismo, and anyone who couldn't see the writing on the wall should be slapped or kicked in the nuts. How is that for fairness? TV commercials from "those liberal hollywood types" only reaffirmed the vote for the NO's, and it added only a few Yes'rs in the process. Then you have at every commercial break on KROQ a commercial for NO. Well great, but are you hitting the conservative radio stations? How many listener's of KROQ voted Yes? How many listener's of conservative radio voted NO? I don't listen to conservative radio, only because they would rather pay their talking heads more than they are willing to pay for putting them on FM, which comes in way better than the crappy antenna of AM in the bimmer, but how many NO ads did you hear? Because, no joke it was every break on KROQ.



The marketing of this prop sucked, it sucked because they never focused on who was the demographic they needed to get their message to. I am disappointed that they got too caught up in the cause to do the research that was obviously there. It's like everyone clicking the thanks button on my posts, but those that appreciate the point but because of some of my past points will never hit the thanks button. They should click the thanks button, but they can't because I wasn't able to articulate my point the way that could possibly sway them to agree.



All in all, I am pissed that someone who has the knowledge I have of PolySci101, somehow missed the whole demographic that was needed to move this from Yes to NO. WTF? There were plenty of church leaders, in Irvine nonetheless, who were on the NO side (and I will provide their op/ed pieces if I am not believed). That should have been the front page news. Instead of Molly Ringwald, you should have had the pastors of the churches that defended NO on 8.



[/rant]



Sorry, but I am truly disappointed, and there was a great piece in the Sunday Op/Ed section of the OCR from a gay man who was disappointed by the fact that he felt it was too little too late. I'm disappointed in so many ways.
 
Thanks, graph. You seem to understand the difference between what is legal... and what is effective, especially from a marketing standpoint. I think you "get it". Kuddos! (Just a head's up in case anyone plans to reply... don't think I'm ignoring you, but I think I'm going to take a break from reading the politics folder.) Thanks.
 
[quote author="lendingmaestro" date=1226414176]I don't understand the protests. The matter was put up for a VOTE. There was ample time to schedule time off work to go vote. The majority of votes were in favor pf prop 8. There really is nothing to protest here. It's not like there was some rogue circuit court that ruled against gay marriage.



Personally, I voted against every single proposition on the ballot. I will never vote to take rights away from someone, but th evote was cast democratically and the majority wins. Sad situation</blockquote>


Maybe you don't understand the definition of the word protest. It means to express opposition through actions or words. They are expressing their opposition to the new rule/law. Just because something passes, doesn't mean you can't voice your opinion against it. This is part of getting things changed. By your reasoning, people should never protest against any law they don't like. Just sit at the back of bus -- we voted!
 
<em>I don?t understand the protests. The matter was put up for a VOT</em>E.



You should have never been <strong>able</strong> to VOTE on my civil rights.



That is my main point.
 
Also, Graph is right. For some unknown reason, we did not target the minority communities. Hell, I'm no marketer, but in hindsight that seems like a huge gaffe on their part.



I was at the Catholic Cathedral protest in downtown L.A. on Sunday (In an official capacity). What I learned is that the vast majority of them were Catholics, who felt that their church had betrayed them. I did not see any swastikas on signs, fyi.



There will be many protests Nationwide this Saturday, most taking place at City Halls.



I'll be going to the one at the Santa Monica Pier tonight.....
 
I, too, thought it would be quietly defeated. This IS California. My experience here has been of tolerance. It was suprising to me that it passed and when I saw the immediate response to this measure - all the protests, I decided I would join in on getting this marriage thing finalized up for ALL of us. I have not protested, but I have done what I can by sending the word out to others and I am waiting to see what is happening w/Arnold, the courts etc....then I am willing to donate and join protests, if the movement needs more help.



I remember when disabled people wanted accessible public transportation. the answer of course was that it would be coming, but RIGHT NOW it's too expensive. It is always about RIGHT NOW if affects you personally. So they did what they needed to do. All these folks with disabilities showed up in their walkers and scooters and wheelchairs and with their seeing eye dogs and their prostesises and they chained themselves up to the city buses. During rush hour/dinner time. Boy was that a mess! So not only did the governement learned that the access service was needed RIGHT NOW, it also learned that jails, paddy wagons, police officers and public buildings didn't support accessibility, either. So there were A LOT of changes that came about because of those protests. If we don't support people who have a vested interested in change, we betray all of our ideals. Our country is for everyone. Not just Ozzie and Harriet stereotypes.
 
I could not said it any better:



<object width="325" height="250"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/youtube" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="325" height="250"></embed></object>
 
Case in Point: Snip from story in the LA Times.



<em>The day after the election, Catholic Cardinal Roger Mahony of the Los Angeles Archdiocese issued a statement thanking his parishioners for supporting proposition 8, which amends California's constitution to ban same-sex marriages, overturning a state Supreme Court decision in May legalizing such unions.

"I am grateful to the Catholic Community of Los Angeles for your commitment to the institution of marriage as fashioned by God and to work with such energy <strong>to enshrine this divine plan into our state's Constitution</strong>," he said.

</em>



Whatever happened to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state">Separation of Church and State</a> ?



<em>"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "<strong>make no law respecting an establishment of religion</strong>, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."</em> Thomas Jefferson
 
Graph, I have to disagree with you a little bit. I don't believe that the protests right now are directed toward lobbying for change, I believe they are providing a mostly constructive nonviolent way to express some pretty strong emotions. There are a lot of people who are not personally affected that have immediately switched to problem solving, "what do we do now?" mode. And while that's great and needs to be done - and will be done - the emotions need to be processed and expressed. What do you do when a pot is boiling over? You take the lid off and remove the pressure. The water will still boil, but it will stop boiling <em>over.</em>



Once the feelings are less raw, then you can move to the next step. If you tamp down the raw emotions and skip over dealing with them, they will come out in unproductive ways later. To everything there is a season, and it's only been a week since the election. You can't rush it.



For those who find the protesters off-putting, I would suggest exercising a little empathy. I also really want to know what has been considered tacky or rude about the protests. In my experience, when people talk about "keeping it civil," what they really mean is that they don't want the other person/people to voice any disagreement or cause the civility-seeking person any discomfort. That may not be the case for the people here, but that's what I'm hearing, even if that wasn't what was intended, which is why I'm asking for further clarification on what kind of protests are acceptable, if any.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top