Editorial: Bitterness serves no one's interest

[cboy4]

More preaching from straight people :eyes:



OPPONENTS OF PROP. 8 NEED TO BUILD SUPPORT, NOT DRIVE IT AWAY
Published: Thursday, Nov. 13, 2008 | Page 14A

Nine days after voters approved Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriages in California, the raw emotions that fueled and fought this initiative remain as volatile as ever.

Angry opponents of Proposition 8 are targeting businesses and individuals who contributed money to the "yes" campaign. Vandals have hit churches that supported the initiative. Sparked by the speed and reach of the Internet, supporters of gay and lesbian rights are organizing protests from California to Salt Lake City, the home of the Mormon Church.

The charged reaction is understandable. Gays and lesbians view Proposition 8 as part of a long line of state-sanctioned discriminatory acts that feed hate and violence against homosexuals.

They are frustrated that the Proposition 8 campaign misled so many voters into thinking that, if the initiative failed, churches would be forced to marry same-sex couples and schools would have to include gay rights in their curriculum.

And they are astounded that California, a diverse state that has been a leader in extending privileges to domestic partners, would amend its constitution to deny marriage rights to a single group of people.

Yet in venting their anger and in exercising their right to challenge Proposition 8, some opponents risk crossing the line that separates civil protest from harassment. And by crossing that line, they undermine the message that some gay and lesbian leaders are trying to impart: that everyone's rights should be respected.

Consider the case of Scott Eckern, the former artistic director of the California Musical Theatre.

After it was revealed that Eckern donated $1,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign, he was vilified by various Proposition 8 opponents. One prominent blogger said he should be "viciously attacked using words and nothing but words by the men and women of the American theatre." That and other Internet postings prompted thousands of theater professionals to flood the CMT with phone calls in recent days.

As a result of this barrage, Eckern resigned Wednesday. While that may have emboldened some of Proposition 8's more aggressive opponents, it embitters others who respect Eckern's work, even if they disagree with his political views.

Boycotts have a long history in the civil rights movement, but the action taken against Eckern – and threats and harassment directed toward other individuals and businesses – crosses the line to the realm of blacklisting. While Martin Luther King Jr. used boycotts effectively and firmly, he never advocated that his opponents be "viciously attacked" with words or anything else.

King's consistency in preaching the message of tolerance went beyond his personal convictions. He realized that, in winning the American people to his cause, he could not afford to alienate potential supporters with inflammatory rhetoric or actions.

In a statement issued after the election, leaders of the No on Proposition 8 campaign urged its coalition to take the long view. "We achieve nothing if we isolate the people who did not stand with us in this fight," the statement said.

Unfortunately, a lone statement on a Web site is not adequate. That message needs to be spread widely and loudly by all leaders in the gay and lesbian community, and all opponents of Proposition 8. It's part of the task of building enough support to ensure that Californians support equal rights for same-sex couples the next time the question is on the ballot.

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1393123.html

[ellius101]

1. Re "blacklisting"

Will never cease to amaze me that these bigots dont see what they've done as blacklisting evry gay person in America!!

From the article: "Boycotts have a long history in the civil rights movement, but the action taken against Eckern – and threats and harassment directed toward other individuals and businesses – crosses the line to the realm of blacklisting"

[msongs]

2. another gays oughta STFU editorial - go to the camps like good little boys and girls nt

[mondo joe]

3. Full of shit. We need to make friends, but punish enemies. If you attack our families, you don't

get our money.

[GodlessBiker]

4. King led boycotts. He was not tolerant of business leaders who discriminated.

The LGBT community is doing the same thing. Businesses and leaders within the business, cultural, and political world will find that we simply do not have to spend our money on them or their institutions.

[bluedawg12]

5. Where were these people when the hate campaign

that they are so aware of,was going on?

Uh...what next time on the ballot? There is no more ballot. There is only the Courts left to us.

In the meantime, bigot Eckern's sister is gay! I guess outreach doesn't work. Just ask Mary Cheney.

[QC]

6. Well-Fed Person: This is no time to complain about your hunger. n/t

[mondo joe]

7. The message: legislating against people is okay, but it's unfair to use the market to strike back.

WTF is the thinking behind that?

Are we supposed to be drones who follow a predetermined market behavior as if it's our job to do so? Spend as expected, buy as expected, with no regard for where your $ go?

Here's my response: NO ONE IS ENTITLED TO MY MONEY BUT ME.

I don't care if I've made the same purchase every day for 20 years, if I change my mind about it tomorrow, that no one's choice but mine.

[bluedawg12]

17. This editorial was appeasement for gays

we should moderate our anger towards their bigotry in order to keep the money rolling in and not one f*cking thing about our issues and our fight -besides PHate8 is over - too later now.

Monetary sanctions are legitimate and non violent form of protest, btw, it is the American way. We are a capitalist society, they understand money and the rw surely has used this against us with their pro-gay boycotts.

[yardwork]

8. Non-violent protest has a long and honored history in this country.

It's not cool to vandalize things, but letting businesses know that you will no longer give them money because they contributed to a homophobic, anti-human rights agenda is part of the capitalist way!

The same people who constantly holler about the sacred "free market capitalism" are the first to complain when competition gets used against them and their allies.

I'm free to spend my money on things like ice cream and the arts as I please. Won't be giving it to people who supported the removal of human rights from a minority by majority vote. That's my right and I really don't care if little capitalists get upset about it.

[closeupready]

9. That's how I see it.

n/t

[mondo joe]

10. I can't get over the implication that somehow people are entitled to our purchases,

as if we are just little drones in their financial plan.

They seem to think THEY are more entitled to decide where we spend our money than WE are.

[yardwork]

11. It's the sickness that has taken over this country. All the values are turned upside down.

On 9/11, the president told us to go out and buy things.

[mondo joe]

12. I keep hearing "But you're SUPPOSED to spend money in the way I expected you to!"

Dumfucks.

[bluedawg12]

20. They can't have it both ways

spend money against people who run vile ads against our humanity and ten ask us to give them more money.

[RedLetterRev]

40. Word! n/t

[keepCAblue]

13. FUCK the Sacramento Bee

Sac Bee should be added to the blacklist, in my opinion. The pro-prop 8 stories they ran leading up to the election were despicable and overtly biased.

Yes, add Sac Bee to the blacklist and if you subscribe, cancel it and let them know exactly why!

[Zuiderelle]

16. AGREED

[Howardx]

25. boycott the bee!

shitty paper anyways

[Duncan Grant]

14. The gays are being effective in response to "Yes on 8"! Let's vilify them some more.

Keep it coming, Sac Bee. Keep it coming.

[bluedawg12]

19. The gays must be MOST effective with our boycott

otherwise this bit of appeasement trash would not need to be written.

if there was no impact they would just ignore us.

[yardwork]

23. Sounds like the boycotts are working.

[GodlessBiker]

26. Indeed. They are worried because it is so easy to check who supported Prop 8.

[Howardx]

32. look for the fundies to attempt to change the laws

now that they have seen they cant operate in the dark politically.

[yardwork]

34. I was thinking the exact same thing. We are going to have to protect election laws.

[bluedawg12]

39. This is good news -suit filed against the cult

and what we were up against.

http://www.americablog.com/2008/11/complaint-failed-against-mormon-church.html

>>November 13, 2008

Chairman Ross Johnson
Fair Political Practices Commission
428 J Street, Suite 800
Sacramento, CA 95814

Attorney General Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
California Department of Justice
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Attorney General Mark Shurtleff
Office of the Attorney General
Utah State Capitol Complex
350 North State Street Suite 230
SLC UT 84114-2320

Dear Chairman Johnson, Generals Brown & Shurtleff:

Today we filed a formal complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) aka the Mormon Church of Salt Lake City, Utah for not reporting various non monetary contributions to ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal I.D. # 1302592. The Mormon Church has been highly secretive about its massive involvement in the campaign, but we managed to piece together evidence of some of their more visible activities done directly to communicate with California voters, including:

Church organized phone banks from Utah and Idaho
Sending direct mail to voters
Transported people to California over several weekends
Used the LDS Press Office to send out multiple News Releases to promote their activities to nonmembers
Walked precincts
Ran a speakers bureau
Distributed thousands of lawn signs and other campaign material
Organized a "surge to election day"
Church leaders travel to California
Set up of very elaborate web sites
Produced at least 9 commercials and 4 other video broadcasts all in support of Prop 8
Conducted at least 2 satellite simulcasts over 5 Western states.

All of these unreported contributions by the Mormon Church were on top of its massive fund-raising effort; the largest ever undertaken on a social issue ballot initiative.

Under California Election Law organizations such as the Mormon Church are not required to report activities if they strictly constitute "member communication." We will explain why we feel that the activities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints went far beyond "member communication," and were instead specifically targeted at California’s 17 million voters. By not reporting any of these non monetary contributions, the Mormon Church violated the Political Reform Act.

The only mention of compliance was a news story stating that the Mormon Church reported a single non monetary contribution of $2078.00 for Church Elder L. Whitney Clayton’s travel expenses for one trip to California. Was there only one trip? Were no other Church officials traveling to California for such an important campaign?

The Mormon Church made the Yes on Prop 8 campaign a national priority beginning on June 20, 2008 when Church President David S. Monson sent his now famous letter to be read in every church building, where he said, "We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment (Prop 8) by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman." http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/california-and-same-sex-marriage This was their call to action, and was undoubtedly designed to get members to begin the outreach to nonmembers.

Two other organizations that were also involved in the Yes on Prop 8 campaign, reported substantial non monetary contributions. The National Organization for Marriage of Princeton, New Jersey reported 49 separate non monetary contributions between 02/01/08 and 4/16/08 totaling $210,634,75. James Dobson’s Focus on the Family of Colorado Springs, Colorado reported non monetary contributions between 12/7/07 and 10/15/08 of $83,790.00....there's more detail about the phone banks,etc. <<

[Zuiderelle]

15. The "next time" ... bullshit. NOW is the time to fight, and BOYCOTT.

[bluedawg12]

18. Financial boyoctts work and the RW does it

ask anyone about how the rw uses boycotts to promote their anti-gay hate.

Ask Ellen DeG when the boyoctts caused them to yank her show a decade ago.

Boycotting is the most legitimate in a capitalist society where money and power is King and justice is a step child.

[bluedawg12]

21. those, "who contributed money to the "yes" campaign"

Contributed to one ugly, nasty bit of defaming and lying campaign about another group of human beings - gays.

the money did not go into anything except anti-gay ad's, don't be fooled, and I know we are not, but this wasn't money simply to say yes, they got to that by smearing gays again and again and again.

[yardwork]

24. Exactly. Votes are confidential. Money contributed to political causes is not.

I'm proud of my political contributions. I'm not afraid of them being published next to my name in the paper or on the internet.

[Jamastiene]

22. I'm not bitter a'tall...

Because I don't get mad. I get even. :evilgrin:

[Psyop Samurai]

27. Not isolating people who did not stand with us DOES NOT...

...equal failing to identify and punishing AGGRESSORS.

Bullies always play victim when the gig is up.

Oh, their delicate sensibilities...

Surprise!... you stepped in it BIG TIME.

This article promotes false equivalencies, as corporate "he said, she said" media invariably does.

[yardwork]

35. False equivalencies, exactly. This time nobody is buying it.

Nobody will be persuaded by this approach. Only those who already hold hypocritical views will agree, and everybody else will respond with the derision that this deserves.

[bluedawg12]

28. I'm clinging to my "bitterness"

as a reminder of how some cling to their hate,

[tribeofdot]

29. Ok I get it....

When other peoples boycott it's a boycott

When gay people do it it's blacklisting?

Jeese... Another "Shut up gays!!!!!" editorial.

[bluedawg12]

30. Even more ironic when the govt does it

they call it "economic sanctions."

[closeupready]

31. Translation: Stop! Your boycott is having an impact on our bottom line!

:rofl:

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our fourth quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[madmadmad]

36. nope- it's not time to make nice. it's time to say we won't take it anymore!

we are dealing with the last gasp of religious extremism here, folks. the religious right realizes if they do not win this battle, they will have lost the war- forever. so they will throw EVERYTHING they have at us, and sadly, they cannot be reasoned with. hard for us to grasp, but THEY CANNOT BE REASONED WITH. we've tried being reasonable and it has failed us miserably. i live in a state where a civil right was just taken away from me- everything we have tried before has failed! we have officially been voted as "not equal" by our fellow citizens- not just talked about badly, or given a dirty look- WE HAD OUR RIGHTS VOTED AWAY! i repeat, everything we tried up until now HAS FAILED. what next? our right to vote taken away? our right to associate? where does it stop, once it has started? i am not merely being a drama queen- WE HAD OUR RIGHTS VOTED AWAY!

we need to out spend them, out shout them, boycott the hell out of them, and make EVERY AMERICAN realize that to side with hate is a losing economic proposition for each and every one of them personally. you will of out of business. you will see your profits drop. you will have picketers outside your door. people really do vote with their pocket books. why do think obama was elected? most of us libruls think "oh, he represents such a powerful change" but the avg american just thinks that things are so bad, they are willing to risk electing a candidate that in better times that wouldn't have voted for, in the hopes that things will get better. they don't care about his social policies- they want to feel economically secure again, and they are willing to ignore long held beliefs and prejudices if it means helping their bottom line. we need to lay out our cause in the same terms- you do not get our money if you do not support our rights. and if you speak out against us, we will expose you for the fear-mongering, hate- sponsoring cowards that you are. no more free passes. no more letting things slide in the name of tolerance- we will not tolerate discrimination!

[madmadmad]

37. title should have been "BULLSHIT SERVES NO ONE'S INTEREST" ;-)

[LeftCoast]

38. We played nice and what did it get us?

No more Mr. Nice Gay!

[RedLetterRev]

41. Note to SacBee

Kiss my fruit-flavored ass.

Love,
Rev

[David__77]

42. What a hot, steaming load of crap!

Eckern voluntarily resigned. End of story.

Sac Bee cherry picks one bloggers statement about "vicious attack" and somehow extrapolates this to a whole segment of the community. Ridiculous, and it wouldn't be accepted if we were talking about another group. As for the No on 8 campaign, I can think of others who I'd rather hear from. Their passivity was terrible.

[NMMNG]

43. Screw that

I don't respect anybody's "right" to discriminate against me or eradicate my rights. I'm also not going to lay down and take it like a two-dollar prostitute while bigots destroy what little we have. Boycott and protest them all (legally and peacefully, of course). No more Mr. Nice Gay.

[readmoreoften]

44. When we do it, it's "blacklisting" when they do it its "family-responsible boycotting."

Fuck these pigs.

[cboy4]

45. The more I think about this ediorial, the angrier I get.

The next fucking time the question is on the ballot?

Oh fuck that. The next time the majority gets to vote to strip a minority of its rights, we're supposed to shut up, sit in the back of the bus and make friends so we will encourage our masters to effing vote for our civil rights.

Negative, this bullshit of puting minority rights up for a popular vote is over. And I don't give a damn whether that pisses off every straight person in America.

Jesus H Christ.

Oh I'm hot. :argh: