rather than protesting at the mormon churches, why not protest at the place that matters:

[ourbluenation]

the county courthouse. put the pressure on where the pressure should be - the government who issues marriage licenses. i totally get the visceral sort of gut need to protest those churches but for 1) it gives them way more power than they deserve, and 2) they don't issue marriage licenses. This guy makes some sense:

Here's my advice to righteously furious gay-marriage supporters: Stop the focus on the Mormon Church. Stop it now. We just lost a ballot fight in which we were falsely but effectively portrayed as attacking religion. So now some of us attack a religion? People were warned that churches would lose their tax-exempt status, which was untrue. So now we have (frivolous) calls for the Mormon Church to lose its tax-exempt status? It's rather selective indignation, anyway, since lots of demographic groups gave us Prop 8 in different ways — some with money and others with votes. I understand the frustration, but this particular expression of it is wrong and counter-productive.

Public protest against a constitutional ban on marriage for gay families is entirely justified. More than a mere vote, protests communicate intensity of feelings. They're valuable in a democracy. Something incredibly precious was lost on Tuesday. Those who lost it should not be expected to go back quietly to producing great art and show tunes for everybody's amusement.

I understand a rally is planned for the state capitol in Sacramento. That's more like it.

If a more intense physical expression of anger and frustration is needed, why not have sit-ins at marriage-license bureaus in California? It could be modeled on the sit-ins at segregated lunch counters in the 1960s. The demonstrations would be targeted at government buildings — rather than at churches. And after all, it's government policy we're legitimately protesting, not religious doctrine. Let people get arrested as they sing "We Shall Overcome." The protesters themselves — gay and straight, single and married, black and white, Mormon and Catholic, Republicans and Democrats, moms and dads raising kids — would suffer and accept the legal consequences of their acts. Rather than instilling fear and resentment in others, rather than dividing people on religious and racial lines, they would literally be putting their own bodies on the line for the good of their relationships, their families, their friends, and for a just cause whose time has come. We've had enough of lawyers, courts, focus groups, and media handlers. Let peaceful protesters by the thousands be dragged away just because they want to marry. It would be good old-fashioned civil disobedience, an American protest tradition.

http://volokh.com/posts/1226172636.shtml

[goclark]

1. Agree

[Ian David]

2. OOoh... THAT is an interesting, and probably a VERY good idea! n/t

[yardwork]

14. Why?

[Ian David]

20. If YOU don't understand why it's a good idea, then now I KNOW it's a GREAT idea!

:P

[Howardx]

3. stick with the churches

concern posts like this show its working.

[ourbluenation]

7. working to do what exactly? make them issue marriage licenses? n/t

and I am concerned so tell it to the judge.

[Howardx]

10. make the parishioners face the consequences of their actions

make them run a gauntlet of protesters every time they try to worship, publish the names of those who have donated to yes on 8, publicize (or re-publicize) the unsavory elements of all churches involved, none of who have the moral standing to be making these kinds of judgements, boycott church owned businesses and companies that do business with church owned businesses, basically make the churches realize that they need to keep their noses out of this sort of issue or they will face the consequences, none of which i might add, are as bad as finding out that iron age myth believers erased your marriage.

[Greyhound]

9. You got it.

For far too long we have allowed the appeasers and the unthinking to have it both ways.

Make a choice and take your stand. Support your religion and all it's bigotry and immorality, or decide to act as your God instructs you and stand against this outrage.

Remove the middle ground and see where people really stand.
:kick:

[yardwork]

15. I tend to agree. Terrible idea to bother people working at marriage license offices.

They didn't do anything wrong.

[Karenina]

4. BINGO!

:yourock::yourock::yourock:

[yardwork]

13. Why?

[Karenina]

21. Not rather than, but in ADDITION TO!

[donco6]

5. Nah - Protesting at false churches gets better press.

But the attempt at distraction is noted.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Do both.

[Cronus Protagonist]

11. I'm with you on that one :)

However, one of the main reasons the Mormon Tabernacle has been targeted initially, is that it's within marching distance of West Hollywood, the nexus of the demonstrations. i think you'll see demonstrations spreading out and reaching other areas and types of organizations as it rolls onward. This is based on my experience with Prop 22, the last time the Mormons and Catholics used the proposition process against their favorite scapegoats.

[GreenPartyVoter]

19. I hope it does continue to roll outward, but I am just as hopeful that

the courts will strike this stupid prop down.

[yardwork]

12. Why is it "friviolous" to suggest taking away the tax-exempt status of political orgs?

And why would anyone bother the people at marriage license bureaus in California? What did they do wrong? Nothing! They're staffed by public servants who had nothing to do with this.

This is a terrible idea.

Focus on the tax-exempt status of political organizations disguised as religious institutions. That's the right strategy.

[Starry Messenger]

16. Why? Our supreme court did nothing wrong.

Our government policy worked (for once). The religions hijacked it. The protests are shaking all the secrets out. Working just fine in my opinion.

Just as a side note, the man you are quoting is a libertarian conservative according to wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Volokh
FYI, I'd take him with a grain of salt.

edit: wiki update.

[TexasObserver]

17. Disagree. The churches are the appropriate target.

Their members should feel the public disdain.

[LeftyMom]

18. Nice try, but no.

County courthouses, vital records offices, etc. have no power. They could issue licenses until the cows come home (and most would probably be happy to,) but as we learned in San Francisco, they don't count if the state won't recognize them.