Thursday favorites: Signs from a revolution

Tonight in West Hollywood, a few thousand people gathered to protest the Prop 8 result and let off some steam. This wasn’t your usual feel-good rally: people are angry.

(The “chickens” reference is to an animal-rights proposition that passed on Tuesday.)

The crowd blocked the intersection of Santa Monica Blvd. and San Vicente…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSfuqkq4E8E[/youtube]

…then moved down the street for the rally. The biggest cheer came when one speaker announced there would be a similar rally at LA’s Mormon Temple on Thursday at 2 p.m. This fight has only just begun.

Update: As I posted this, I turned on the local news; not only is the march / protest still going on as of 10:30 p.m., at least one person has been beaten and arrested by police, and another jumped on top of a cop car waving a sign. Also, just six minutes after posting my video on YouTube, the first anti-gay comment appeared.

45 responses to “Thursday favorites: Signs from a revolution”

  1. Dave says:

    The Mormons haven’t done themselves any favors with this one, have they?

  2. Rogan says:

    Look out Mormons! Some times when you win, you lose… just ask Karl Rove.

  3. Marleyfan says:

    As one of my gay friends said yesterday, let’s look at the positive, the vote was at least close to 50/50, so public knowledge and opinion is a far-cry better than it was 15 years ago. It’s ashame that it passed, yet 30 years from now, the majority of people will be wondering how proposition 8 ever passed! We need to keep fighting against inequality and bias. Margaret Thatcher said that “you may need to fight the battle more than once to win it.”

  4. LP says:

    Did everyone see the news that Sarah Palin didn’t know Africa was a continent, rather than a country?

  5. swells says:

    Here’s the link.–on Fox no less. What else are we going to learn???!!!

  6. swells says:

    But look, everyone, if it had ALL gone wrong, at least we’d have an escape plan!

  7. Godfree says:

    Incase you missed it, here’s my comment from yesterday:

    Thank you dear Mormons for perpetuating the kind of bigotry that has affected you and yours for so many generations. You are truly an inspiration — it is, after all, the American way to make lemonade out of lemons.

    Remember life is always sweet when there are others to view as lesser than you. Great job!

    But I think we’re being particularly hard on the Mormons. There’s blame to be divvied among all the social conservative fascists in the state and beyond.

  8. I don’t want to stereotype or suggest that there is any one monolithic gay culture, but can’t we say that by opposing gay marriage, the Mormon church has inadvertently promoted gay promiscuity?

    Sure there are promiscuous married people, but as a general rule, isn’t marriage a cultural trend that curbs promiscuity?

    I don’t want to come across as anti-promiscuity, because I really don’t care about it so long as all parties are honest about their health and history. I just find it a bit ironic that Mormons, in opposing marriage, are creating obstacles for those gay couples that simply want to settle down and pursue domestic bliss. Why? Maybe because ‘domesticated gay couples’ are harder to demonize?

  9. Dave says:

    Rogan, you’re getting at a pretty persuasive conservative argument for same-sex marriage that’s been articulated by, among others, Andrew Sullivan and Jonathan Rauch. There’s also the old line that if you want the gays to stop having sex, get them married.

    I think the Mormon and other religious conservative opposition to SSM despite the argument that marriage stabilizes gay relationships is evidence that it’s not really about the gays but about defending the cultural authority of a certain patriarchal regime of regulating relationships.

  10. Dave, I think you are right about the REAL reasons Mormon authority opposes gay marriage. I’ll save this argument for the Mormon rank and file.

    Maybe we need some T-Shirts for our gay friends in Utah:

    I’m Gay and Promiscuous!
    (but I would rather be married)

  11. cm says:

    While I won’t deny Mormons were a visibly supporting group of prop. 8, I find it interesting that they’re taking the most heat for it passing. They only make up 2% of the state population, hardly the 52% that voted to pass it.

  12. angry lurker says:

    Yeah, but hardly any other Yes on 8 force was so well organized or brought in so much money and influence from out of state. The amount of money they raised was wildly out of proportion to their actual population in the state.

    They should lose their tax exempt status. Leaders from Utah made personal calls asking rich Mormons to donate tens of thousands of dollars at a time.

  13. I’m Gay and Promiscuous!
    (but I would rather be married)

    This is an awesome t-shirt/bumper sticker.

  14. LP says:

    11 – Angry lurker hits the nail on the head here. Estimates are that between 50% and 75% of the roughly $35 million donated to pro-Prop 8 coffers came directly from Mormon contributors, both in and out of state.

  15. Eric Jones says:

    I used to work for a Democratic Utah state senator whom I heard on a conservative radio station yesterday. No longer a Utah legislator, he now lives in California and, being a good Mormon, went canvassing in favor of Prop 8. He said on the radio that when he came across someone who had no problem with gay marriage, he would say, “Well, how do you feel about polygamous marriages? Do you want a bunch of polygamsists moving to California from Texas and Utah? If you vote no, it will happen. . . .”

  16. Shocked and Ashamed says:

    Wow. I mean seriously, that comment by Eric Jones (#15), if true (which I don’t doubt), suggests that Mormons have become completely detached from their own history. I am just incredulous. Now THEY are the moral police, and now THEY are leading the campaign to define deviant marriage??? WTF?! They were once one of the “twin evils” Lincoln waged war upon: slavery and polygamy.” So amusing, if not so sad.

    I teach a class on the history of marriage in the US. I was so looking forward to ending on a positive note about CA and CN legalizing SSM this year, and now…I’m thinking about how related the modern-day “Saints” and the 19th-c. white supremacists are. I’m sure the Mormons are all gloating now, but this will be a death knell to their ideology. The world has to eventually see that they can buy neither righteousness nor “right”ness. The hypocrisy is SO OBVIOUS. Not to mention H8TEFUL. Isn’t it? Grrrrrrr.

  17. lane says:

    that’s sweet of you “shocked and ashamed” to be so. but you really shouldn’t be. the mormon church will never keep it’s paws out of politics. almost by definition it can’t. on a theological level (such as mormon “theology” is) it is an inherently political organization. (back in the day, the crazy boy prophet ran for president!)

    this is the same thing they did in the 1970’s against the ERA. it will never change.

    i know that one member of TGW community has sent in his resignation from the church based on this issue. and i know another that is considering it. add me to that list.

    for all the GreatWhatsiter’s that still have a membership in the church, but haven’t attended for years, maybe this is the time to send in the letter.

  18. i just returned from dinner with my sister and brother-in-law, who were in town for the day (from Utah) and decided to join the protests at the Los Angeles temple. I wanted to pass along what they told me. They said it was an awesome experience with a wide mix of people. Some were marching with signs saying things like “Today I am ashamed to be Mormon.” There was a lot of anger, but also a strong sense of unity. The crowds were about 4000 people at 4:00, but my sister said they were getting significantly bigger as the day went on. Police were stopping people, trying to keep the roads clear, but there were too many protesters for the sidewalks, so they took to the streets.

    Meanwhile the Mormon church has made a press release.

  19. LA Times and Daily News have some nice photos from the protests.

    Here.
    &
    Here.

  20. lane says:

    eww! signs reading “Mormon Scum” and “Vile Mormons”

    yucky.

    That sort of thing only reinforces that irritating sense of Mormon specialness and superiority.

    I’m working on that letter.

  21. angry lurker says:

    Readers with access to Project Muse might be interested in this article. For those who can’t reach it via the link, you may be able to get it at a library, perhaps through ILL: William R. Handley, “Belonging(s): Plural Marriage, Gay Marriage and the Subversion of “Good Order,” Discourse 26.3 (2004) 85-109.

    It highlights all the ironies of the LDS church, the target of the Republican party in the nineteenth century for polygamous marriage, being at the vanguard of the anti-gay marriage movement, which actually relies on anti-polygamy legislation and court rulings to attempt to limit marriage to a definition that would have excluded so many of their honored ancestors.

    Unfortunately for the Mormons, THIS is how many people, in and out of California, will be viewing those clean-cut young men for a good long time to come. Terrible public relations! What ever happened to Brigham Young’s old motto: “Mind your own business!” ??

  22. Miller says:

    For those of you who live in or around Long Beach, CA, there’s a march against prop 8 at 7pm tonight starting at Broadway and Redondo and heading west, ending at Hamburger Mary’s. Be there!

  23. swells says:

    Already planning on it. Here’s a link to the petition to have the LDS’s tax-free status revoked.

  24. Tim says:

    Angry lurker, are you who I think you are, what with your access to Project Muse? We miss you around here.

  25. Kate the Great says:

    I’m angry too, but I’m not a lurker. I’m a Mormon, and I’m with the second-to-last paragraph of that press release mentioned earlier:

    “Before it accepted the invitation to join broad-based coalitions for the amendments, the Church knew that some of its members would choose not to support its position. Voting choices by Latter-day Saints, like all other people, are influenced by their own unique experiences and circumstances. As we move forward from the election, Church members need to be understanding and accepting of each other and work together for a better society.”

    I think that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I also think that the choice of who to love and who to marry shouldn’t be limited by the government. Please. Don’t hate all Mormons just because some of them are involved in something those individuals might see as right. I won’t.

  26. Shocked and Ashamed says:

    Dear Kate,

    I see you trying really hard to be tolerant, but do you really think you can have it both ways–being in favor of restricted, heterosexual-only, marriage on the one hand and supporting government-free choice about “who to love” on the other? How exactly would that work?

    While I admire your sentiment, I think at some point people have to come down on one side or the other: tolerance and acceptance, or bigotry and exclusion. I hope as you and other fence-straddling Mormons who are trying to be tolerant, but who are swayed by the dogma of the current organizers of your faith, ponder this issue, you will find a way to pick a side….and please!, may it be the side that respects all human rights, and the rights of all humans to participate equally in secular society.

  27. Kate the Great says:

    Well, Shocked and Ashamed, it’s an issue that I’ve been thinking about and feeling through for months now. Once I do come to a conclusion, it will be well thought out. You’re right. I am torn. I have dear friends who are gay, and I certainly don’t hate anyone who is gay. The church’s stand seems to be that we must shun anyone who chooses to be gay because the act is wrong and immoral, and yet it teaches that we must love everyone. Hypocritical, very. I won’t leave the church because of it, but I do want to find some kind of conclusion I’m comfortable with.

  28. Tim says:

    The church’s stand seems to be that we must shun anyone who chooses to be gay

    Do you mean “anyone who chooses to act upon his or her sexual attraction to the same sex and acknowledge it publicly”? It is generally recognized, except in the case of some extremists, that “being gay” is not really a choice, just as “being straight” is not.

    Personally, I’m attracted to women, which is something I have never chosen consciously. Moreover, I have elected to act upon my inclinations. It was much easier to do, however, because there were no social barriers thrown in the way, as there are with attraction to the same sex.

  29. Kate the Great says:

    Yes. That’s what I mean.

  30. Kate the Great says:

    And I’m going to stop commenting. I can only see this ending in a bunch of people attacking me when I’m not even sure of where I stand definitely.

  31. PB says:

    Kate – please don’t stop commenting. And anyone else who has the courage to admit uncertainly and ambivelence should not stop commenting and having conversation. if we turn any issue into a black and white, duh! sort of issue (and I am as guilty of this as anyyone) then we are no better than the other group who is taking a black and white, duh! stand on things. We HAVE to keep talking, we have to keep questioning, we have to keep asking ourselves how we feel and who we know and how all this fits with our experience. What I admire about you Kate is that you are not willing to just toss one thing you value for another thing you value. This means that you will make realistic and meaningful, moment to moment decisions. This is all we can hope for. You can live in the question until another question becomes more important to you. There are other people on this site that are sitting with different questions – that does not make yours any less compelling.

    Besides we all need to remember those wise words from AVE Q – “everyone is a little bit racist, it’s true” In our disappointment, let us not go to the judging place – the object is to come together on this issue, not throw stones.

  32. Marleyfan says:

    Kate the Great- Please keep commenting; I am in the same boat as you.

    I disagree with Angry Lurker, because without people like you and me in an organization,, it would not want or need to change. It takes people challenging that which is not right, to see changes occur. Was not the 1978 blacks/priesthood issue the same? My son just pointed out that the recent statement from the church, may just be the beginning of a shift towards the center (see 25. above). And when Angry Lurker wrote that we are “swayed by the dogma of the current organizers of your faith”, I have to wonder why he/she believes we are swayed? I can be a good Democrat/Liberal, and still not like how the party spends more money than they have. Or how they take care of the poor and needy, but press for changes to programs in order to promote self-sufficiency versus government give-ways to those who don’t need them. Is my marriage any different? Should I leave because there are some things which don’t work well, or should I stay because of the others that do? Life just isn’t that black and white, and I need to hold on to that which works, and work towards changing that which doesn’t. Maybe we can’t change the church’s position, but we can enlighten some of the views of those around us, and we can let our positions be know.

  33. Dave says:

    Kate, I agree with PB that it takes courage to admit ambivalence on this issue, especially in a forum like this where people have such strong feelings. “I think that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I also think that the choice of who to love and who to marry shouldn’t be limited by the government,” is an interesting way of expressing the dilemma that a lot of people probably face — a belief in the traditional meaning of marriage as a cultural practice, but also a recognition that the current, exclusionary laws are unjust and violate the rights of same-sex couples who simply want to get married like anybody else. Best of luck in sorting out the issue, and I hope you always feel welcome in comments here as a valued member of the community.

  34. lane says:

    hey Kate, a gay friend in Utah just sent me this

    if you are in the church and want to stay there, but also want to nudge it leftward, investigate the work of equality utah.

    in a recent press release EU stated that the church was in favor of domestic partnership, (i’ll let dave give you the finer points of the arguments against that if you want) BUT still DP is better than nothing AND to have THE MORMON CHURCH saying it supports DP is pretty amazing.

    so anyway, don’t stop commenting. these people really like you and it makes me proud to know that this group of hipster yahoos likes my niece.

  35. Dave says:

    i’ll let dave give you the finer points of the arguments against that

    Short version: separate but equal isn’t equal.

    But it’s true, DP is better than nothing, and the Mormon church has been forced to change its position to appear less obviously bigoted.

  36. lane says:

    oh yes, “separate but equal” that’s it

    see the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling. they put it well.

  37. Lots of argumentation going on at two Village Voice blogs about the efficacy of protesting the LDS about Prop 8: La Dolce Musto and Runnin’ Scared.

  38. swells says:

    I have been reading up on it a lot myself lately (to have a concrete response to “but they already have civil unions–isn’t that the same thing?”). I found this website (craigslist, of all things), even though it’s rather unpro and biased, to be helpful in articulating the differences.

  39. swells says:

    Also learned at the rally that while civil unions come with 300 specific rights for couples, civil marriage comes with 1049. I started reading more after that because I could only name about ten of them (on either side). The number 749, the difference, was on a lot of the protest signs.

  40. Rebecca Riots is giving away their latest composition, “A Thousand Hands (Wedding 08)”, written in response to the Prop 8 battle.

  41. Sorry, that’s wrong — it was written before the whole Prop 8 business in celebration of a wedding. Particularly timely right now though.

  42. Gale says:

    This is pretty incredible: MSNBC/Olbermann on love.

  43. PB says:

    This video is so lovely – it is making the rounds on facebook/ the internet/ etc – To me it gets to the core of the issue – dare I say? The heart of it.

  44. Rogan says:

    Olberman is such a blow hard, but he is our blow hard, and sometimes it is damn freaking cathartic to have one’s feelings expressed in blow-hard-ese. This was one of his finer moments.

  45. lane says:

    so hereis a Times article on how the mormons brought it home.

    i love how they were last to be asked to join to coalition, because the catholics and evangelicals think, rightly, that they are an heretical cult, but i guess the other “christians” didn’t feel up to the task.

    and of course the old frontier survivalist organization and know how was the perfect fuel to win the day,

    then of course the mormons take all the shit for what they did.

    uhhhgg, when adriana found the story she said “we’ve got to finish those letters.”

    i agree, and to all you fence sitters out there, you know who you are, write the letter!

    it won’t change anything in your life, your family will still love you.

    At this point it’s like resigning from the NRA.