DISQUS

davidkc · 1 year ago

Good riddance Mr. Eckern, you homophobe. For him to say that he had "no idea that this would be the reaction" to his support for taking away legal rights from gay couples shows that he is either incredibly, naive, stupid and ignorant or thinks that we are for shoveling out that crap.

IamSmartypants · 1 year ago

Going into Pollyanna mode, at least he's trying to make amends by giving an equal contribution to HRC. (Leaving aside all debates about the relative merits of our national organizations.)

I'm not particularly interested in parading Eckern's scalp, but this will be a serious warning to anyone who relies in some manner on the glbt community for their livelihood, while not supporting glbt equality.

IamSmartypants · 1 year ago

Now that I've read his full statement with the shameless use of his lesbian sister, I take back the not parading his scalp.

HE VOTED AGAINST HIS OWN SISTER! That's just fucked up.

erick28 · 1 year ago

It's way looooonggg over due that we stand firm and make the religious bigots that we are part of this society. Now we need to make the "bigger guys" face the consequences of HATE.

scytherius · 1 year ago

Guess the bigots don't know that bigotry is dying and no longer tolerated

MikeNaustin · 1 year ago

Spencer Wheelwright, the marketing manager of Dell Computer, donated $25,200 to the bigots' campaign. What does Dell think?

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

An interesting aside, I'd read that Dell's top executive is a Mormon. Would need to confirm that.

boloboffin · 1 year ago

Kevin Rollins is a Mormon, yes. I don't see that he contributed, though. I checked his name.

Forty2 · 1 year ago

I'm just surprised any man associated with musical theater isn't gay.

and yes, that's a hateful stereotype. deal with it.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Just from photos, I am guessing he is DL.

dommyluc · 1 year ago

How could someone involved in musical theater think they would not catch hell for donating to an anti-gay cause? Go to Utah and stage Mormon beauty pageants, you fucking dumbass!
Also, a little OT, but still.....

I am so livid at the thought of that slimy mother-fucker Lieberman getting off scot-free that i wrote this to Harry Reid:

"I have been a loyal Democrat since I first voted in the midterm elections of 1974 when I turned 18 and lived in the city of Chicago. Being raised in Chicago, I live, eat and breathe politics. I busted my ass to try to get Barack Obama and the Democratic Congressional majority elected. And how am I and millions like me being repaid for our efforts? We are being told that the Senate is seriously considering letting that traitorous, slandering, McCain/Palin loving non-Democrat Joe Lieberman keep his chairmanship at Homeland Security. Do not tell me that Lieberman has not done any harm. He basically called Obama and progressive Dems terrorists for not agreeing with him, McCain and the Republicans. He needs to be PUNISHED! Obama did NOT say that he should keep his chairmanship, only that he should be allowed to caucus with the Dems. Give him a chair with some other committee, but do NOT give him the power to subpoena the Executive Branch, because Joe cannot be trusted as far as you can spit, and he will do great harm to the Obama presidency and the Democratic Party. A great majority of Dems are truly infuriated by the very thought of Lieberman going unpunished. Get rid of him, and if you are worried about Republican filibusters, then either eliminate the filibuster or force the Republicans to filibuster the old -fashioned way: in full view of the public, so the American people can see them trying to block much needed and popular legislation. JOE MUST GO! He is a traitor to the Democratic Party. Grow a spine, Senator Reid, or give your leadership position to someone else. Lieberman is no friend to the Dems, and he deserves to be kicked out as soon as possible. Let Mitch McConnell have him!"

I only hope everyone else does the same by writing their Dems Senators. It took nearly every fiber of my progressive Democratic being to keep the words "fuck", "prick", "dildo" and "douchenozzle" out of my letter, but next time I may not be able to.

no · 1 year ago

what is it with these people's obsession about "redefining" marriage -- nobody is redefining marriage by asking for the same rights

marriage is the life-long and legal committment between 2 consenting adults that wish to remain as partners for life, for better, for worse, richer/poorer, etc....

the supreme courts' ruling on brown vs. education clearly distinguished that separate BUT equal was still unconstitutional

what if civil unions were given and then a law was passed that gays that have civil unions should get a new car every year for free, or their children should be hired before a straight couple's child -- nothing wrong with that is there? i mean after all, if the majority of the voters vote for it, that sounds fair right?

how about all straight couples that want to get married have to do it in a mosque, that sounds fair right??

or straight couples really shouldn't be able to have property rights, i mean why should the wife get anything if a husband dies, right??

that all makes sense to me -- in fact, i want to start stripping straights, including myself, of my guaranteed rights right now!

eclare · 1 year ago

Before reading his statement, I expected to feel sorry for a man that has made a terrible mistake and has since come to realize how wrong he was. Having read it, however, his apology rings hollow in that "Well I'm sorry that everyone misunderstood me but I didn't do anything wrong" kind of way. He clearly does not understand the true impact of Prop 8.

dacnova · 1 year ago

I've been hoping Eckern would realize he had little choice but to resign, but I didn't expect it this quickly. But it's mighty nice to see one of OUR boycotts once again be far more effective than the "christians" efforts.

protogenes · 1 year ago

Seriously, can that man be as much of the epic idiot that he comes across as in that statement?

"I honestly had no idea that this would be the reaction...I chose to express my views through the democratic process, and I am deeply sorry for any harm or injury I have caused in doing so..."

I took your rights away..you're upset? Oh, I'm so surprised...

Joe_the_Cynic · 1 year ago

Exactly. He writes at another point: "I have now had many conversations with friends and colleagues,
and I am deeply saddened that my personal beliefs and convictions have offended others."
I am not really interested in his "personal beliefs and convictions." But I do care that he supported a
measure that denies both the dignity and fundamental rights of fellow citizens.

wildrumpus · 1 year ago

OK then. As a gay man in Michigan my reaction to this is

Wow, you got a $1000 donor to quit his job! What have you actually fixed other than punishing someone from exercising his 1st amendment rights, as unpopular as those might be? Are there challenges being filed? $1000 really isn't much. What about other donors who actually donated significant amounts? What about legal challenges to the law? What about legal challenges to 501c3 status of the LDS church. Going after every donor seems to set a dangerous precedent to me. If Prop 8 had been defeated would turn about be fair play with the LDS going through donation records of the No on 8 organization and bringing pressure on those contributors livelihoods in straight dominated industries? I don't think so. This looks like a witchhunt to me, or at least misdirected punishment. My America protects all of us with the constitution, not just minorities, majorities, rich, or poor. Denying an individual their 1st amendment rights because of the popularity of the viewpoints is a slippery slope friends, as the good guys for the last 8 years, lets not start a slide ourselves.

Lets fight it with boycotts (we've canceled our ski trip this winter and let them know exactly why, my partner canceled his business relationship with Marriott hotels), lets fight the bigoted bastards legally, challenge the LDS status as a church, but let's never attack individuals for the legal expression of their right to free speech, even if we hate it.

That's the other side's job.

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

Nobody denied him his first amendment rights. He was and is still free to say whatever he likes. Gay people, off whom he has made a living, simple used their 1st amdn rights.

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Thank you and EXACTLY.

Antinous · 1 year ago

The Mormon and Catholic Churches proved all the bigots aren't KKK members and they don't all live in the sunny South, sunny California has their fair share.

thudpucker · 1 year ago

And there's a big difference between fighting against what someone says and what someone does. As much as I don't agree with his thoughts, he has a right to them. But what he doesn't have a right to do is actively work to enforce his personal beliefs as legislation, thereby denying countless Californians of their rights.

wildrumpus · 1 year ago

Aren't people working for the repeal actively working to enact their personal rights as legislation? Isn't that their right? "Speech" in the first amendment covers far more than actual verbal activity.

I fully agree he's an idiot on a lot of levels, and I personally wouldn't piss in his mouth if his teeth were on fire. But, like I said, the unpopularity of his outlook isn't a basis for personally attacking him, just like we shouldn't come under attack for our outlook.

eclare · 1 year ago

The difference is, of course, that the "personal right" that would be protected in the event of an appeal in no way infringes on anyone else's "personal right," except purpose the right not to feel icky about other people's sex lives, but the Constitution doesn't protect that right just yet.

As an aside, the Supreme Court has called marriage a fundamental human right. So strong is this right that even convicted and incarcerated criminals, individuals who have been stripped of seemingly the MOST basic right of freedom of movement, still have the right to get married.

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Sorry, Bubba, donating money to that cause has consequences. No one stomped on his right to freedom of speech. He had to know it might have negative consequences when working within the gay community in show business. By the way, didn't you read of the LDS threat to those who contributed to the other side? Turnabout is fair play.

wildrumpus · 1 year ago

So, following your convicitons has consequences. OK, lets roll with that.

In an alternate universe Obama loses, the dark ages ensue, but Prop 8 fails. You, as an outstanding American contributed to the political platform you believed in. Now what sort of consequences are you prepared for? Is turn about really fair play?

Charles2 · 1 year ago

Voting is always a gamble (as are the attendant costs in time and monetary contributions). We always accept, in a democracy, that "our side" might lose. But accepting doesn't mean just rolling over and playing dead. There's also always the option of leaving the country until it returns to its senses, too.

That's the long way of saying "yes, it really is fair play."

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Sorry to take so long to respond. Just read your message. I'm not advocating taking away other's rights so I don't think I should be worried my support for Barack Obama would have negative consequences. If I supported taking away other's right to marriage then I would EXPECT some kind of negative consequences if my support were discovered by those I was trying to oppress.

Yes, turn about REALLY IS fair play.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

You are profoundly ignorant as to what the 1st Amendment is all about.
This is a pet peeve of mine, you don't even know your own rights, it's sad and it makes you look stupid.

The First Amendment (as pertains to free speech):
Expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws that infringe the right of free speech.

That's it.
The United States (as a governing, law making institution) is prohibited from passing laws that limit free speech.
Nothing else.

Part of Free Speech (grab your thinking cap) is that the other side is free to voice their opposition to whatever has been said. No matter how reprehensible or unpopular. Part of the beauty of Free Speech is that you are free, in a public space, to voice your opinion. You are not then sheltered, coddled and protected by anyone, the person using their free speech has to accept the consequences of said speech, up to and including boycotts.

Please educate yourself.

wildrumpus · 1 year ago

Gee, I guess that PhD was for nothing then!

If you follow Supreme Court decisions political contributions are covered under the first amendment.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Obviously you are still incapable of understanding the First Amendment, your "PhD" notwithstanding.
Even after I posted the pertinent information.
How sad.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

rRRowWR! :-)

FNReedie · 1 year ago

PeteWa: Actually the Supreme Court has ruled that individual donations are akin to Free speech.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

So?
Guess what?
There was NO LAW enacted by CONGRESS to deny him the ability to (you guessed it) make an individual donation.
Are you really so ignorant, or are you just incapable of understanding what Free Speech (the right) actually entails?

eclare · 1 year ago

Just to clarify, the Fourteenth Amendment extended the prohibition to the separable states, so it's not just Congress that can't deny you free speech, etc.

The larger point, however, is that individuals can't infringe on people's first amendment rights. Only the government can do that.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Yes, this is correct.

Charles2 · 1 year ago

Still changes nothing in PeteWa's post.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

essentially, by his actions though...

he walked up to everyone gay in his theater, and all the gay patrons... and all his supposed gay friends...

and said, "fuck your civil rights, my faith tells me its wrong"

is it wrong for any of those artists, patrons, donors to decide to boycott the theater he works in? they're exercising their 1st amendment rights as well.

they no longer wish to associate with that theater because of him.

.

eclare · 1 year ago

I get your point, but there's a couple things that need to be pointed out.

First, no one has denied this guy his 1st amendment right. He can still legally donate to any political or religious cause that he wants. Similarly, those who disagree with him can express their displeasure by refusing to patronize the company that pays his salary. The threatened boycott of this theater is no different than your proposed boycott of ski resorts and the like.

Second, it is my understanding that there are plenty of legal challenges that are moving forward. Not to mention a variety of other boycotts being planned.

Third, I recall reading reports that LDS did in fact go through donation records of No on 8 and pressuring those contributors.

Finally, it is certainly true that $1000 is small peanuts compared to the tens of millions raised to support this awful legislation. But the circumstances of this particular donation play an important role in understanding people's reaction to it. The CMT is patronized by many in the LGBT community and undoubtedly employs many more. Eckern, like many people, purports to be a friend to the community yet has donated to a cause that strips them of their rights as human beings. This is hypocrisy, plain and simple, and a boycott of the theater that paid his salary, thus providing him with the means to donate, seems like a pretty reasonable reaction.

Truth is we punish people for exercising their 1st amendment rights all the time. I don't watch Fox News or read the Washington Times. I don't shop at Walmart and I purposely avoid socializing with people that express hateful or bigoted views. We're all participating in democracy and hopefully this incident will make people think long and hard about how their actions affect other people.

wildrumpus · 1 year ago

OK, I give up, you're all correct, I'm an some ignorant asshole.

I will say that just because people are punished for their expression of their beliefs, it makes a long damn way from being the right thing to do.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

You are wrong, it's that simple.
No one called you an asshole, although you have proven yourself to be ignorant on this matter.
Please, do yourself, and the rest of us, a favor.
Go read the Bill of Rights.
Spend some time on it, so that you actually understand what you've read.
In particular, read the first amendment. Try to understand the difference between the GOVERNMENT limiting free speech, and OTHER CITIZENS excersizing their own free speech.
It's really not that complicated, although you will have to actually figure out where you were wrong first (and if you honestly have a PhD, you should be smart enough to figure it out. If not, I'm starting to think "cracker jack box".)
Have a good day.

Gary SF · 1 year ago

Stop! We are allow to disagree here. I agree that going after business such as the Marriott and anything Utah as preferable to pursuing individuals, however this issue of Scott was in the media and we chose to pursue the issue. It is largely symbolic. He quit his job, but he continues to lie and say that domestic partnership has the same rights as marriage. What's done is done. Let's move on.

hrh · 1 year ago

wildrumpus writes: "OK, I give up, you're all correct, I'm an some ignorant asshole."

See, that PhD was worth getting now, wasn't it? Gave you the gift of self awareness.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

we started a boycott... I'm sure the owner of the theater had a talk with this guy and decided he should leave.

if we're responsible for that, good.

he can get another job, how long before the couple down the street can get married? they could two weeks ago... now? nope.

he was on the wrong side of history... he claims to have gay friends, and that he's not a bigot... how can you claim that and actually SUPPORT taking away civil rights from those you claim are 'friends'?

its called backstabbing. think about it.

I have no sympathy for this guy at all.

Lizzagna · 1 year ago

Why are you all such haters? I am a member of the LDS church, and though I did not give money or time to help spread the word about prop 8, I still support the bill passing. Isn't it interesting how you are all attacking the LDS faith because they supported this monitarily? Why aren't you going after the Catholic or other Christian faiths? I am in no way a homophob, I have friends that are gay and I would not trade them for anything! But marriage is between a man and a woman. Check the bible. Also you bitch about the LDS faith taking away your rights and ammendments, but what about our freedom of speech. Besides, California voters passed this bill (which is my birthplace) and I bet anyone $100.00 that the majority of voters that were for the bill were not of the LDS faith.

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

Wow. i see so much of this. I'm not a homophobe, i just don't think gays are equal to me or deserving of the same rights and priviledges as straights. They want their bigotry and to deny it too.
You are a homophobe, Lizzagna. You are. it's okay. We understand. But at least please own up to it.

BTW as long as were checking the bible, do you think we should kill adulterers? Outlaw divorce? Or do you just pick and choose to defend your own bigotry?

Soaplady57 · 1 year ago

Yeah, how come divorce is OK in the Mormon Church? I have a friend who is a Mormon. She is on husband #3 or #4 plus she also smokes cigs and drinks coffee (both are big NO NO's according to the Mormons). Also, look at Marie Osmond...two divorces. Now THERE is a big Mormon female role model!!

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

Marie Osmand repents by gorging on twinkies though.

the mormon church approves of that.

JohnInTexas · 1 year ago

She was forgiven because she has 8 kids and 64 teeth.

Antinous · 1 year ago

My goodness why are you here, have you been cast from your flock? Sorry if your gay friends find out you are a bigot they won't be your friends very long.

RainbowPhoenix · 1 year ago

If you support things like prop8, you do not really have gay friends.

KerrynowCampau · 1 year ago

That was going to be my comment as well. Bigots seem to start off by saying, "I have gay friends, but......."

If someone REALLY has gay friends they wouldn't support anything that took their friends rights away. Or else they are just a sh*tty friend.

RainbowPhoenix · 1 year ago

At least most of them aren't mentioning gay relatives. I had to guilt trip my mother into voting against 102 and my father didn't vote on it one way or the other.

Soaplady57 · 1 year ago

Liz,

I think that gay couples have EVERY right to be as miserable as some married straight couples are!!!

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

its interesting that someone who supports TAKING AWAY CIVIL RIGHTS calls me a hater.

how does my being married affect you? how does it affect your church enough to donate $19 million?

what have I done to you that makes me a target of such hatred?

you call me a hater? take a long look in the mirror... this isn't about religion, its about denying people their constitutionally given civil rights.

bigots never see their actions as bigotry... so just let me ask, how does it feel to be a bigot?

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Lizzagna,
you are yet another "citizen" who is completely ignorant of what one of our most basic rights actually entails.
Please, don't be such a dope, read what rights the First Amendment ACTUALLY grants, so that you don't look like such a moron in the future.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

There was a crowd of protesters outside the catholic cathedral here in San Francisco this past Sunday morning. The thing is, they're so used to it now that it's just another Sunday mass here. There was a huge protest with thousands of people in front of saddleback church in Orange county. They're a giant fundie "other" church down there. We're going after the knights of Columbus, getting them kicked off of private properties where they used to do fundraising.

There is no denying though, the mormon church was first and foremost at the helm of funding and organizing this proposition. A huge amount of money came from Utah.

You still have your 1st amendment rights babe. So do we. It's now up to the California Supreme Court to decide if you and your ilk had a right to rob me of my constitutionally protected rights to equal protection. That's just the way the California constitution is. Why not worry about your own and leave mine alone?

eclare · 1 year ago

Have you told you gay friends that you supported Prop 8? You may find that you have already traded your friends for a heck of a lot less than their probably worth.

FunMe · 1 year ago

DId you check the Bible about the part where a woman should be stoned to death if she looks at a man while going through her period?

Selective Bible verses to hide BIGOTRY is no longer acceptable.

The Mormon cult supported the YesOnH8 with over 80% funding. Plus they sent an email to ALL their churches.

Any other questions?

ChrisSF · 1 year ago

When did the Bible become part of the Constitution? I must have missed that meeting.

Antinous · 1 year ago

I was hoping for some tar and feathers, darn it.

boloboffin · 1 year ago

Eckern: "I support each individual to have rights and access and I understood that in California domestic partnerships come with the same rights that come with marriage."

That's not true, is it? I wonder if the big push by the Mormon church to get donations included this misinformation? How many others did the church leaders mislead?

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

If you asked if them if people of two different races should only be allowed "civil unions" instead of "marriage" but they would still have the same rights they would scream "Separate but equal isn't equality!" When it comes to marriage the idiots don't see its about ensuring we get the exact same CIVIL RIGHTS and call it the same thing to ensure it but it has NOTHING to do with their ideas of what they consider "religious marriage." No one says they have to perform some religious ceremony for anyone they don't want in one of their churches.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

exactly.... say to a black person who had to use a different water fountain or ride in the back of the bus "what's the difference? you got to drink water, and you were still on the bus?"

see what their response is.

Chrissy · 1 year ago

It isn't true and one of the reasons why the California Supreme Court overturned because they ruled that domestic partnerships were ALMOST like marriage, but not exactly like marriage.

The civil unions/domestic partnership argument is one of the many lies that the Mormons have told.

balafre · 1 year ago

This is what one of the [famous] Osmonds wrote about that on his blog:

California Family Code 297.5 states: "Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses." This includes rights and responsibilities related to wills (subsection c), biological children (subsection d), ownership of property (subsection k), and nondiscrimination (subsection f), and social services (subsection g).

(The blog page has since been taken down (!) but is still cached in Google's database):

http://74.125.95.104/search?q=cache:11AIqlrn2xw...

stranded · 1 year ago

Even if all the other rights were the same in practice, the actual right to be considered married would be denied to some people. So, no, it's not the same thing.

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Sick to death of the bully's persecution complex. As if they have to pay taxes for all their political bigotry!

balafre · 1 year ago

Yeah, whether on the playground or in the pulpit, bullies are always the biggest whiners, the first to cry "Foul!" when exposed for what they are.

thudpucker · 1 year ago

The most important part of Eckern's comments are these four words: "I chose to act." I think we need to be clear that, although we don't agree with his opinions, he is certainly entitled to them. We can't fault him for thinking, saying, or worshiping in the manner he seems fit. He completely crosses the line with his ACTIONS though: providing financial support to a discriminatory organization. That's the part that I find most hateful.

I will say "Good for him" for donating to the HRC though. It's definitely a step in the right direction.

Greensburg · 1 year ago

I dont think the LDS will loose its tax exempt status since it is not truely a "christian" religion right? I mean the catholic church could/should loose the status since they are a christian religion but the mormon faith isnt truely a christian organization so they shouldnt be punished, right? They are more like a carnival freak show, just go visit their "temple". Talk about getting everything wrong, they have blond haired blue eyed Jesus pictures everywhere. Again. they are not even christians so they shouldnt be given the respect a true christian organization deserves. LOL

Sacanagem · 1 year ago

I find it astonishing that some people can be so stupid as to defend this moron. If you support a political movement that spits in the face of a LARGE percentage of your employees, and that fact is part of the public record, there will be consequences.

Anybody who has issues with gay people has no business WHATSOEVER working in theatre. Period. They picked the wrong fricking business. Trying to deny that is to argue that the Earth is flat.

sputnik · 1 year ago

John Jr and Josephine Templeton of The John Templeton Foundation (a right wing-religious think tank in Conshohocken PA) gave somewhere in the vicinity of 1.2 MILLION dollars. Anyone feel like researching these good folks?

climate3 · 1 year ago

For those who don't like the backlashes, all I can say is MAN UP. There is nothing illegal or unethical about what is happeneing now.

If the LDS can handle the heat, they shouldn't have started the heat.

FunMe · 1 year ago

Good point!

If they want to blame anyone for the backlash, blame the Mormon cult!

Soaplady57 · 1 year ago

He says his sister is a lesbian? I wonder if the Mormon church booted her for that....?

scottinsf · 1 year ago

Probably not, but if she came from a "good" mormon family she was probably subjected to electroshock torture when she was a kid.

Miket298 · 1 year ago

OT: But has anyone heard of any new numbers coming out of Alaska yet?

FNReedie · 1 year ago

The real kicker here is his claim that domestic partnerships and marriage are the same. California really needs to redo the "I'm a marriage"/"I'm a civil union" ads from New Jersey. The two are not the same and until this meme gets removed from discussion, the bigots have something to fall back on.

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

LDS Mormon trolls. Please watch this if you don't understand our anger:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/2765244...

Now, do you GET IT?!!?

bill__free · 1 year ago

Keith was great, and I also think South Park made a great point in their own way. I don't remember everything, but I think that South Park didn't show the episode on TV, (maybe because of legal action?), and you had to watch it on the web.

RitornaVincitor · 1 year ago

This is wonderful news for so many reasons. I'm sure many churchgoers and church leaders are genuinely stunned at the backlash. Almost immediately after the election I began hearing church leaders saying that their churches were being persecuted by gay people. What faulty logic!! Well, let them get used to the backlash. Let it grow. Let there be consequences for trying to force religion on those who don't want it. If the California court does not strike down Prop 8, then there will be a proposition to repeal it in 2010. As they prepare for that fight let them realize what it may cost them.

foxy · 1 year ago

What I want to know now is why the Sundance Film Festival has been so quiet on this matter.

TrappedinaRedState · 1 year ago

How Dick Cheney of him to support anti-gay legislation against his own flesh and blood. Nice... very nice. With relatives like this who needs enemies? The shameless use of his sister to prop up his own 'acceptance' creds just makes it worse for him. Pathetic.

BTW... I don't want 'seperate but equal' and I don't need your 'acceptance' or 'tolerance' thank you very much.

We are all ultimately responsible for our own actions. Had he been working for the LDS as a creative director and made a contribution to the HRC or any other gay cause he would have been fired immediately. Why should he expect any different result in this situation?

Good luck finding another job in the same industry.

bosdav · 1 year ago

His entire statement/response seems absolutely schizophrenic to me.

RitornaVincitor · 1 year ago

Eckern concluded his letter of resignation by saying, 'I am disappointed that my personal convictions have cost me the opportunity to do what I love the most which is to continue enriching the Sacramento arts and theatre community." Well I'm disappointed too. I'm disappointed that Eckern's personal convictions have put my marriage in jeopardy of being ruled invalid. I'm disappointed that Eckern's personal convictions have cost millions of Californians the right to marry the person they love. I'm disappointed than anyone's basic rights can be invalidated at the ballot box. So Eckern had to resign his job. Boo hoo.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

nicely put.


I have a feeling that November 4th was filled with both joy and anger for a lot of people...

odd how for the GLBT community, it was both at the same time

Obama won, and the people of California voted to take away my right to marry.

considering I'm already married, I sorta feel like I'm in limbo... and I also have this low burning feeling like I'm going to snap at someone "why don't my rights matter?!?!??".

I had a wonderful wedding day in July, family and friends. Tears of joy... making the man I refer to as Husbear my Husband.

it IS different than a domestic partnership... only people who are denied the right to marry can possibly understand HOW.

.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

Marriage limbo indeed. I still have friends that were planning to marry and now that's all in limbo until the California Supreme Court puts this to rest once and for all and rules prop 8 invalid.

I saw on the CNN website yesterday the video of Judge Judy on Larry King. She's a BIG supporter of our side. When Larry brought up the Supreme Court, Judy got a sly grin on her face and basically said well, we'll see what the court decides.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

So much different... why people can't understand something so basic is beyond me.
Marriage grants you rights along with responsibilities that CUs do not grant.
Most of these shallow minded people cannot even imagine the hoops that you have to jump through if your partner gets sick, the horrible, hateful, inhuman and thoughtless things you can and often will be subjected to because you are not "married".

Dumbo · 1 year ago

John, I hope you found this, through Google.

http://cfac.byu.edu/index.php?id=1421

Scott Eckern talking about how his acting, producing career, is guided by the Holy Spirit.

Scott: "Just over a year ago, I had the opportunity to be in the celestial room of the Sacramento Temple, sitting 12 feet away from the living prophet of God, waiting for one of the dedicatory sessions to begin. I recall thinking at that time, How did I get here? I feel somewhat the same today—how did I get here—standing before you as an example of the Homecoming theme Come Full Circle.



The last time I was on the Pardoe Theatre stage was 25 years ago. I am appreciative of the opportunity to come back to this stage and share with you what I have done with the stewardship of my BYU education. To a certain extent the reason perhaps I’m here is that I have a successful career in show business and I have a current temple recommend..."

It's a long article.

Gary SF · 1 year ago

Wow! Jami Floyd just gave her personal views about Proposition 8. She said that California got it wrong. She said that she is a Christian, and as such, she supports same-sex marriage. She also said that many have said that they COULD tolerate civil unions instead of marriage, but that we are better than just being able to TOLERATE. I was really impressed.

Older_Wiser · 1 year ago

He voted against his lesbian sister? Not surprising since the Mormons would love to keep women barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. Hell, they'd even love to legally bring back polygamy...

Watch this prop get overturned; the sooner the better.

Meanwhile, in CT, the first couples got their marriage licenses. Will Joe LIEberman run to "Rev." Hagee and get his opinion?

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

Well, at the risk of having my ass handed to me for a hat again, I'm gonna try a slightly different tact...

People who believe in the rights for homosexuals to marry have to understand that there are people - WHO DON'T BELIEVE THEMSELVES TO BE BIGOTS - who think marriage is meant to only be between a man and a woman.

I'm not saying I agree with this; I don't. I believe homosexuals should be allowed to marry. But until you can convince this subset of anti-gay-marriage believers that the right for gays to marriage is just that, A RIGHT, and one that other Americans shouldn't glibly vote away, you're gonna find a whole lot of people like Eckern out there. Look, when I was in my teens and twenties, there were lots of things I said or did that I thought were appropriate, you know, unless you were a member of the liberal thought police. Things I said or did because by God it was my First Amendment right to say and do those things. And while I don't think any of those things I said or did would get me thrown in prison, I'm not that person anymore and were I able to take some of those things back, I would.

Here's a guy who lives and works with homosexuals, has a sister who's a lesbian, believes in civil unions and equal protection...but happens to think marriage should be between a man and a woman. I don't agree with him, and were I ever to have a conversation with him I'd try to get him to change his mind, but I wouldn't point at him and scream "FASCIST" either. Much like the suffrage and civil rights movements, we need to convince people that that way of thinking about gay marriage is wrong. And NOT because if they don't, we'll threaten their livelihood or taunt them in public, but because it IS a civil rights issue, and not open to the interpretations of opinions. That's a big part of it right there, isn't it? People think it's a matter of opinion, and that it's not a matter of equality for all. There are always gonna be gay bashers, homophobes and zealots who will for the ghettoization, "conversion," removal or even in the extreme idiots extermination of homosexuals. And then you have this guy, who had a bad lapse in judgement, thought that civil unions should be just as good as marriage in the civil sense but that marriage should only be between a man and a woman. And a good many of you have metaphorically tarred and feathered him, lumped a potentially eventual ally, a likely sympathetic ear, in with the likes of hate radio and televangelism. Be happy about it, but I can't help but think this guy didn't have hate in his heart. Misguided priorities, but not hate. When I don't like somebody, and I see them deal with a tragic blow, my usual retort is "sucks to be him." But in this case, I mean it, it truly truly sucks, at this moment, for Eckern to be Eckern. He sounds repentant to me, and I hope the money he donates to HRC is the beginning of an enlightenment that makes him see gay marriage is a right and not an opinion.

Gary SF · 1 year ago

Who pointed and screamed FASCIST? Regardless if these folks think they are homophobic or not, they are homophobic. He only 'repented' after he got caught. He still equates domestic partnership with marriage (they are very different) and HE HAS A LESBIAN SISTER. I can't muster much sympathy for him.

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

Well, of course he repented AFTER he got caught. Sounds to me like he
didn't think what he was doing was particularly homophobic UNTIL he "got
caught." Sorry if I didn't make that point, but it was the point I was
trying to make. If otherwise decent tolerant people are making ignorant
decisions based on their religious beliefs or social mores, you have
every right to be angry, but the efforts should be made to educate this
guy that he is being ignorant, even if he doesn't think so. Despite
their rhetoric, most racists and bigots and homophobes are just fine
being racists or bigots or homophobes. But then you have the shades of
gray people, the ones who think black people are fine, but there
shouldn't be mixed marriages, or women should be allowed to work but not
in positions of power over men, or whatever dumb beliefs that got
knocked down and still continue to need to be broken down today.

MALICE. That's the word I'm looking for. As awful as this guy's decision
may have been, it wasn't meant to be malicious. It sounds like he
understands the degree of his transgression now, but it doesn't mean he
was being willfully mean about his decision. I'd bet he'd think twice
about his decision now, AND NOT BECAUSE he "got caught" or had to
resign. I think this discussion is opening up many peoples' eyes.

Gary SF · 1 year ago

I still disagree. Like all Mormons (I have several Mormon family members) they are beyond reason. If the church elders told them that they would be better, more wholesome people by drinking the kool-aid and that people who don't drink the kool-aid are evil, that is what they would all think. So while Scott may not have acted with malice, he did act because he was told to by his church. But his church did act with malice. Also, I feel that in general, if one does not share their anger with someone, one cannot expect that person's behavior to change. We shared our anger. Scott quit.

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

But someone who is told to believe something by their church may still,
eventually, be able to think on their own terms. In 2000, my mom's
church told her that to vote for a pro-choice candidate was to commit a
sin, and she took it to heart. In 2004, same shpiel, but my mom didn't
fall for it. In 2008, they tried to temper it a skosh, more of a "you'll
be held accountable for your actions" kinda shpiel without saying it's a
sin, but good ol Momma Magoo still isn't falling for it. People can
learn to think even the blindly devout.

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

And that, Magoo, is the point. Not to get the guy fired. Not to wreck a theater. It is to get the attention of bigots so they may have their eyes pried open. That's why we have to keep it up.

eclare · 1 year ago

I would agree with you if his statement had indicated that he had truly learned his lesson and understood why marriage was so important. He can no longer claim ignorance because he has seen how hurtful his actions were to his so-called friends. I hope you're correct that his eyes have been opened, but I honestly didn't see anything in his statement to indicate it.

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

No ass to hat, Slappy. It does suck to be him. I didn't want him to lose his job, either, but he chose to leave. I agree with trying to use the art of persuasion. But what exactly makes you think this guy would have sat down and listened for even a moment. He himself said he had no idea this would cause a ruckus. The shouts and yells from his gay co-workers and friends and artists are the only things that got his attention. It is sad, but it seems the yelling is the only way of getting any of the Yes on 8 people's attention. And you can't persuade until you have someone's attention.

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

He had no idea this would cause a ruckus because of the ignorance
inherent in his religion. And we use the term "ignorant" often as a
synonym for cruelty. An ignoramus is a term we usually use to define
someone who knows the difference between right and wrong, and still
prefers to stand behind the wrong belief. I don't think Eckern
qualifies as an ignoramus. Sounds to me like he really thought gay
marriage was a matter of opinion, and in his opinion (based on his
religious convictions) marriage should only be between a man and a
woman, and if gay couples get civil benefits, what's the big deal? And
now (maybe) this outpouring of anger and emotion is a clear indication
that it is a big deal, and that equality for all means gays should marry
(and for the benefit of the right-wing message-twisters, we're extending
the definition of marriage to mean any two consenting adults of sound
mind - NO polygamy, no bestiality, no child brides)

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

EDIT: I meant to say "when I was in my teens and twenties, there were lots of things I said or did that I thought were INappropriate..."

stranded · 1 year ago

I'm a gay man from Arizona, one of the other states that just voted my citizenship out the window. Reading the statement from Eckern made my blood boil. There is an arrogance to the whole notion that some people should be afforded more citizenship than others in this country, and a willful naivete from someone who has apparently spent a career working with gay people. And he's one of the guys who aren't hard-core bigots. Soft-core bigotry perhaps?

All this aside, I believe it's very important that if we're actually going to have a dialog with groups we disagree with (first option--before going for the proverbial throat), is that we have to be diplomatic with people who consider this an element of their faith. It doesn't mean we have to agree with it, but I prefer to approach the conflict from a Ghandi/MLK perspective. There are many great civil rights pioneers who have come before, and their example is important to us now.

I come from a family of Southern Baptists, and I know that the only way I have ever won them over has not been through tantrums (there HAVE been those...) but when we can calmly treat each other with respect. These people don't see what so many are calling hate. They actually DO feel that they're saving us from ourselves (among other things), and it has to be made clear to them what the negative effects of their efforts are. As long as we keep charging them as haters they're never going to understand what they're doing that's so hurtful and selfish. We have to speak to them in different terms.

This is not to say that demonstrations aren't important, they are. It's our time to be vocal and stand up for our--everyone's--rights. But without diplomacy we'll be no different than George Bush in Iraq--invaders in a land we don't understand but are determined to conquer. The end result of our task right now should be a country where everyone has the same freedoms, not an attempt to crush people who might actually be our allies.

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

OK, you win the "says what Slappy tried to say, but better" prize for
the day.

stranded · 1 year ago

Thanks Slappy. I'll add it to my trophy case.

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

Why either/or? i think we need both tacks. I'm also betting that although you think the persuasion was done in the quieter discussions with your family, the tantrums played a good part in getting their attention.

Use it all.

hrh · 1 year ago

Where is my damned barf bag?!?!?!?!

Apphouse50 · 1 year ago

Time for Scottie to move to Utah. They'll welcome him as a hero there.

Funny thing, though, there are now protests in Utah too, it's not just for California anymore.

He may find his options pretty limited -- oddly enough, he didn't mind limiting the options of others.

Sucks to be you, Scottie.

Chrissy · 1 year ago

Big protest going on right now in New York City.

RitornaVincitor · 1 year ago

I'm so glad the law requires donations to political campaigns to be published. Millions of people voted against the marriages and the marriage rights of others in the privacy and secrecy of the voting booth, and that was perfectly legal. But the names of those who contributed to the campaign against those marriages and those rights are known, and it is perfectly legal for us to go after those people by boycotting their businesses. It is perfectly legal for gay people and their supporters to refuse to patronize the businesses of those who would take away our rights. And I'm glad we're doing it!

El Rojo · 1 year ago

Did I donate wrongly? My name is not showing up on the "oppose" list. I gave to Equality California and am proud of it and would like to see my name among those who did.

balafre · 1 year ago

Have the most famous Mormons of all, Donny and Marie Osmond, weighed in on Prop 8?

What's that? They weighed in by remaining silent but continuing to tithe 10% of their SUBSTANTIAL incomes to the Mormon church? They weighed in by not speaking AGAINST Prop 8 as fellow Mormon Steve Young did?

Donny and Marie are currently 'playing' at The Flamingo in Las Vegas. (Too funny that they consider "Sin City" their second home, LOL!)

Boycott the silent tithers, too, I say!

El Rojo · 1 year ago

What you said:

http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/statemen...

I guess his naïve "trust that this decision will be respected by all Californians" and his equally disingenuous "hope there can be a healing among all and a continued respect [?--sic] for the diverse views that have been expressed during this campaign" aren't *quite* turning out as he had planned. But read on:

The Protect Marriage website also has these unfortunate words from Elton John. Of course I'm fairly certain no hospital will ever deny him the right to visit his "civil partner":

http://www.protectmarriage.com/article/elton-jo...

StarSpangled · 1 year ago

Omnipotent John: Question - Does the Constitution preserve my right to marry my sister? What if I'd like to marry my neighbor Keith, as well as my friend Sara ...at the same time?

DavidinPS · 1 year ago

Oh, shut up. This line of thinking is sooooooo tired it is not even worth responding to.

ShochuJohn · 1 year ago

Dear StarSpangled, Yes to both.

Dear fellow defenders of equal rights, don't be afraid of these parallels. If people actually want to engage in these unions, why stop them?

gwyneth · 1 year ago

Are you not able to read? You need to actually read the Constitution instead of asking the same idiotic question over and over. We've already told you how the State laws work with the Constitution. So uneducated! Its not our job to educate you when you keep asking the same stupid questions over and over!

I'm sorry but I'm not a masochist to sit and explain something to someone whose illiterate for the millionth time! Which is obvious at this point in time.

bastiane · 1 year ago

your not born with a gene that makes you fall in love with your brother or sister its a choice. If you want to marry neighbor keith and your friend sara I would support that love is grand!!

Wesinoregon · 1 year ago

LOOK at the "steps" to resign from the Mormon cult. It's crazy...................

http://mormonnomore.com/

Chrissy · 1 year ago

I used that website to get my name off of the Church's membership records.

While in the resignation letter, you state that you want no representatives of the church to visit you, lo and behold one afternoon to "home teachers" showed up on my doorstep asking if there was anything I needed. I hadn't been to church in 13 years. I should have said yes and had them clean my apartment, lol.

What the Mormon church tries to imply to their members is that the only way to leave Mormonism is through a Church Trial and excommunication procedures. Of course, it's a lie, but it does keep the members in fear.

TerryInIowa · 1 year ago

When people say "marriage is between one man and one woman according to [my religion]"
I suggest a reply such as,
"Marriage is the union of two. When you create a dovetail joint from wood and you glue it together, you create a marriage of the two pieces of wood.
Between two people, marriage is a civil contract which provides a couple with certain benefits and obligations under the laws of the government. Holy Matrimony is a religious ceremony which provides a couple with certain benefits and obligations within their religion."
If you have a wedding ceremony in a church and you are married in Holy Matrimony, but you don't get the marriage license from the state, the government won't recognise your union. Period. End of Story.
<snark>I suggest a new voter initiative for California:
Those who voted Yes on Prop 8, if married (or marry in the future), are no longer married. They shall now be domestically partnered.
You may no longer refer to your partner as "wife" or "husband" or "spouse", however, you may refer to them as your "roommate", "partner", "friend", "significant other", or "better-half". Oh, and if either of you leave the state of California, your partnership is invalid until you both return.</snark>

willnyc · 1 year ago

Guess who is on the theater faculty at BYU and produces and directs MORMON theater? Yeah, the ECKERN. He's probably a hero in the eyes of lots of mormons. This whole meme that he didn't act with malice is total bs btw: soft-core bigotry can sneak up on lots of people and before we know it, there's an insidious hatred floating around. Happened with Jews in Germany, god knows how many tribes in Africa, but now, for us - no. No more. If tonight's rally at the mormon church in NYC is any example, we're simply not going to take it any more. Moving on! To freedom!