Comments on: 15,000 protesters in San Francisco over passing of Proposition 8

By: RAproducer

RAproducer — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:20:21 +0000

Mormon and Catholic churches now MUST marry ANY heterosexual couple or be sued because of their arguments for prop. 8.

While prop 8 IS unconstitutional and will be overturned, you can make churches choke on their own lies, and hit them where it really hurts by taking their money in court in discrimination litigation. Take away their tax exempt status! Make all their fears come true — but not by allowing gay marriage. Gays didn't want to be married by those hate mongers anyhow. But, now that they lied so boldly is such an anti-Christian manner, they should be attacked by the people through our court system. "Live by the sword…" how does that expression go again????

Enough! Churches do NOT own marriage. It is sanctioned by the STATE, and if churches want to keep their 501(c)3 statius, they BLEW IT BABY!!!!

The public needs to show churches that they DO NOT OWN marriage. We the people own marriage, not churches. Use the mountain of written evidence they published during the yes on 8 campaign to prove they MUST marry every man and woman and cannot discriminate. They will choke and crumble when they realize the foul they have committed with these lies.

By the way, of COURSE marriage is spiriutual, but under Separation of Church and State that argument is not allowed. Spiritual marriage and legal marriage are two completely different domains. Legal marriage allows State and Federal protection. Spiritual marriage can be done on any level a church or individual desires. But Spiritual marriage is ceremony. Legal marriage is a BINDING state and Federal contract.

Prop 8 in California passed, attempting to define a marriage as between a man and a woman. Pro-8 supporters argued that they would be legally forced to marry any couple that demanded it — including homosexual and gay couples.

This argument can now be legally used against them in court — so long as you are a man and a woman — churches MUST marry you no matter what your religion, marital views, or philosophy, so long as you are a man and woman.

You guys want to win this battle or lose? This strategy is legal, bullet-proof, and horrifying to those lying bastards.

This is not anti-Christian — this is absolutely Christian in the true sense of the term.

Here's what you can do for justice and love….

(This was composed and posted by a straight Christian person who is not a Gay rights activist in any stretch of the imagination — but I am ANTI-LIE and will force people who lie to win to ultimately lose. You used Christ's name in vain and in lies to promote your political agenda. That's a no no and the Mormon and Catholic Church surely knows that.)

1) I am not an attorney. Consult one.

2) For this argument to work, you are going to need written and/or recorded evidence of literature and propoganda from the church you approach.

ie, if your evidence (a pamphlet or ad) is paid for by Mormons, go to a Mormon church. It may be admissable against Baptists, for instance, if there was cooersion between the monied interests in this campaign, but keep it simple. Your argument was that you watched or read their announcement that they are forced to marry anyone and you are basing the marriage demand on that published information.

3) Protect yourself from physical harm. Bring video cameras and witnesses if necessary. Get them to state clearly that they will not marry you even though you are a man and woman. (if you can, get them to admit it verbatim)

Limit what you say to them about your motivation.

If they say they will not marry you, quote your evidence and tell them they must.

4) Get a lawyer.

5) Get a lawyer.

6) Be willing to accept as a victory the PUBLIC DECLARATION BY THE CHURCHES THAT THE CHURCHES LIED AND SUPPORT THE REVERSAL OF 8. This is not being done for profit —- but if you can financially benefit for your risk, great!

God bless.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: warholfactory

warholfactory — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:31:05 +0000

I was there. I posted an event listing on my Facebook and it had about 670 people confirmed by 5pm – when I left work on Fri. For SFGate.com who reported that there were only 1,000 people there, this is a blatant lie. If you stood up on Market, you could only see people LINED up all the way down the street. A sight to behold. The other Facebook invite had over 2,000 confirmed – so to SFGate.com – get your facts straight the streets were overflowing.

It made me proud to be a SF resident to see we can all stand united.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:06:35 +0000

Sorry for being dense but this was a democratic decision, yes? Maybe should have got the vote out (like the Morons, sorry Mormons did) instead of stamping our feet and having a hissy fit now?

This does nothing to engender the redneck's to gay rights – they will just assume we don't play by the democratic rules.

Quite how a Democrat State can vote yes to this is beyond belief – but then again America did elect Bush twice – maybe Chad was hanging about or where the butterflies let loose on Prop 8 as well?

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Bill Perdue

Bill Perdue — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 20:01:20 +0000

There were several large demos (10-20 thousand) during the week in SF, LA and San Diego and one of the key things about them is that they were organized over the net and by using cell phones.

Now they're beginning to spread nationally. One was held in Chicago the day after we got clobbered and here are some of the many being held today, Sunday the 9th.

Seattle, Washington
8:00 AM in front of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
5701 8th Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98105.

San Francisco Rally Against Bigotry
10:00am – 2:00pm
St. Mary's Cathedral (Geary and Gough)
1111 Gough Street
San Francisco, CA

Lake Forest, CA
Saddleback Church Protest
10:00 AM at Saddleback Church
1 Saddleback Parkway
Lake Forest, CA

Laguna Niguel CA
Proposition 8 Protest (10:30am) @ The LDS Church, 28291 Alicia Parkway, Next to Aliso & Woods Regional Park (map). Bring a handmade poster or a No On 8 Sign.

La Jolla Prop 8 protest at the Mormon temple La Jolla 11AM
7474 Charmant Drive
San Diego, CA 92122

Los Angeles 12:00pm – 3:00pm
Los Angeles Catholic Cathedral
555 W. Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA

Oakland Mormon Church at 12 p.m.
Oakland Mormon Temple
4766 Lincoln Ave.
Oakland, CA 94602

Cambridge, Massachusetts
Prop 8 Protest
Sunday, November 9, 2008, 12:00-3:00pm, CENTRAL SQUARE, CAMBRIDGE

East Los Angeles
The Latino/a LGBT Coalition:
EQUALITY not H8TE
1pm East LA in Lincoln Park
3501 Valley Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90031

Sacramento Californians Against 8
Protest at the capital building in Sacramento at 1:00PM-4:00PM.

San Jose 2 p.m. | Billy DeFrank LGBT Community Center
938 The Alameda

North Hollywood
Rally in the Valley 4pm
Intersection of Laurel Canyon

Visalia
5 p.m. | College of the Sequoias
915 S. Mooney Boulevard
March down Mooney Boulevard to Caldwell Avenue and back.
Park in Lot 3 off Meadow Lane.
No signs, bring candle!

Rancho Santa Margarita, 5-8pm
Lake Santa Margarita, Santa Margarita Pkwy, Rancho Santa Margarita
We will begin at the south side of RSM lake and probably plan a course down Santa Margarita Pkwy.

Ogden, Utah
Protest LDS President Boyd K. Packer speaking at 6:30 at the Weber State University LDS Institute of Religion, in Ogden, Utah

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Leilah

Leilah — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 19:36:14 +0000

@ Robert
"As far as I know, only Tasmania allows heterosexuals to enjoin gay couples in civil unions."

New Zealand also allows both hetero & gay couples a civil union rather than 'marriage'.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Robert, ex-pat Brit

Robert, ex-pat Brit — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 16:21:30 +0000

Nathan, I also read in the LA Times that even if the uncounted votes were counted…many of which were provisional or mailed ballots that arrived too late to be included, it would still not effect the outcome…..makes you wonder though.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 09 Nov 2008 15:51:07 +0000

Cohen wrote – "With 100% of votes counted, 5,424,916 (52.4%) voted in favour of a constitutional definition of marriage being between a man and woman. 4,832,086 (47.6%) voted against. Some postal and absentee votes have yet to be counted.".

If there are still some votes to be counted – and "some" is 2,700,000″ according to today's Los Angeles Times quoting the California State elections department, how can 100% have been counted?

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Robert, ex-pat Brit

Robert, ex-pat Brit — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 15:08:08 +0000

Coogie, in regard to civil unions, are you implying that in the U.S. heterosexual couples can opt for a civil union in those states that offer them? If so, that is incorrect. Heterosexuals can only marry or form domestic partnerships in some cities or states, and of course, they have the automatic right to marry if they so choose. As far as I know, only Tasmania allows heterosexuals to enjoin gay couples in civil unions. Its possible other countries allow it but to date, I know of none, although I'm sure they're may be a small handful that do. Maybe someone can enlighten us on that.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Laura

Laura — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 12:14:45 +0000

I'm so glad people are fighting back and standing up for what they believe in. It's about time we get our way!

xXx

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Wim from the Netherlands

Wim from the Netherlands — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 11:45:26 +0000

In our country changing the constitution must be started in parliament and needs there three to four of the votes, before it can pass to our "house of lords" for further discussion. A simple majority of 52 % of the people's voice isn't enough tot change constitution.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Adrian-T

Adrian-T — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 11:31:15 +0000

Good work, and turn up the heat on the Mormon Church, a racist organisation until 1979, which had to reject its doctrine on polygamy in order for Utah to be allowed into the Union, and founded by a convicted fraudster.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: Coogie

Coogie — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:42:40 +0000

By its very definition, marriage (a union of a man and a woman), is an under inclusive legal term for use in a society that strives to ensure due process and equal protection to all similarly situated persons under the law. The term civil union most accurately describes the socio/political construct of a state sanctioned union. It is all inclusive in that it can pertain to both heterosexual and homosexual couples.

(Report comment to the moderator)

By: stephen

stephen — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 08:17:05 +0000

This is truly an amazing moment–I was there. The protest continues even still…more than 5 hours later with a sit-in on the intersection of Castro and 18th Street. All traffic is cut off, and protesters are singing songs and keeping up morale as they fight the defeat of equality under the law.

(Report comment to the moderator)