Saturday, November 15, 2008

Gay Rights Movement Seeks to Crush its Enemies

Gay marriage activists saw a substantial turnout of protesters for today's demonstrations against California's Proposition 8.

L.A. Protests

According to the Los Angeles Times, approximately 10,000 to 12,000 demonstrators marched in protest in downtown L.A.

"Tens of thousands" marched in San Francisco, according to this San Francisco Chronicle report.

In San Diego, roughly 20,000 showed up for that city's events, which moved TBogg to write, "This is not going to go away."

Well, I couldn't agree more: The gay marriage ayatollahs never had any intention of accepting the will of the voters. The motivation driving the movement is apparently based in an extreme grievance at perceived injustice, which is resulting in a campaign of rage and recrimination, seeking not just marriage equality, but to brutalize those who stand in the way as well.

Rod Dreher writes, with reference to the legal controversies surrounding Proposition 8:
Eugene Volokh, the UCLA law prof who supports gay marriage, once wrote that one of the key goals of the gay rights movement is to punish and marginalize people who in private life hold views they see as anti-gay.
This point seems unimpeachible, considering that gay activists have published the names of contributors to Proposition 8 at the website "Anti-Gay Blacklist," with the goal of boycotting and blacklisting regular citizens who exercized their democratic rights in the political process.

Pam Spaulding, who's been leading the leftosphere's backlash to Proposition 8, said this in response to the Mormon Church's political support of the initiative:

The factions of hate are now ready to take their well-oiled machine and work it on the rest of the country.
There's much more of this tone all over the blog, which is currently dedicated to the national campaign to overturn the will of a California majority.

The left's authoritarianism is evident in
Jane Hamsher's post on the Mormon Church, which has a "they-had-it-coming" tone to it that confirms Dreher's thesis about crushing enemies:

It was awful enough that the Mormons (and Catholics) saw fit to fund an all-out blitz to amend the California constitution to outlaw gay marriage - but now, after breaking the hearts of millions of gay couples in California and across the country, they have the f**king nerve to act outraged when they face protests ....

Can someone show me where in the Constitution or Bill Of Rights it says that "people of faith" are somehow exempt from facing protests? That their "democratic right to express their views in the public square" trumps everyone else's?

The Mormons want to use the First Amendment as a one-way shield to protect their own right to free speech at the expense of everyone else's, while still reserving the right to cross the boundary between church and state whenever they see fit.
In a political battle like this, both sides will be outraged by the tactics of the other. But there's something about the No on 8 campaign that's downright anti-democratic. As Rick Moran says about the left's intimidation campaign against Yes on 8 backers:

Rather than trying to change [public] opinion, they are making these people enemies for life. And carrying out pogroms like this against people who oppose gay marriage based on their religious beliefs borders on bigotry.

There are other means of protest to make your displeasure known than targeting individuals. All the gay marriage advocates are doing is sealing their fate the next time such a measure goes before the [voters].


Anonymous said...

The "will of the voters" is being rejected by the California state governor.

Is he an ayatollah? That's a weak, weak analogy by the way. People who want to extend rights, compared to those who want to kill gays. Very poor.

So far, you are losing this argument as I have yet to see any reasonable discourse against gay marriage. The "will of the voters" is a temporary thing. The desire to marry is not.

This will not go away, and it needs to be fought. By any means necessary.

AmPowerBlog said...

"So far, you are losing this argument as I have yet to see any reasonable discourse against gay marriage."

One reference to our RINO governor and I've lost the argument?

Sorry, Tim, Schwarzenegger's waffling on the issue. In fact, he thinks marriage advocates should try again with another initiative ... and of course, they'll lose.

The Vegas Art Guy said...

So Tim, does that mean that the backers of prop 8 can fight by any means necessary or is it only the left that gets to do that sort of thing?

Anonymous said...

Tim responded:

People who want to extend rights, compared to those who want to kill gays.

Except, of course, that this was never about rights; California already had a domestic partnership law, which extended to same-sex partners who chose to register for it all of the rights we associate with marriage. Had California's voters been asked to approve a domestic partnership initiative, they'd almost certainly have done so, overwhelmingly.

Rather, it is about respect. The advocates of same-sex "marriage" are battling solely over the name of marriage, because they are seeking to have people, with the approval of the state, hold that same-sex relationships are the equal of heterosexual relationships, that same-sex relationships are just as good as normal marriage.

California's voters apparently didn't think that was the case.

libhom said...

You are extremely attached to your heterosexist stereotypes of gay men. Not all gay men are willing to play the role of the weak and helpless. Many are willing to act on their inalienable rights as human beings to fight back against their oppressors.

Your use of "ayahtollahs" is ironic, since you share the same prejudices and agendas on homosexuality as the militant clerics in Iran.

Anonymous said...

I hear all kinds of liberal things about California and some may be true and others not. I do think that the people stongly voted on marriage and they upheld traditional marriage and the voice of the voters should be heard and upheld. I do not hate gay people or despise them, but my role as a man is to be a husband to my wife and to be a father to the children that we produce from that marriage. God made it that way.
Also, I am getting tired of hearing about the gay marriage issue. They say that the voice of the people are not being heard, but I think that the percentage of (the voice) is very small and backed by our liberal and very overtly-homosexual friendly media.

That is my view.

mike in the southeast

judyv12306 said...

I am a straight non active Mormon, living in a Mormon household and appalled by the recent votes in 3 states. So I have made a decision to resign my membership in the Mormon religion.

There are many of us non active Mormon. Maybe a way to hit them is to campaign to get all non active Mormon to resign their memebership. The Mormons are always touting the growth in their church. But I do know that much of the membership is non active with no plan to change that.

If anyone in any power would like to start this campaign, I would be more then happy to help.
Or if any one here knows who to contact to get my idea put forth please email me.