No one's religious beliefs should be used to deny fundamental rights to others," said Lorri L. Jean, chief executive officer of the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center. "Our civil rights are inalienable."
This peaceful protest will take place this Sunday (November 9th) at 10AM PST. Please spread the word!! Prop 8 is unfair and unconstitutional.
Why Saddleback?
Rick Warren of Saddleback Church came out publicly in an email to his congregation telling them to Vote Yes on 8.
In exit polling Christians voted 66% for Yes on 8.
Saddleback is also a VERY well known church and one of the largest in the country. It's a great place to have our voices heard and be seen.
Please bring your friends - gay or straight. Christian or not. All who support marriage equality are encouraged to come show their support in front of one of the largest churches in America. Bring your signs if you have them!
Driving Directions to the Protest
Map of Protest Location:
View Larger Map
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
62 comments:
I'm interested in joining the protest!
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=33811792481
Are there any organized protests planned for Friday evening?
If you can't join the Facebook Group and RSVP there then please RSVP here.
thanks!!
also protest is sat. 4pm at SADDLEBACK..for the 4:30 and 6:30 services..then sunday is at the MORMON TEMPLE..28291 ALICIA PKWY..LAGUNA HILLS..BETWEEN ALISO AND WOODS REGIONAL PARK
oops..time for sunday 10:30..at the MORMON CHURCH IN LAGUNA HILLS
Oof. Can I be the first to say this is perhaps not the best idea? My family and I proudly took part in the protest yesterday at the Mormon Temple. I support all efforts opposed to churches that financially supported Prop 8 and used church time for political means. However, my parents are members of Saddleback. They also voted No on 8, as did many in the congregation. Rick was under tremendous pressure to make a stand and did so, but he's one of the most tolerant religious figures in the nation. He's also been completely preoccupied by a daughter in law with a 7 week old child suffering from a potentially terminal brain tumor. It was a horrible time to force him to release the statement. Given the situation, though, a protest at that church may do serious damage to the cause, rather than help it. There were a lot of constitutionally motivated No on 8 voters at that church. I'd think twice.
To whom it may concern,
I am Deputy Nelson with the Orange County Sheriff's Department. I am the administrative Deputy for the City of Lake Forest.I am also the protest liason officer. I would like to speak to or meet with the organiser of this protest at Saddleback Church, prior to the event this Sunday. Lake Forest Police Services and the Orange County Sheriff's Department want to welcome you and be able to provide a safe environment for you to express your 1st Amendment rights, from other groups and or the Church you will be protesting. Please pass my number on to the organiser so we will be able to staff this event appropriately to insure your SAFETY and protect YOUR RIGHTS. Office (949)461-3545. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. I hope everyone has a great, safe, and peaceful time protesting in the City of Lake Forest.
lsdwolfe -
I understand some at Saddleback may have voted No on 8 but the statistics show that 66% of those polled claiming the Christian faith voted YES on 8. I personally went to Saddleback and was a member and I know they do not allow anyone in a gay relationship to become a member. I wouldn't quite call that tolerance. Throw that together with the Yes on 8 email by Rick and the fact that this is one of the largest churches in the country, this gives the movement some good attention and makes a great place for a peaceful show of protest.
deb and donna - I'm not sure about any mormon church protest of Sat night protest but I do know there IS a protest at Saddleback Sunday at 10AM.
Other OC protests on Sat night include:
Huntington Beach
No On Prop 8 Protest Rally - Huntington Beach, 2pm
Huntington Beach Pier, Huntington Beach
Laguna Beach
No On Prop 8 Protest March & Vigil - Laguna Beach, Saturday 11/8 5:30pm
City Hall 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach
Proposition 8 Protest/ Candlelight Vigil
7:00PM Laguna Beach City Hall
Parking available at Act V parking lot at 1900 Laguna Canyon Road - shuttle busses will be running every 15 minutes. Bring signs, flags, candles (or flashlights), whistles, and dress for a cool evening.
saddleback prop 8 protest-
I can certainly understand where you're coming from. My point was simply that this might not be the most effective location given the current situation with Pastor Rick and the church's movement to become a more tolerant atmosphere. They have a ways to go, particularly given their location in South Orange County, but have been making strides. They are probably the number one charitable religious organization in the US right now, and one of their biggest undertakings has been to attempt to battle the AIDS crisis. They have done so without discrimination or judgment, as many volunteers can attest. If I may suggest a location that needs to be protested, it's San Diego Rock Church, the largest single church donor to Yes on 8 and a church that needs its tax exempt status examined. Good luck on Saturday/Sunday. We'll keep fighting in my household, and I will pray that the protest remains peaceful and that the churchgoers remain open to the importance of this message. A lot of good comes out of that church, and if approached the right way, perhaps you can make a difference on this issue.
lsdwolfe - I understand they are trying (in some areas - like AIDS) but Saddleback still has a long way to go when it comes to gay rights within the church and gay rights in general. Rick didn't have to email everyone telling them to vote Yes on 8. From my time at the church I know people tend to respect and listen to Rick. If nothing else maybe this peaceful protest will help him to reconsider his stance on prop 8 and on gays being members of his church. I'd certainly be open to dialogue with and I know other have tried (like Soulforce who he chose not to talk to)
saddleback prop 8 protest -
I hope this convinces him to engage in that dialogue. I've always known him to be a reasonable and thoughtful man, although I disagree strongly with his involvement on this issue. I can understand his perspective, but this country is still plagued by a collective ignorance when it comes to our country's fundamental ideals and the nature of our constitution and laws. Again, best of luck on Saturday/Sunday.
Where should we park?
Good question, where should we park? There's not a whole lot out there besides the church.
you can park across the street from the main entrance there. there's a strip mall and gas station. should be plenty of parking there
I REALLY want to go does anyone live in the RSM area and is willing to pick me up???
Thanks
949 858-6227
Isn't this protest more about you then Prop 8 ? As I read your posts, you appear bitter because you cannot modify a particular church's beliefs, based on their interpretation of scripture.
A church is made up of people who study their scriptures, draw conclusions on which they believe is God's will for how they should live their lives, and then they gather together to practice those beliefs.
There are many churches because beliefs vary, and people have different perspectives. People have the freedom in this country to participate with the one that best fits their personal views.
Why would you expect a church to change its beliefs because you emotionally disagree with them ? In the case of Saddleback, which is based on the Bible, can you build your case from the scriptures, or is it built from your feelings ? I'm sure they know how you feel, so why would they meet with you. Unless you can reveal some new Biblical interpretation, validated by other biblical scholars, you have nothing to offer them.
There are churches that believe like you. Are you involved in one ? Is your church actively involved in a ministry to the world ? Is your church, for example, working to fight the worldwide aids epidemic, through the expenditure of time and money to bring support, and medicines, to those who are suffering and dying from this disease ? Are you active in that ministry ?
You can get your media time, spew your hurt feelings, and maybe people might even agree with you about Prop 8, but then what ? There is nothing they can do !
This is a battle that must be fought in the courts. That is the only venue that can do anything about what the voters stated on Tuesday.
I would encourage those considering attending your show to first do their research and see what Saddleback is actually doing that is good for people, including homosexuals. Do you really want to be out there standing against these people as they enter and leave the church ? Be cautious. You may be attacking the very people who may benefit you in the future because their focus goes way beyond themselves !
This doesn't have anything to do with wanting a church to modify their beliefs. It DOES have to do with the fact that they are voting to remove our rights based on their beliefs. They can believe what they want but should we be forced to adhere to that?
The purpose of this protest is to have our voices heard. Just because 8 passed doesn't mean we have to shut up or will. We will keep drawing attention to our cause until we have equal rights. Period.
Help me understand what it is that you feel is being taken away from you. From my perspective, you are trying to redefine the marriage that I have been involved in for over 30 years.
Help me understand what it is that you feel is being taken away from you. From my perspective you are trying to redefine the marriage that I have been working on for over 30 years.
Dave, how does a gay couple marrying affect your marriage at all? Are you going to turn gay? Will it make your children gay?
It's about two consenting adults being allowed to make official their love and life-long devotion to one another. I don't know about you, but I think that's pretty important for most people.
To the bible thumper-
Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuals. As a matter of fact, there is NO mention of homosexuals or homesexual acts in the new testement which is what JESUS against. I don't care what you say... The bible this, the bible that. It's just a BOOK in my eyes. I judge people on there actions and integrity and compassion not on what words in a book they believe in! I don't think Jesus taught to gloat on good deeds. Only to do good deeds and not say a word about it to get recognition... Get a brain and think for yourself. I do belong to FABULOUS Church www.centerfortruth.org
that teaches LOVE that is the BIGGEST message Jesus taught! LOVE YOUR ENIMIES...
Rick Warren wrote to his congregation to VOTE YES on 8. That is why we're going there... MY church has NEVER told us what and how to vote, and if they ever did I would leave!
First of all, I voted no.
In other news, a few very close friends of mine are members of Saddleback Church and have been for a long time. I have met Rick Warren personally as well as read his books, and I have a hard time believing he would be the type of person to tell his congregation how to vote.
I am on Saddelback's email list as are my friends mentioned above. NONE of us got this email. I am saddened that you would make up a lie like this. When you lie, it makes the rest of us who believe in your cause look bad.
To Jennifer,
Please review the link provided below and tell us if you think we're lying now.
http://saddlebackfamily.com/blogs/newsandviews/index.html?contentid=1502
To Jennifer:
You may not have gotten the email somehow, but the Baptist Press did, as did the Christian Broadcasting network. A quick google search for "Rick Warren Prop 8 email" brings up a variety of sources that all seem to know about this email, as well as a video of Rick Warren himself talking about these same issues. Here's one example from CBN:
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/472086.aspx
And the video on Youtube if you are having trouble viewing it on CBN:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o4QqGbQmU0
Can I just say thanks to those who attended. Turnout was good. And MUCH thanks to the amazing Deputy Nelson who was well organized and allowed us to speak for our rights.
Please, please, please don't let the dust settle on this. We all need to continue to speak out against inequality.
thanks for the great turnout everyone! Let's keep up the good fight for our rights! I'll post the links soon from ABC7 & Saddleback about today's great protest!
Since someone from the OC Sheriff's Department left a comment here, I would like to leave my appreciation for this wonderful police department here on this blog. The officers were extremely friendly, helpful and open minded.
Thank you, OC Sheriff's Department!
Instead of protesting if you really want to change the definition of marriage then go through the legal process to get a inititive on a ballot for people to vote on. It is unconstitutional for judges to make public policy. Marriage from the beginning of civilization has always been defined as between a man and a woman, after 4000 yrs this definition is now discriminatory and unfair???
Mormons and all churches alike had the free, legal and constitutional right to participate in a free election (without being harassed by protestors) to choose how to vote on something that was legally put on the ballot. If gays want to force their morality and change the definition of marriage on the rest of us, then I constitutionally have the legal right to vote on it, not have it forced on me and my children and someday grandchildren. Prop 8 is not hateful, nor is it banning gay marriage, it is simply continuing to define marriage as it has always been defined.
Excuse me! Your intolerance and your illogic is showing.
Being a hateful bigot toward people with spiritual convictions that differ from yours, and protesting their places of worship, is neither an intelligent nor progressive way to conduct yourself.
Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Black, White, Latino, etc., it doesn't matter who they are -- it is not OK to bash them because they have non-discriminatory, rational disagreements with you about what marriage means to them.
This blog, conveniently, leaves out many of the offensive and intolerant signs that have been being displayed at such protests. Talk about deception.
I am calling on all rational citizens to actively counter-protest these pro-ignorance, anti-democracy, anti-intellectual "no on 8" protests.
Gays and opponents of 8 are discriminating against people who simply believe that marriage includes a man and woman.
Shame on you guys and your intolerance!
Democracy doesn't want you ramming your ideologies down everybody's throat, especially down the throats of children who are too young to rationally evaluate controversial issues of sexual identity.
Sorry no intolerance or illogic here, I have no problem with two men or two women being in a relationship. I do have a problem with (I will repeat myself) judges who are not legally or constitutionally allowed to change public policy. If we are still living in a free country, than we the people, not judges determine what the legal definition of marriage means.
When gays put a initiative on the ballot and the people of California vote to change the definition of marriage to include two men or two women, and the majority votes for this definition, then I can accept the we the people made their choice.
777 -
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Judicial Review gives our court system precisely the right to interpret the constitution and make decisions that affect public policy based on that. Were you not aware that our courts ended segregation in this country, and this after effectively creating the concept of "separate but equal" 60 years prior?
This matter SHOULD have been left to the courts. It was tragic to allow the majority to determine minority rights, and to have churches violate their tax exempt status by donating to that cause. Our constitutions are in place to protect the rights of the minority against a majority, a valid fear in any democratic republic.
As far as changing the definition of marriage, marriage wasn't mentioned in our constitution until Prop 8. This proposition didn't seek to protect the definition of marriage, it INSERTED the definition of marriage into the constitution, and did so at the expense of a minority group.
Mormons and other religious individuals have the right to take part in a free and open election. Pastors have the right to give their viewpoint. However, actively forcing your congregants to donate, or donating yourself as a tax-exempt religious group, is unacceptable. It is particularly unacceptable as a moral institution to lie and mislead your congregation, and particularly to preach ignorance of the true parameters. I fully support the churches' right to not recognize or perform gay marriages. I do not, however, support a church pushing to alter the constitution or strip the rights of a group (or other churches, in this case) in order to fit its agenda.
777,
That was not directed at you. It was directed at the administrators of this blog.
To the administrators and supporters of this blog:
Gays and opponents of 8 are discriminating against people who simply believe that marriage includes a man and woman.
Shame on you guys and your intolerance!
Democracy doesn't want you ramming your ideologies down everybody's throat, especially down the throats of children who are too young to rationally evaluate controversial issues of sexual identity.
Being a hateful bigot toward people with spiritual convictions that differ from yours, and protesting their places of worship, is neither an intelligent nor progressive way to conduct yourself.
Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, Black, White, Latino, etc., it doesn't matter who they are -- it is not OK to bash them because they have non-discriminatory, rational disagreements with you about what marriage means to them.
This blog, conveniently, leaves out many of the offensive and intolerant signs that have been being displayed at such protests. Talk about deception.
I am calling on all rational citizens to actively counter-protest these pro-ignorance, anti-democracy, anti-intellectual "no on 8" protests.
charlie -
I agree, I've seen some rather angry and hateful signs at protests I've attended as well. However, please understand that the churches that pushed for a "Yes on 8" vote and funded that movement were, in effect, attempting to strip the right to perform gay marriage from churches that believe wholeheartedly in it. There are churches whose rights have been stripped, whereas (despite what the ads would have you falsely believe) no churches would have had their rights stripped by a No vote. Look to Morris Thurston, a pre-eminent Mormon legal scholar and professor at BYU, who stated that it was patently untrue that churches would be forced to perform gay marriage. The only loss of rights pertained to a Yes vote.
I have yet to meet a gay person who wishes to shove his or her ideology down a child's throat. My daughter has grown up with stable gay couples in her life, and every one of them has talked about how the boys are going to love her when she gets older. My wife and I don't worry about something rubbing off, or her picking up on some ideology. To suggest that is ridiculous. If their right to marry had been upheld, you wouldn't have seen gay marriage recruitment offices open.
As far as your assertion that these protests have been "anti-democracy", that's absurd. Our concept of democracy is one in which the majority has a say, but NEVER is allowed to trample the rights of the minority. You should really do some reading up on our founding fathers.
"However, actively forcing your congregants to donate, or donating yourself as a tax-exempt religious group, is unacceptable"
Please provide evidence that the congregation was "actively forced" to support prop 8. From talking to many of them, they did it of their own free will.
If you do not provide evidence (photos, multiple corroborated personal testimonies, eye-witness accounts, validated emails, etc.) that they were "forced" to vote the way they did, then please retract your false assertion.
Hi Charlie,
The purpose of the protest at Saddleback is NOT to get them to change their church doctrine. It WAS to bring attention to this issue in an area that voted in large percentages to pass Prop 8 and restrict our rights.
Rick Warren can believe marriage is between a man and woman all he wants and I don't care if he changes his view. What I do care about is that He and lots of members of this church voted to take away rights from a minority group.
We are going to make our voices heard in areas where we had the most opposition. If that is in front of churches then so be it. Churches were against a woman's right to vote. They were for slavery. They are against gay marriage. Churches shouldn't be "excluded" from protests just because they are a sacred place to some.
I am not intolerant of the churches views. What I DO NOT like is that churches are trying to mold our laws by turning their doctrines into law for everyone.
If we want to make everything illegal that is supposed to be a sin in the Bible then why are we not making Idolatry against the law? Or lust? Or how about Adultery? Why single out gay marriage?
I'm a Christian myself and I respect the right of churches to disagree with gay marriage but I don't appreciate when pastors tell their congregations to vote to take away the rights of another group of people.
Feel free to stage counter protests. This is a free country. If you want to make your voice heard then I encourage you to go do it. But don't expect us to be quiet until we get our rights restored and we are going to take that battle to the places that voted to remove our rights.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The conflict comes when you try to use your opinion to deny the rights of others.
To me - that's what this issue is all about. We are not ramming something new down anyone's throats. Until last Monday gay marriage was legal in CA. Now it is not. Why? Because other groups of people wanted to direct their definition of marriage toward us.
Gay couples are denied fundamental rights that straight couples get in this country - plain and simple.
P.S. Rick Warren never "forced" his members to vote yes but he did highly encourage it. He knows very well people listen to him - otherwise why would they go to church there?
Proof:
http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=29209
Charlie - also note in Rick Warren's email -
2% of population? That is not a proven or accurate number. Plus the gay population of CA is much higher than most other states. Also - more than just gays want it legal. 2% is a very deceiving number.
You know what else is deceiving? Saying Obama opposes gay marriage in the same email you are saying to vote Yes on 8. Obama OPPOSED prop 8. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2008/11/obamas-tricky-s.html. He said "hen you start playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that's not what America's about."
All those against Prop 8 highly encouraged people to vote against it, so church leaders did the opposite, this is exactly why we live in a free country, to freely promote our belief system.
I know not one person who are for Prop 8 that are against gays or are even full of hate toward gays. I don't want to be told I'm hateful and maybe arrested in the future if I tell my children that two men being married is not marriage as God defines it. I don't want to be brandished a gay hater because I believe differently and I want public policy to reflect my beliefs.
777 - I think it's naive to say that no one voted Yes on 8 because they hated gays. Just like it's naive to say no one voted No on 8 because they didn't like Mormons. We all know that both scenarios probably happened.
I would never call you hateful for or think you should be arrested for telling your children what you want to. You can do that right now. You can tell your children whatever you want to and it's not against the law. It will never be against the law to define marriage within your family or church however you want to define it.
Look at states and countries where marriage is already legal and has been for years. Are these places telling churches they can't preach against homosexuality? Are these placing telling parents it's wrong to tell your children God sees marriage as between a man and woman?
I don't think that's happening - nor do I want that to happen.
But sadly SOME of those against Prop 8 did and do define those for Prop 8 as being hateful and against gays. And sadly their have been people arrested for speaking against homosexuality in Canada and Sweden, my concern is that this is what is coming here in the near future.
Lsdwolfe,
agree, I've seen some rather angry and hateful signs at protests I've attended as well. However, please understand that the churches that pushed for a "Yes on 8" vote and funded that movement were, in effect, attempting to strip the right to perform gay marriage from churches that believe wholeheartedly in it.
No, it wasn't about "stripping rights" -- that's empty rhetoric. Centers of worship are free to practice their beliefs, so long as those beliefs harm none. Both sides interpreted this as dangerous to their rights. For example, parents do not have the right to opt their children out of diversity programs, a context within which the subject of gay marriage would have likely came up, had prop 8 been voted down. So let's not have any of this special pleading for one group over another.
There are churches whose rights have been stripped, whereas (despite what the ads would have you falsely believe) no churches would have had their rights stripped by a No vote. Look to Morris Thurston, a pre-eminent Mormon legal scholar and professor at BYU, who stated that it was patently untrue that churches would be forced to perform gay marriage. The only loss of rights pertained to a Yes vote.
That is factually incorrect. As Thurston would concede, Churches would have to perform gay marriages depending on the facilities they use (e.g. are they private church property?). That's what the no campaign chose to gloss over, and it is why sincere people like you are misinformed, thinking this is only about "rights" and "discrimination" when in reality the issue is vastly more delicate with serious consequences looming. Moreover, congregations and worship leaders could be charged with legal discrimination and "hate crimes" depending on the contexts within which they make their beliefs about gay marriage known. It depends on the forum they use, so yes, there is a possibility for Churches to have to bend to ideologies they don't personally believe in and keep their mouths shut about it, even though they aren't harming anybody -- which should not be possible in a free society. Period.
I have yet to meet a gay person who wishes to shove his or her ideology down a child's throat. My daughter has grown up with stable gay couples in her life, and every one of them has talked about how the boys are going to love her when she gets older. My wife and I don't worry about something rubbing off, or her picking up on some ideology. To suggest that is ridiculous. If their right to marry had been upheld, you wouldn't have seen gay marriage recruitment offices open.
Not so. Currently 96% of California schools, despite the lies you've heard from the no campaign that this "has absolutely nothing to do with education", are required to teach about marriage (specifically about respect for marriage). Had prop 8 been voted down, this would have included gay marriage, which would be decidedly shoving it down children's throats in a state backed institution.
The daughter you mention to in passing is likely an isolated case, since scientists have made religiously neutral studies on the basis of objective empirical evidence that there is a high likelihood that children adopted by gay couples will be exposed to unhealthy environments -- much more so than children in heterosexual marriages.
As far as your assertion that these protests have been "anti-democracy", that's absurd. Our concept of democracy is one in which the majority has a say, but NEVER is allowed to trample the rights of the minority. You should really do some reading up on our founding fathers.
Incidentally, our founding fathers were mostly racist slave owners, including Thomas Jefferson, so I'm puzzled as to why you would appeal to their authority on matters of discrimination. But anyway, the sense in which these protests are anti-democracy is that, even though democracy has spoken, you wish to invalidate it through the courts and through shaming religious people in public. That is anti-democratic. No single group was targeted with the passing of 8, since incestuous, polygamous, homosexual, bestial, and under-age relationships collectively do not satisfy the criteria in the definition of marriage. And even then, there is no ostensible discrimination occurring against these groups, as the legal terminology was a positive affirmation of an historically noncontroversial definition of marriage, not a direct negation of any longstanding rights.
Minorities themselves voted yes on 8, and they understand discrimination more than anybody. As a statistical fact, the overwhelming majority of African Americans voted yes on it. A slightly less but still convincing majority of Latinos voted yes on it. They also donated. Jewish people also donated. Etc. Perhaps you are prepared to hold your bigoted protests at their houses next? (By the way, it was individual members of churches who donated, not the official Church of Latter Day Saints itself. And at Saddleback, no member was "forced" to donate -- it was done on a voluntary basis. Does this mean we should picket at their homes, according to your reasoning?)
On a side note, I would be interested in hearing your reasons to exclude those other groups --incestuous and polygamous, for instance -- from getting married, as arguably they aren't harming anybody. If you put any conditions on marriage for those groups, then you have conceded what proponents of 8 have been saying all along: everybody has the right to marry, and nobody has the right to marry whomever they please.
777 -
Yes but this country has a strong history of freedom of speech. There have been some very hateful things said publicly in this county. They may cause someone to lose a job, etc. Think Don Imus! But this country protects free speech. It always has tried its' best to do that anyway.
There already are gay hate crimes laws in many states. Do you know of anyone who has gone to jail over them? Allowing gay marriages doesn't change existing gay hate crime laws already on the books.
I have likewise not met a single person who voted yes on 8 because they were "hateful" of gays. (Although I'm sure there were probably a few out there, just as there were probably a few No campaigners who hated religious people.)
I had a "hate" sign waved in my face for merely wanting more information on the issue and being undecided. I think one of the primary reasons the No campaign failed was due to the hostility, bigotry, and irrationality put on display by many of its supporters. Unfortunate but true. And now you continue to feed this public perception of you by protesting at churches, with chants and signs that bash religious people (many of whom voted no)? Bad move. Very bad move.
There would be a possibility of being charged with legal discrimination depending on the context within which one makes her beliefs about gay marriage known, had prop 8 failed. This should not even be a possibility in a free thinking society.
The issue was about other freedoms this would encroach on and about preserving an historically non-controversial view of marriage that is important to many people -- to say it's all about "discriminating" gays, that it has "absolutely nothing to do with education" sounds uninformed and fanatical. It's partly why the No Campaign failed. Protesting churches, many with members who voted no, makes you look even worse.
Actually no our country doesn't always protect free speech, a state counselor was fired from her job for stating to a gay person needing counseling that because of her religious beliefs she didn't feel she was best suited to help her. And then she said she would get her connected with another counselor to help this person. But this wasn't good enough for this gay woman, so she made the lady pay with her job. I don't call this tolerance, this is discrimination against someone's deeply held religious beliefs.
I could list many other stories around our country where gays are going out of their way to intentionally hurt people who strongly differ with them and their beliefs, but my post would too long.
We are going to make our voices heard in areas where we had the most opposition.
I encourage you to do so as long as it is done in an intelligent and responsible manner.
Churches were against a woman's right to vote.
There were many who supported it.
They were for slavery.
There were countless churches who tried to abolish it. Douglass's own autobiography attests to this. Basic history here.
They are against gay marriage.
See above.
Churches shouldn't be "excluded" from protests just because they are a sacred place to some.
As a basic point of respect in a society where mutual toleration must be practiced, it is wrong.
I am not intolerant of the churches views. What I DO NOT like is that churches are trying to mold our laws by turning their doctrines into law for everyone.
Why do you think in terms of rhetoric rather than logic. There are many churchmembers and churches as a whole who voted no. You are being intolerant of them. Maybe you don't do this personally, but several of the participants in the protests carry bigoted signs and chant intolerant messages, which are intended to bash and humiliate otherwise decent, non-violent church goers.
If we want to make everything illegal that is supposed to be a sin in the Bible then why are we not making Idolatry against the law? Or lust? Or how about Adultery? Why single out gay marriage?
Nobody wants to do that except, perhaps, fringe fundamentalists. There were religiously neutral, secular reasons for voting yes, and many of the voters employed those reasons at the voting booth. Pretending this is all a matter of "religion taking away rights" is a gross oversimplification and an intellectually lazy way of approaching such a delicate issue.
I'm a Christian myself and I respect the right of churches to disagree with gay marriage but I don't appreciate when pastors tell their congregations to vote to take away the rights of another group of people.
That's their RIGHT, and they have the ability to exercise that right in a free thinking society. Nobody was "forced" -- contrary to the assertion above -- to vote or donate. Let people with spiritual beliefs have their rights, stop these bigoted protests.
Feel free to stage counter protests. This is a free country. If you want to make your voice heard then I encourage you to go do it. But don't expect us to be quiet until we get our rights restored and we are going to take that battle to the places that voted to remove our rights.
There are already peaceful counter-protests being organized. To lash out intolerantly against religious people is wrong and positively irrational (since many religious people voted no), not to mention the division it causes at a time when people need to stand united.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The conflict comes when you try to use your opinion to deny the rights of others.
This is empty rhetoric. Again, this is not simply an issue of "rights being taken away to one group". It is much more complex than that, and we cannot afford to let rhetoric and soundbites do our thinking for us. There were some logical reasons to vote yes. Not everybody who voted is some religious vampire out to get you.
To me - that's what this issue is all about. We are not ramming something new down anyone's throats.
Yes you would be, for parents who do not feel their child should be taught the promotion of gay marriage (for whatever reason), they would lose the right to opt their children out of school programs where this issue would be brought up. The California education laws are set up this way, it is certainly false that this "has absolutely nothing to do with education". All people have to do is familiarize themselves with California education laws and they can easily see that the "no campaign" was trying to gloss over these details. Currently at least 96% of California schools are required to have teachings about marriage as part of their sexual education programs. That is a fact, and I ask that you would research it in our education laws (readily available online) before you think of challenging it.
Until last Monday gay marriage was legal in CA. Now it is not.
It was not deemed legal by democratic processes -- which voted against it by a convincing majority. What we have here is one group imposing its ideology on the rest and then complaining about "discrimination" as a rhetorical tactic when the majority has rational, non-discriminatory reasons for voting the way they do. That is wrong.
Gay couples are denied fundamental rights that straight couples get in this country - plain and simple.
Again, we need go beyond rhetoric and carefully assess this issue. Everybody has the right to marry, but nobody has ever had the right to marry whomever they please (that's not a "fundamental right"). Several kinds of relations between persons do not satisfy the criteria for marriage (as supported by democratic processes), not just gays. If you say that marriage does not apply to incestuous couples -- like a daughter and her grandpa-- who aren't harming anybody, then you too are placing conditions on marriage and implicitly agreeing with the fact that nobody has any "fundamental right" to marry whomever they please, even though everybody has the right to marry. It does a huge disservice to free thinkers when this issue is distorted by misleading rhetoric, such as that this is all about "discrimination" and that it has "absolutely nothing to do" with education and other freedoms.
Hi Charlie.
I do respect your freedom of speech but I feel your last post crossed a line. This is a Prop 8 protest blog and if you want to start your own counter protest and or post your own sign ideas - then you'll have to do that on your own blog.
And for the record, I don't think everyone who voted Yes on 8 hates gays. However, almost EVERYONE I know who is gay (at least out gay) has been a victim of hate or knows someone who has been because of who they are. The overwhelming majority of this type of hate, sadly has come from Christians.
Some of us over and over again. We've been heckled, called names, some of us killed for our sexuality. Sometimes this promotes anger. I can understand some of the "hate" signs even though it's an oversimplification. And we both know that some who voted for 8 DO hate gays.
So, you are banning "Charlie" (a different person than me BTW)?
Charlie - I HAVE been letting you speak freely. But if you want to promote another agenda I don't have to allow you to do that on my blog. Do you think Saddleback Church will let us hand out fliers for gay rights? Same thing.
Sorry, Charlie.
BTW: when did you "personally" attend Saddleback and how did you become a member if they do not allow anyone in a homosexual relationship to become a member? I have been a member since 1996, and I am unaware of that "rule".
If you are now "allowing" posts, are you going to answer the questions?
Charles,
I attended from 2004-2007. I was not in a gay relationship when I became a member. Check out this page:
http://www.saddlebackfamily.com/membership/group_finder/faqs_saddleback.asp?id=7509
"someone unwilling to repent of their homosexual lifestyle would not be accepted at a member at Saddleback Church. That does not mean they cannot attend church – we hope they do! God’s Word has the power to change our lives."
In other words - you can attend Saddleback but until you repent of your homosexual lifestyle - forget about membership. Which also means you can't volunteer since they don't allow that if you aren't a member (in certain ministries anyway).
Why do they single out that sin? Why do they allow adulterers to become members? How about someone who is addicted to porn? Drug addict? Alcoholic? If Saddleback wants to restrict membership based on sin, or even sexual sin then it should be across the board. Otherwise they make us feel like we are "worse" and more unfit to be members than other sinners. The Bible is clear that all sin is equal in God's eyes.
Oh, O.K., you were writing the answer. Thanks. I can see why that's important, but it should be the same for any other sin, I agree.
I do know that you cannot serve in ministry if you are going through a (heterosexual) divorce.
Right. I'd have less of a problem if it were a more uniform rule. I also know several straight couples that were not married, having sex and were members. that's also supposedly against the rules but not enforced. I do know about the going through a divorce thing. I think you have to wait a year after that to get involved again.
So, the rule is ANYONE unwilling to repent of their sinful lifestyle would not be accepted at a member at Saddleback Church (now you are saying that rule is not enforced). I would say the same goes for heterosexual "living in sin" sex outside of marriage -- I know that pre-marital counseling requires the couple to live apart -- adultery during marriage. I will have to check into that and get back to you.
I am a member of Saddleback Church and just for the record, Rick Warren NEVER said from the pulpit or in an e-mail how to vote on this or on any other issue. I don't know who in your group started that rumor-but it is a lie and I think it would be best for you to check and double-check your facts...
Post a Comment