Meet Matt Aune and Derek Jones, your new favorite Salt Lake City residents. Sneaking a smooch — on the cheek — Thursday in front of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on Main Street Plaza, the pair were detained by church security guards for “inappropriate behavior.” And then the Salt Lake police cited them for trespassing. Of course, the church says they didn’t target these two men because they were gay, but because “two individuals came on church property and were politely asked to stop engaging in inappropriate behavior — just as any other couple would have been,” according to a spokeswoman.
The path where they walked is officially church property, but is used as a pedestrian avenue open to the public. That’s because it was a public walkway until 2003, when, reports the Salt Lake Tribune, “in a controversial land-swap deal … the easement became private property, allowing the church to ban protesting, smoking, sunbathing and other ‘offensive, indecent, obscene, lewd or disorderly speech, dress or conduct,’ church officials said at the time. In exchange, the city got church property for a west-side community center.”
Meanwhile, the police are refusing to provide a copy of their report just yet, and the church won’t say why, exactly, their security guards even notified police.
Which begs the question: Shouldn’t they have alerted God instead, because only he knows how to deal with sinners?
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
(Photo: Salt Lake Tribune)
Dennis
Maybe if we proposed gay polygamy, the mormons would get on board with us…
Sorry, but Mormonism = f’ing joke…their core ‘foundational belief story’ makes Scientology seem like a rational and well thought out theology.
Phoenix (The Pinko Commie Atheist Faggot)
@ Dennis,
Mormonism’s core ‘foundational belief story’ makes Christianity seem like a rational and well thought out theology.
strumpetwindsock
@Phoenix (The Pinko Commie Atheist Faggot):
Actually there are many aspects of mormon philosophy which make a lot more sense than most standard christian belief (in theory anyway).
On the other hand, they do talk a lot about free agency and being “in the world but not of the world”, so why the security guards hassling people for doing stuff that is not illegal?
TikiHead
I believe gay smooches send out corrosive particles (Gayons) that attack and weaken hideous pseudo-Gothic architecture. The security guards knew this. Now if a whole crowd gathered and kissed, we could make that pile of shit collapse.
HiveRadical
So clear that this was done by the couple as an act to illicit this end. The issue of the once previous public easement was precisely why they did this where they did this. It’s old hat and shows the lack of scruples held by the provocateurs. This whole story is as much a non issue as the recent Obama photo and just as empty. It has elements designed to illicit knee jerk responses and drive hits, but it’s far from responsible or meaningful reporting of facts.
JDD
“Meanwhile, the police are refusing to provide a copy of their report just yet, and the church won’t say why, exactly, their security guards even notified police.”
Actually, the Church did explain why it called the police. The two were trespassing, which is illegal.
strumpetwindsock
@HiveRadical:
@JDD:
Were there any signs that said no trespassing?
If not then why did the guards not just ask them to leave (a courtesy they afforded Bill Maher when he filmed Religulous – but they he had a film crew with him).
The religious argument aside, there is a lot of bullshit nowadays about clamping down on people in spaces that are technically private, but public in function – libraries, clinics and government offices in malls.
If this happened in a traditional public thoroughfare which just happened to be taken over as church property, I have no problem with “provocateurs” challenging people who want to claim it back.
strumpetwindsock
I am actually surprised they took the bait, and that the security guards were not briefed against a reaction like calling in the cops.
In a lot of cases like this protesters actually have to push pretty hard to get arrested or detained – if they succeed at all.
Do they not realize that (assuming it was an action designed to elicit response) the bad P.R. will make them look like fools? You would think they have learned nothing from Proposition 8.
Jamie
“Actually, the Church did explain why it called the police. The two were trespassing, which is illegal.”
Yeeeeeah except they let everyone else use the walkway willynilly.
And why call the police when a simple “We’d like you to please leave as you are on private property and we don’t want our children to see you do that in front of our church” would probably have sufficed? If the couple had resisted this, don’t you think the Church would be eager to say so, as it would prove that it wasn’t just a simple misunderstanding?
Face it: the Church would not have cared if this were a hetero couple “trespassing” on land they otherwise allow to be used by the public and not just their own members. They are enforcing the law with unnecessary strictness in this case simply because both members of the couple were male, and if you can’t see that much, you’re an idiot.
It’s also entirely possible that the couple did not realize it wasn’t a public-owned sidewalk. In which case it’s even more obnoxious behavior. I’m not anti-Mormon myself (I’ve known a few, and they tend to be incredibly sweet people), but sometimes their Church comes across as being a little power-hungry and intolerantly pushy/selective on things like this.
Dabq
Well, if you do it you may as well do it in front of cult headquarters, since all Mormonism is a cult, since anyone who believes the Joseph Smith story of a haystack and a new bible, is worse than the other, homophobic hate filled so called Christians, and with their kissing, I guess the others missed all the polygamists families and the swapping of their magical under garments on that ‘sacred’ ground!
Kissing dudes in front of the fantasy and hideous temple, more please!
blacknightukalba
how quaint – public displays of affection between two men- in nothern europe we’ve been doing this for ever – sometimes reading this stuff makes me think I have entered a time warp to the past.
schlukitz
@HiveRadical:
So clear that this was done by the couple as an act to illicit this end. The issue of the once previous public easement was precisely why they did this where they did this.
So, by your line of reasoning, Rosa Parks was “looking for trouble” when she sat her ass down in the front of the bus and therefore, got deserved exactly what she deserved?
Why can’t people just STFU and STFD instead of always having to make trouble for the rest of us? *sarcasm font on*.
schlukitz
Typo: Omit the duplicitous extra “deserved” in the second sentence.
schlukitz
@Brother August Ludwig:
Speaking from experience are you Brother August?
No Homophobama
Watch out. Romney is on our horizon since Palin screwed up her chances by showing herself to be weak and a quitter. Nobama Douchebag represents a failure in progress. Romney with good hair and the ability to ad lib sentences much better than our stammering Nobama means we might have a Mor(M)on in the White House sometime soon. Too bad we were blinded by Nobama and did not elect a viable, intelligent, non-corrupt and non-homophobic candidate.
Get ready for more Mor(M)ons thanks to the Obamabots.
galefan2004
@HiveRadical: I think as a person with a brain in downtown Salt Lake City, I would realize that kissing my boyfriend in front of a church where there were not only witnesses but security guard witnesses might be a little over the top. I mean, yeah in a perfect world we should be able to kiss our man or hold hands wherever we want, but in a realistic world we have to stem our behavior for our own safety.
galefan2004
@strumpetwindsock: I think you greatly over estimate the PR argument. If you think the Mormon church cares what people think about its stance on gays then you are mistaken. The Mormon church, like all fundamentalist churches will continue to lose members until it ceases to exist, but in the mean time it has no problem preaching its message of hate as long as the bills are paid.
galefan2004
@No Homophobama: FFS, get over yourself. Seriously, if you think Obama is homophobic then what was Bush? Obama will more than likely get a second term just because he is brilliant and is smart enough to start a war with Afghanistan in his last year of his first term. Do you know the odds of the current president getting voted out of office in a time of war? They aren’t very freaking high.
strumpetwindsock
@galefan2004:
@galefan2004:
Stem your behaviour?
Not if it’s de facto public space, and certainly not if you’re trying to make a political statement and GET a response.
And actually they ARE sensitive to PR. If you check you will notice they DO respond to bad press. Plus, the Mormons do have experience with persecution (even though it’s only a complex now, it once was very real) and they have a squeaky clean image to uphold. So I think this security guard calling the cops was a definite blunder.
Plus I think you’re greatly overestimating the situation if you think they are going to cease to exist anytime soon.
… but that’s another question.
strumpetwindsock
At the very least if they want to expropriate anymore of downtown Salt Lake, or any other community, having their private cops busting people isn’t a very good way of showing that they will be good stewards.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
but in a realistic world we have to stem our behavior for our own safety.
Archie Bunker would be so proud of you.
“Stifle yourself, Edith” was his mantra too!
Stemming our own behavior for our safety is nothing more than a lame excuse for supporting and enforcing the rules of separatism laid upon us by the RRRRR.
I, for one, never cared much for the sight of a yellow-steak down my back. The only thing it matchs, is the brown stains of fear in the seat of one’s pants.
As a self-respecting gay, I will NOT sit at the back of the bus. I will NOT drink out of a separate water fountain. And as an American taxpayer, I will NOT accept second-class citizenship.
Nor, will I stifle myself.
Sorry if that offends you…or anyone else that thinks that they have the God-given right to dictate the mores and social behavior of everyone else.
Brother August Ludwig
@schlukitz:
Actually, yes. Brother August was a Catholic Brother, my high school principal for one year. He raped one of my classmate’s younger brothers, and quite a few others in his many postings with the church.
DuttyBarb
Just shut up ..all of you!! Queerty shame on you for that misleading topic(as usual)
This has nothing to with gay people..why should you kiss anyone in a church environment??? WHY PROVOKE PEOPLE?
Religion is not a joke to everyone. You people whine about tolerance and acceptance….well how can you want something that you refuse to give others. Respect their religious right. A straight couple would have been told the same thing as you well know.
Grow up and keep your amorous habits to your homes
TANK
DIsgusting pigs. I hate mormons–they’re a plague of locusts. I refuse to patronize mormon owned businesses (they’re cropping up all over the country…and have been for quite some time…all with allegiance to salt lake). Mormons actually make my case for me, though. WHenever it is brought to their attention that their religious beliefs are so insanely irrational (moreso, I’d posit, then religions with actual traditions…), they like to call into question that their beliefs are no more irrational than any other religion (like scientology, for example), discrediting the whole lot of superstitious white noise.
Marius
@DuttyBarb:
You’re here to provoke are you not?
TANK
But seriously, it could’ve happened to a more attractive couple…
strumpetwindsock
@DuttyBarb:
Oh yeah, would they have called the cops on a bride and groom for kissing during a wedding ceremony in a chapel?
In the first place, there is no way they would have called the cops on a straight couple sharing a kiss on the cheek and you know it.
Secondly, this is open air public space, not the nave of a church. It may be privately owned, but so is any mall.
I have nothing against straight people per se, but some of you are stone blind to all the privileges you enjoy.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
And then there’s the notion that only young fashion models should have rights or be seen in public.
schlukitz
@Brother August Ludwig:
I am so sorry. I didn’t know.
I hope the pervert was caught and dealt harshly with.
Of course, if those crimes occurred in an RC Church, I guess that is just wishful thinking on my behalf.
They probably just transferred him to another diocese with better “pickings”.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Yeah, it doesn’t get enough attention.
Brother August Ludwig
@schlukitz:
I only know of this one incident, and an attempt on
another classmate’s younger brother, who stopped it.
The ruse was that it was too expensive to get separate rooms on
out of town trips, so August would room with a boy. None of this came to light until 20 years after the fact.
August was eventually imprisoned for a while for crimes on the east coast, then was retired.
He’s dead and I’m sure went straight to hell.
Why would you wish these crimes be committed in a church?
Extra perv factor?
TANK
@Brother August Ludwig:
You poor man. I had no idea your homophobia stems from being raped by a priest over and over again. That’s awful. I hope you’re getting counseling for it, and received compensation in a lawsuit against the church. Wow, it really does ruin lives as is clear in your case.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
And I guess that’s why we won’t see your face published anytime soon taking an actual stand on any issue.
Bitching that others who have the guts to do something aren’t pretty enough is much more important work.
No Homophobama
@@galefan2004:
= Obamabot retard.
Obama stated that he is against marriage equality because “God be up in da mix.” (sorry paraphrased)
He campaigned with gay bashing Donnie McClurkin.
He gave gay hating Rick Warren a position of honor.
He compared LGBT people to those who practice incest and pedophiles in HIS DOJ brief (I am a lawyer from a top law school, and I read the brief!).
How is this douchetard NOT a homophobe.
NOW GO LICK OBAMA AND HIS MAN ARMED WIFE MA-CHELLE.
schlukitz
@DuttyBarb:
Just shut up ..all of you!!
Am I noticing a trace of pique, here? Getting under your “skin” are we?
Queerty shame on you for that misleading topic(as usual)
Really? In what manner was it “misleading”? Two men kissed. The cops were called and the “offenders” were charged with a crime by the SLC Police. How would you have reported it?
This has nothing to with gay people..
Then why were two gay people arrested? Whey didn’t they arrest two straight people?
why should you kiss anyone in a church environment???
I dunno? Why shouldn’t you not kiss anyone in a church environment? Newly wedded couples do it all the time. Dumb question.
WHY PROVOKE PEOPLE?
Because there are bigoted, homophobic, hateful and discriminating people like you who need a wake-up call and a reality check. Why NOT provoke people? If Rosa Parks had the balls to “provoke” people, why not not the gays? It’s ok for one group of people to “provoke, but not another? Fail!
Religion is not a joke to everyone.
Well, that is just a point of view. Religion is a joke to most of the people that I know. They have bains…and are not afraid to use them to figure out that you Christers are just trying to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes and tell them how they must live.
You people whine about tolerance and acceptance….well how can you want something that you refuse to give others.
Dutty, read my lips. No one wants or is asking for your shitty tolerance and acceptance. Shove it where the sun does not shine.
All we want, is what our tax dollars have been paying for all along and which people like you will do everything in their power to prevent.
Respect their religious right.
Sorry. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. You religious whackos will get not an ounce of respect from the LGBT community, until you start showing some respect for members of the LGBT community. You people started this shit and you have the power to put an end to it if respect is what you really desire. You don’t light a Molotov cocktail, toss it in someone’s back yard and then yell “unfair”. I don’t see any olive branches or white flags popping up in front of the Salt Lake City Mormon Tabernacle or on the front lawns of any Churches in the land. Do you?
A straight couple would have been told the same thing as you well know.
Bullshit! And you damned-well know it.
Grow up and keep your amorous habits to your homes
After you, my dear. Do lead the way.
When you have finished your lap dance, that is.
schlukitz
@Brother August Ludwig:
Despite my apology and trying to be understanding of what you have posted, I get that you are spoiling for a fight and I am not sure why?
Why would you wish these crimes be committed in a church?
Extra perv factor?
I give up. Why would I wish these crimes be committed in a church? I am unabashedly gay, but one of the things I am NOT, is a perv. You don’t know me well enough to make that sort of sweeping generalization. Undoubtedly, it stems from what appears to be homophobia on your behalf.
What I said was (watch my lips now), I hope the pervert was caught and dealt harshly with.
What part of that comment did you deliberately CHOOSE to misinterpret?
bill
“It’s also entirely possible that the couple did not realize it wasn’t a public-owned sidewalk.”
Actually they did know it was church owned property, right in the salt lake tribune story one of them talks about how he protested the sell of the property to the church back in 2003. They understood where they were.
Also it says the security guards warned them, and then they refused to leave the property. They could have left, but chose to refuse to leave and be arrested.
strumpetwindsock
@bill:
Thanks for clearing that up.
Good for them. The privatization of public space is completely fucked. Wherever private owners try to impose their own set of arbitrary rules or exclude people (like barring homeless people or non-patrons so they can’t go to libraries or visit doctors located in malls) they should be challenged.
Again, I think the Church is insane for even taking the bait on this one; it will only be bad for them.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
You taking a stand here, old timer? Is that it? You shaking your fist at the air now? Please.
TANK
@bill:
SO basically, you believe that title II of the civil rights act is wrong by endorsing their right to be bigoted in public accomodations, and to discriminate.
bill
Well i don’t believe that i voiced my opinion on the issue, i was just clearing up issues that people had wrong on the situation. 1. they knew where they were and 2. they had the opportunity to not be arrested. That’s all i said.
BUT, since you mentioned it. Title 2 doesn’t apply because a deal was made where the state was given some land owned by the LDS church in exchange for complete control over mainstreet plaza which is now regarded as religious property and can enforce any rules against behavior they don’t want happening.
Not saying i agree with it, but that’s what was worked out.
Brother August Ludwig
@schlukitz:
You needn’t apologize. Nothing happened to me. He wouldn’t dare
touch me as he was 5’5″ and I am 6″1″. He went after the small boys.
Perv? Sorry, I should have hit the facetious button.
But don’t be so touchy, you’ve tossed out your share of insults, too.
Call me what you will, I’ll get over it. Bigot? Fine. Ignorant? OK. Homophobe? In your eyes, guilty. Irreconcilable differences.
We can argue all day about the meaning of gay, perversion, aberrant, etc. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.
I applaud this forum for its lack of censorship.
I do agree that the title is misleading, though.
Brother August Ludwig
@schlukitz:
6’1″
TANK
@bill:
but the reasoning does apply, you see, if the easement is a public forum which, if it weren’t, would inconvenience many people who live in the area who would be precluded from using it and exercising their first amendment rights as they would be entitled if it were a public easement. You can argue that it’s not (like a homophobic fool), but it’s pretty clear that it’s a public forum in my and the ACLU’s opinion. Unfortunately, the tenth circuit court of appeals disagreed with that. I think it is a public forum and accomodation, and I’d like to remind everyone that the law is not ethics.
“Unfortunately for Salt Lake City residents, this decision may precipitate the loss of a central public forum of the type that was held in high esteem by our country’s founders who valued, rather than stifled, diverse viewpoints.”
http://www.acluutah.org/mainstreetplaza.htm
TANK
@bill:
It has worked out that way, and it’s highly unethical and the reasoning is contrary to title II of the civil rights amendment.
AlwaysGay
Hiveradical, jdd, and brother august ludwig are mormons. Mormons infest the internet. When I had a website against prop 8 the second highest traffic I got was from utah where many mormons live. They tracked my website. They are a dishonest, hateful group that is not afraid to lie. Baring false witness is what they do. Don’t believe anything brother august ludwig, hiveradical and jdd wrote.
TANK
@Brother August Ludwig:
It’s a shame that you were brutally raped by a priest and that it has warped your understanding of the truth to such a degree that you’re a homophobic bigot.
TANK
In fact, that ruling can be said to be the formal cause of this bashing. Do not look to the law for justice…the law isn’t in the justice business.
bill
@tank
I’m not disagreeing. You point is sound. However i’m just telling people that the courts have ruled that the LDS church has a right to do these type of restrictions. So really i can see not liking it, and thinking it was over the edge but the church acted in their already established legal right.
Brother August Ludwig
@AlwaysGay:
Actually, I’m an atheist, AKA recovered Catholic.
Brother August existed, if you want to call it that.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20020609&slug=skylstad09m
Turns out he got to two of my classmate’s brothers and a few more that I wasn’t aware of. Oh, it’s “Bearing false witness.”
TANK
@bill:
So were the nazis. Godwin’s law.
bill
@Tank
i think that’s an extreme comparison
schlukitz
@DuttyBarb:
After thought:
Respect their religious right.
FYI, respect is NOT an entitlement that can be demanded. It must be earned.
Since religion shows no respect for others and has done absolutely nothing to earn it, I and my brothers and sisters are under no obligation,whatsoever, to show any respect in turn. You reap what you sow.
Just sayin’.
schlukitz
@TANK:
Do not look to the law for justice…the law isn’t in the justice business.
Amen, brother Tank!
TANK
@bill:
Yes, but it’s true. The nazis–later– were operating within the letter of the law they had created to make legal their mass executions.
The point is that it doesn’t matter at all if they have the legal right to do what they did–it was unequivocally wrong.
bill
@Tank
Yes, but the nazi’s were also making the laws. The mormons aren’t running the court of appeals. So there is a distinct difference in that nazi’s justified their actions. The mormons actions are being justified by an impartial judicial system.
TANK
@bill:
Since when is the judicial system impartial? Throughout this country’s history, from siding with racist murderers, etc–the court’s have revealed themselves to be nothing more than a product of the spirit of the time, and grossly impartial to the whims of the popular (as opposed to ethical) opinion. The ACLU seems to disagree with the impartiality of the ruling–and the ruling itself. As do I. You’re invoking a fairytale to justify these actions, somehow.
The mormons aren’t running the court of appeals, but that doesn’t matter to the fact that the court of appeals sided with the mormons and are formally responsible for this bashing that the mormons carried out. They apparenty agreed with the argument proposed by those who run the city and wished to grant the easement to the church (mormons). So while the mormons don’t run the court, the court abeted the mormons.
That, however, misses the point of the comparison. It doesn’t matter to my point whether or not the mormons are “running the tenth circuit”–the point, to reiterate for clarity, apparently–of the comparison was to demonstrate that operating within the law doesn’t mean a damn thing to the ethics of the situation.
bill
and yes i realize your point is that laws aren’t always just. And i’m not disagreeing with you. But the point i’m trying to make is everyone is complaining about them being arrested. But these men were arrested because they refused to leave religious property after being asked to once they engaged in actions that go against the owners moral code. The same thing would have happened to me if i had gone smoked on the property then refused to leave. The men didn’t have to be arrested their fate was in their hands, that’s all my point is.
TANK
@bill:
But doesn’t this also speak to the people enforcing the code? Just because they have a right doesn’t mean that they should, as you obviously agree. Or that police are somehow magically recused from heinous nature of their deeds because they were simply “enforcing” the law–which can be quite ethically abhorrent. Unfortunately, I never bought into the “just following orders” defense. I think it’s unacceptable, as were the behaviors of the security personnel and the police here.
TANK
That is to say, it wasn’t entirely their fault, as you portray–the ethical responsibility also rested on the security and police…and they failed to discharge their ethical responsibilities.
Michael
The prurient prunes who were offended enough to term a kissing gay couple “inappropriate” should be arrested for wasting public resources and having too much time on their hands for appeasing a warped sense of entitlement. It is their burden to adapt to the real world with LGBTQ people in it, not the other way around.
Martin Luther Queen
“But these men were arrested because they refused to leave religious property after being asked to once they engaged in actions that go against the owners moral code. The same thing would have happened to me if i had gone smoked on the property then refused to leave. The men didn’t have to be arrested their fate was in their hands, that’s all my point is.”
Your point also applies to the lunch counter sit-ins in Greensboro, NC, when those obstreperous Negroes didn’t HAVE to be arrested, but they CHOSE to be, even though their presence at the lunch counter went against the owners’ moral code.
In my opinion, the Mos are just BEGGING for 10,000 or 100,000, or 1,000,000 mos, mo-mos, les-mos, and red-blooded, flag-waving, Mormon-hating Heter-mos to come occupy the plaza, engage in waaaay gratuitous public displays of affection, then turn around and full-ass moon that stupid tabernacle. Defecating in the plaza would be to the discretion of the demonstrators. Let’s see those fuck-tard rent-a-Mo security guards shit their knickers over THAT scene. Can anybody say Flash Mob?
It’s time to take the fight to the lunatics’ home turf.
TANK
I think, in summary, that the people who enforce the laws are just as responsible for its enforcement as those who made them. It is an endorsement of the law that was crafted. TO see yourself as a mere mechanism that enforces the law is a sleight of hand invented to eliminate moral responsibility in an efficient cause, which is unjustifiable given that a social law is only as good as its enforcement.
And court rulings make law–there’s no mistake about it. Judges fill in the gaps that are inherent in all laws made by legislative bodies. They can do so conservatively or not, but they do so nonetheless. The constraints some theories of jurisprudence place on the decisionmaking process are just as arbitrary as laws themselves. Spirit of the law, or law as integrity (dworkin’s favored theory), are epistemically vacuous given that there is no definitive meaning of how it applies to specific instances. They just make people who issue and disagree with the rulings feel better.
bill
“they failed to discharge their ethical responsibilities.”
Ethical by your standards. They’re no doubt lds and were protecting what they see as a sacred place from behavior they deem to be inappropriate.
bill
“Your point also applies to the lunch counter sit-ins in Greensboro, NC, when those obstreperous Negroes didn’t HAVE to be arrested, but they CHOSE to be, even though their presence at the lunch counter went against the owners’ moral code.”
which is a legititamate form of protest, and if that is what they were doing more power to them. But they weren’t.
TANK
@bill:
It doesn’t matter to the ethical evaluation of the situation if one’s convinced that one’s position is the right position. History is littered with the corpses of those who sincerely believed that their position was the right one, and were willing to inflict unimaginable suffering upon anyone who disagreed with them. Mere disagreement alone doesn’t imply relativism. That’s an invalid inference. Let me show you.
A believes that x is right; so according to A, x is right; x is right for A; therefore x is right. You simply cannot infer that because someone or a large group of people believe that something is right, that it is. It mixes up the “for of according to” and the “for of applies to,” and results in a logically invalid argument. Just because Joe believes that jews are evil and should be destroyed doesn’t mean that it is right, or that it should be implemented. In fact, joe’s belief and the rightness of the situation are totally distinct. The for of applies is a different story. Neither you or I believe that if we saw a cop breaking the speed limit in pursuit of a criminal, that according to him it’s right and according to you and I, it’s wrong. The law doesn’t apply to him in that context, regardless of what we believe.
Moral relativism, which is what you’re alluding to with “by your ethical standards”, is an incoherent metaehical theory. Contrary to what you or I or anyone believes, there’s right and wrong and these things are no relative to the believer.
Michael
@Martin Luther Queen: love it. A group of cavorting homos in a Mormon plaza would certainly be an improvement over that stiff convention it sounds like they’ve got now.
TANK
@bill:
I dont’ think the intent can distinguish it. For their intent could have been to do just that, and it would have resulted in the same outcome. Therefore, their intent is wholly immaterial to whether or not this is a legitimate form of protest. Thankfully, it has become a call to protest.
bill
@Tank
“there’s right and wrong and these things are no relative to the believer.”
how do you know what is right or wrong then? I imagine you happen to have standards and beliefs that line up perfectly with this supposed absolute truth.
Anyways, i’m gonna go make out with my girlfriend at the plaza I’ll let you all know if i get asked to stop, then we’ll know for sure if it was a gay issue.
strumpetwindsock
@bill:
Of course the matter was in their hands.
Bill, do you understand that it was probably their goal to get charged, and they succeeded?
The Church may have had the legal right to call the cops, but the question is whether it is ethical or not.
As I have said, there are disputes in many cities regarding privatization of public spaces, and how far landowners can go in enforcing their rules on the public.
Certainly the couple orchestrated this even as a way to start a confrontation, and the only possible loser can be the church.
TANK
how do you know what is right or wrong then?
Every proposed system of morals seeks to do one thing: minimize suffering. Some of succeeded in this enterprise better than others.
I imagine you happen to have standards and beliefs that line up perfectly with this supposed absolute truth.
There’s only one absolute ethical truth: avert and minimize unnecessary suffering–for that is what the predicate bad means (unnecessary suffering). Any system of ethics unconcerned with minimizing suffering in any way for any one and as much as possible…is not a system of ethics, for it is concerned with nothing ethical.
Anyways, i’m gonna go make out with my girlfriend at the plaza I’ll let you all know if i get asked to stop, then we’ll know for sure if it was a gay issue.
You do that, champ.
bill
the church may lose in the pr front. but they said before if they can’t enforce their rules on the plaza they’ll just close it to the public, so i don’t think they’re too worried.
and i do realize the whole thing could have been (and probably was staged) my point continues to be why is everyone on here surprised then. That’s what happens when you refuse to leave private land, which is why they were arrested. Don’t you people see that they’re trying to force the mormons to accept their beliefs as much as the mormons are trying to make them accept theirs. Just because you agree with the gay position doesn’t mean it’s the ethical one. Wonder if the christian right are correct and there is a god and he believes homosexuality is a sin, then perhaps what happened was the moral or ethical position.
bill
“There’s only one absolute ethical truth: avert and minimize unnecessary suffering–for that is what the predicate bad means (unnecessary suffering). Any system of ethics unconcerned with minimizing suffering in any way for any one and as much as possible…is not a system of ethics, for it is concerned with nothing ethical.”
okay well i imagine more mormons would have suffered from their sacred places being disrespected then homosexuals being hurt because they can’t kiss on a 40 yard strip of land.
Mormon Bishops
Just an anecdote…
About 10 years ago I took my elderly Father down to Cabo.
The condo below us invited us down for a drink.
Great cigars and fine single malts! These men were styling.
They called themselves the “Mormon Bishops” from Salt Lake City.
We partied and went out to dinner many times over the week, and had
a helluva good time.
Dad had no clue. He was wondering why all these well-dressed, well-off men didn’t have any women with them. “It’s a convention of Mormon Bishops,” I said. “But they’re not supposed to smoke or drink.” “Maybe they get an exemption, being bishops and all.”
A few weeks later, I explained that they were gay.
“Well, them gay folks know how to party” was all he said.
TANK
@bill:
Unnecessary suffering is is not up for grabs, you illiterate asshole. It’s not “relative”. If you think so, you should be whipped until you admit otherwise. What are you, sixteen?
It’s not up to your “imagination” what is and is not unnecessary suffering. Suffering’s real, asshole.
bill
who is the judge of suffering is my point
TANK
@bill:
Accept the mormon beliefs result in harm to people, whereas no real harm (distaste isn’t harm) accrues if they stop being bigoted.
Oh, and asshole, that’d just be god’s opinion, then, and can be questioned like any of the idiots who ascribe their opinions to that fantasy.
TANK
@bill:
LOL! What do you mean who’s the judge of suffering? LMAO! That doesn’t many any sense. Who’s to say what constitutes suffering and what doesn’t? Um…suffering exists….and most of it’s unnecessary. Any suffering that could have been avoided is unnecessary. Those that suffer and know what suffering is.
There’s a big difference between having your feelings hurt and being tortured.
TANK
@TANK:
except
bill
haha, okay TANK, from now on i’ll come to you to define weather something is real harm or not.
bill
There’s a big difference between having your feelings hurt and being tortured.
exactly and these dudes were the ones who had their feelings hurt.
TANK
NO, asshole, these people were being discriminated against by homophobes. I don’t care if they’re religious homophobes, they were being targeted because of their sexual orientation, and caused to suffer as a result of that.
I don’t care if one’s religious sentiments are offended of those religious sentiments result in the suffering of others. It doesn’t matter when weighed against that.
TANK
Are you a mormon, too? One of those locusts? Your kind should have been exterminated like the vermin you are by other irrational religious folks. It’s too you weren’t, for there’d be less irrational people around if you were.
bill
“should have been exterminated like the vermin you are by other irrational religious folks.”
wouldn’t that be suffering? that’s not ethical haha.
See you keep sayig they suffered because of the homophobes, but what did they suffer? they were asked not to kiss (which anyone would be depending on the type of kiss it was in a sacred place). Their suffering was hurt feelings just like you say the mormons suffering was just hurt feelings.
TANK
@bill:
I hope so, you seem like you’re in desperate need of moral instruction…I dont’ think you’re uncommmon, though.
See, I don’t think anyone really believes that the torments of homophobes who believe that homosexuality is a sin is worth the persecution of gay people, just as no one believes that the torments racists go through because interracial couples are allowed to marry justifies banning interracial marriage, and causing those couples to suffer unnecessarily.
There’s a big difference between needless suffering and necessary suffering. Necessary suffering amounts to bigots suffering because their beliefs that, when acted upon, cause physical pain, death, and promote a toxic environment of intolerance in which people are precluded from achieving happiness–are denied. Their beliefs about others behaviors that do not impact their own in any TANGIBLE way other than the irrational psychological defects inherent in their dogma (that’s their problem, not who it’s directed at), do not justify them.
TANK
@bill:
Well, as I see the less of you irrational bigots around, the less suffering overall will be promoted.
TANK
@bill:
Oh, okay, you fundamentally don’t get homophobia, or oppression of any kind. You’d be telling those who protested segregation laws by violating them at lunch counters, “it’s only lunch, bub…you’re not really suffering…just food.” What has been instructive, however, is that I have exposed you as the bigot I knew you were when I began this useless exchange.
TANK
ANd I have rendered your attempt at “reasonable homophobia” unreasonable.
bill
“Their beliefs about others behaviors that do not impact their own in any TANGIBLE way other than the irrational psychological defects inherent in their dogma (that’s their problem, not who it’s directed at),”
you keep amending your original position to fit your needs. Whatever you need to do man, whatever you need to do.
My personal opinion is both the couple and the mormon security were being stupid.
But unlike you i don’t think anyone should be killed. ignorant or not. And to think you were comparing others to nazi’s. WOW.
TANK
That is to say that this world would be a much better place without mormons.
TANK
@bill:
You’re stupid. I haven’t amended anything.
Martin Luther Queen
“…which is a legititamate (sic) form of protest, and if that is what they were doing more power to them. But they weren’t.”
Yes, I believe they were protesting. When they realized that they were being singled out for harassment by the Mormon security guards, they refused to be intimidated, and stood up for themselves. THAT is protest, every bit as much and every bit as legitimate as Rosa Parks refusing to be sent to stand at the back of the bus. Whether it was spontaneous, or whether it was approved beforehand by the HRC, it was legitimate. And not a little bit brave.
strumpetwindsock
@bill:
Sacred place?
Bill, it wasn’t the celestial room, it was an outdoor walkway which used to be public property and is obviously still being used as a public thoroughfare.
There is nothing sacred about it.
Obviously some people were upset that the church took it over in the first place, and from the sounds of it they had good reason. You seem to think this is a matter of the general public enforcing rules on the LDS Church, but obviously some people who care about access to public space have different feelings about who is encroaching on whom.
Salt Lake is not Nauvoo, so that siege mentality is a bit inappropriate in this day and age.
And actually I see this less as a gay issue and more as a public access issue. They could easily have used something else to get a reaction.
And for the record, I don’t share the opinion that mormons are vermin, but I do think the church needs to remember that your country is a secular land. If they weren’t prepared to make reasonable accomodation they should not have accepted responsibility for that land in the first place.
G
Ironic that a gay man is saying that Mormons are locusts and should be extinct.
TeleUte83
@strumpetwindsock: Yeah, but religions aren’t supposed to be logical. That’s why we call them religions, based upon faith, and out of touch with reality, rather than groups of people coming together for a productive purpose.
TeleUte83
@HiveRadical: So obvious that kissing your boyfriend on the cheek is intended to illicit a response. Just like just-married moron couples with buck teeth and receding hairlines, whose making out on the concrete pedestal after going through the marriage assembly line is intended solely to make me nauseous.
At what point is kissing my boyfriend on the cheek not going to be seen as some illicit activity?
TeleUte83
@galefan2004: Really we ought to just get concealed weapons permits… there’s no signs there that prevents me from carrying a handgun onto the former easement. You’d think that would be a more important issue for the church, but alas, they are more worried that gays will corrupt their already faltering hierarchy.
TeleUte83
@DuttyBarb: Go back and bake some bars for seminary.
TeleUte83
@bill: Unfortunately, what the story fails to mention — and what I expect would surprise and infuriate most Americans — is that this former easement is Salt Lake City’s Main Street. So for a block of Main St, it becomes church property.
I walked it last week and saw kids smoking pot and boarding off benches and curbs. Why did I walk it? Because I wanted a view of the temple? No, because it would take an extra five minutes to walk around (3/8 of a mile) and I’d have to either go even closer to the temple, or under this abhorrent eagle gate and stare at the even more homophobic Utah state capitol building.
They held hands. He pecked him on the cheek. And that compares to smoking pot and jerking curbs, one of which is illegal, the other which is explicitly banned — how?
TeleUte83
@Martin Luther Queen: I think pride is quite enough for them already. Buttars would likely die. You don’t want that on your conscience, do you?
TeleUte83
@bill: I’m surprised you completely ignored Tank’s advances. He is in love with you like a moron is with funeral potatoes. Props for avoiding his trap.
TANK
@G:
Why is it ironic? I think all religions should be. Mormons shouldn’t it personally, as it’s an attack on their faith, not them. It’s mormonism, you idiotic simpleton, not people.
strumpetwindsock
@TeleUte83:
THat’s a pretty common line around here.
Frankly I wouldn’t insult their intelligence, nor my own by relying on such a narrow and false assumption.
I know some religous people are ignorant, arrogant, stubborn, and dumb as a post, but in that respect they aren’t that different from many non-religious people.
More importantly, most of them are mature enough that they can be compelled to respect the law and public opinion when it is pointed out to them strongly enough.
And you might be surprised to find out that a few of them actually agree with us on some issues.
schlukitz
@TeleUte83:
Your post No. 96 is right on the money.
Religion produces nothing except misery, heartache and suffering for millions of people around the glove.
Like a deadly poison, it kills everything it comes into contact with…including love.
It’s a pox on humanity.
schlukitz
@strumpetwindsock:
And you might be surprised to find out that a few of them actually agree with us on some issues.
Not to dispute or negate what you are saying, but why is it that we never hear from any of those few who actually agree with us on some issues, instead of just the ones that don’t…and do make themselves very verbal about it…to the point of inducing nausea?
schlukitz
Obviously, I watched too much Michael Jackson on TV last week.
Glove should read globe in the second line of my post no. 105.
TANK
@TeleUte83:
That’s actually funny. Why? Because it’s absurd.
strumpetwindsock
@schlukitz:
Took me one google search to find this:
http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid64847.asp
I know plenty of religious people who are in favour of gay rights and marriage equality. And if you mean on this site, of course the cranks, homophobes and trolls (and the closeted) are most vocal.
I have certainly read some comments on this site from religious gays and religious people who support us. Unfortunately they usually get turned on and shouted down pretty quickly. Are you really that surprised some of them don’t feel like sticking around or speaking up?
TeleUte83
@strumpetwindsock: I lived with a moron family for five years and had only the best of things to say about them. They were wonderful to their neighbors, engaged in their community, kind, well-meaning, honest, and funny. Those are great qualities that stemmed partially from their involvement and upbringing within the church.
But then last October, they sat me down, not knowing I was gay, and told me that if Prop 8 didn’t pass in California, their church would be sued for discrimination for not allowing gays to marry inside the temples, the temples would have to be shuttered, the church would fight, but lose its tax-exempt status, fewer missionaries would be sent out.
They based their reasoning… well, they recounted this story from their stake president, who had received it from the prophet. They didn’t think. This is an educated family, a master architect and a family of doctors and lawyers for sons and daughters. They just believed.
Their donations ultimately will stall the chance that I can marry the man I love just a few more days or months. And that annulment of rights was predicated solely upon religious doctrine — a doctrine created by a fantastical young man in the middle 1800s.
Them and their cousins in the religious right keep me from being an openly gay member of the military. Again, predicated solely on a “traditional perspective” that is rooted in a phobia for a world that is diverse and inclusive.
Religion on a private level can be comforting. But on the massive scale, it seems to remove a level of consciousness, of critical thinking, of criticism for worldly matters. No god reigns on earth. Yet people interpreting divine meaning and morality where it does not exist and use it to guide their interactions and feeling of place with/in the world.
Those original traits I spoke of about the family — of compassion, care, honesty — those are excellent. If religions would focus upon enriching these values, on eradicating poverty, disease, and famine, on bringing people together to discuss and share… then my view of religion would change.
But instead, we have security guards arresting young men holding hands and kissing one another on the cheek.
damon459
WOW no wonder we can’t get anything done all “we” do as a “community” is fight. *hangs head in shame* we reap what we sow.
TANK
Now we are left with stupid apologism based upon the happy feelings of one and one individuals. Some religious people are good folk, make you laugh and enjoy your time with them. That doesn’t justify their religious beliefs NOR their OPEN BIGOTRY and the HARM THEY CONTRIBUTE TO anymore than a good bottle of wine justifies alcoholism. People who rely on anecdotal evidence in their reasoning have stopped thinking, for the most part. People like Tele…well, I wouldn’t count ’em as people, myself…but they’re deserving of moral consideration, of course…just like cows, pigs, and chickens deserve moral consideration, too.
TANK
I count strumpet as one of those moderates who doesn’t understand the first thing about theology or the ethical implications of religious belief.
strumpetwindsock
@TeleUte83:
All they have to do is look north of the border to realize that that churches are not being sued or closed. It’s a lie, and I think given the backlash to Prop 8 more people are beginning to see it for what it is.
I agree with you, but dismissing them and other religious people as out of touch with reality does nothing to change the situation.
It might be comforting to think of them as fools, but really it is a gross underestimation that gets in the way of what we have to do to win recognition of our rights.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
I guess that means religion’s okay by you–because “plenty” of religious folks are for it. More religious folks are against it, and have recourse to same beliefs and sources to justify it. You’re not very bright, strumpet…you’ll never get the poison that is the moderate position which licenses relgious bigots to continue on their path.
DeAnimator
They did call God first, they just got his answering machine.
Now if they had called Zeus! That guy is on top of his shit.
TeleUte83
Unfortunately, I am out of town this weekend from Utah and am reading about this from afar. My sister asked me today what I would’ve done, after I had seemed to have suggested that I would have been conciliatory and walked away.
I said the last thing I would’ve done was started holding my boyfriend closer and kissed him again, as the actual men did. I would’ve leveled with the security guards and explained the PR disaster that would stem from them pushing the issue.
She related to me that at a certain point, the greatest advances in civil rights movements come when the victims stand up for themselves no matter how infuriating their actions, so long as they are non-violent.
Rosa Parks’ action was just as inflammatory to whites in the south as a kiss on a cheek is to certain religialites.
My sister concluded by saying that because these guys stood their ground and held each other — an action that is in no way provocative if it were two heteros — and the security guards and police showed their truly homophobic nature through their actions… it was far more successful in advancing our civil rights (even if they never intended to) than if I had tried to level and discuss reasoning and logic with them.
Provocation: 1
Reasoning: 0
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
You lost my attention at the part where you said you thought Aune and Jones should have been more attractive if they were going to stage a protest like this.
But on the issue of belief, you can treat them like blind stupid children and feel as superior as you want, but you will accomplish nothing.
The only way forward is to demand that they behave like adults or compel them to do so. How do you think every other social revolution came about? DO you think the dumb people all just died out by themselves?
TANK
And the biggest insult from strumpet’s zealous defense of religious faith found throughout these comments in several different entries is that he’s canadian. He has no conception of what America is like and who Americans are, apparently. Gay marriage is legal in canada, and he’ll never understand the religious disease that afflicts most of Americans. He rambles as if he’s aclue, and it does more harm than good. And the thing that really bothers me more than anything else is that he, like the religious bigots, hides behind the right to hold those beliefs. That’s never been what this issue has been about, despite what the lies and failed simplistic arguments that amount to nothing more than baseless, empty rhetoric has attempted to assert. No gay person is standing in the way of religion…and never has. We just don’t have that kind of power, and nobody has ever argued against it.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Oh, will accomplish something. And many people like me have accomplished a great deal. Atheism is on the march, you sad little man. In fact, atheism is growing faster than any religion in the united states. Even the most devout christian who is imbued with any sense of reasoning doubts that the fairytale he upholds has any merit.
strumpetwindsock
@TeleUte83:
I don’t see it as provocation, but rather a non-violent demand that their rights be recognized. Through their actions they were reasoning with the guards – by showing at what point they would refuse to be moved.
And as was said earlier in this thread, it seems they wanted to be charged in order to challenge this issue.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
“No gay person is standing in the way of religion…and never has. We just don’t have that kind of power, and nobody has ever argued against it.”
No, you just want them exterminated like vermin (comment #84).
And instead of actually dealing with my arguments you dismiss me as someone who does not understand the issue. Again, not a very effective way of dealing with opponents if you actually want to accomplish anything.
And fortunately it is a smear tactic that most reasonable people can see through very easily.
Hominy Grits
There is no God.
WE ARE EVOLVED APES -with brains that created the idea of God to make us feel comforted, protected and superior —
do apes go to a celestial kingdom / heaven?
If they do — I hope they all take a collective SHIT on Salt Lake City.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
I want mormonism exterminated, which would mean that there’s no mormons. The “idea” (if it can be called that) gone. I think that’ll be good for humanity to get rid of religion.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
No, you don’t understand the issue at all. Confronting these ideas as the utter nonsense that they are is good. Your way of treating them as equally legitimate to, say, scentific theories or statements that actually say things about the world is harmful. IT gives them the legitimacy that they simply don’t deserve, and insofar as it does that, promotes the toleration of ideas that are directly responsible for oppression.
TANK
It’s no smear tactic. Religious moderation and not only tolerance, but acceptance is harmful. Toleration is one thing, but acceptance as epistemic equals is another. It is the latter that you have consistently endorsed and defended. And it is that belief that needs to be called out for the harmful meme that it is.
TANK
I simply think that the world would be much improved in terms of the amount of unnecessary suffering that occurs if religion were to vanish. One really can’t argue with that, either given the MILLIONS of people in THIS DAY AND AGE around the world who die because they don’t believe in the “right” fairytale. Do you need the genocides that have occurred within the past fifteen years to make the case? I have ’em at the ready. They would not occurred if not for the sincere and ardant beliefs of those who massacred innocent people.
Julia
@TANK: So what if someone said they want all gays gone? You can’t just take away the “idea” without the people. You want acceptance from Mormons, yet you’re prejudiced and hurtful toward them. No wonder they don’t want to accept you. I’m ashamed to be on the same side as you. You’re pitiful. You are aware there WAS an extermination order for Mormons in Missouri? You’re digging up old memories, and they aren’t going to be more inclined to accept you if you bring that up.
TANK
@Julia:
This is vacuous apologism. There is a crystal clear logical trajectory originating in people’s faith, and the genocides and atrocities that have occurred throughout human history a direct result of those beliefs. You simply don’t comprehend that without religion, bad people would do bad things, and good people would do good things; only with religion (it takes a FAITH, fuckhead!), do we have otherwise good people doing bad things.
I am deeply ashamed to be anywhere need a simpleminded dolt like you. You are harmful to the very possibility of me achieving equality. You are a tool of the oppressor.
TANK
@Julia:
We are not on the same side. Never. You are harmful to lgbt equality, and, more importantly, a total decrease in human suffering. You have nothing to say. I would expect you now to equate atheism with hitler and stalinism. That’s the level of stupidity (discourse) from which your witless…thoughtless…and highly unethical beliefs originate. You belong next to dinesh d’souza, arguing with ann coulter and the rush limbaughs of the world.
TANK
and who did the mormons exterminate? Was it the natives in utah? Yes, it was…they perpetuated their own genocide upon native americans. That doesn’t make either right, but the world would doubtless be a better place without mormonism.
Julia
I would never equate atheism with Hitler and Stalin. (Hmm instigators of some of the worse genocides in history and people who don’t believe in God…. Of course they’re one and the same! What do atheists kill…. Oh! The faith of other people! Yes, very much so. Definitely equals.)
You are proposing something like Hitler did. He had his own reasons for eradicating the Jews(the religion and the race), as do you with the Mormons. So if I equate anything with Hitler, it would be you. Exterminating anyone on the basis of religion is bullshit.
Then again, I can’t expect you to see rationally on this. You obviously can’t. I wouldn’t expect you to because it’s an important issue to you and to me. It’s hard to think rationally when you’re so emotionally involved. But please, don’t propose extermination. That’s just wrong. (I think most people agree that murder is morally wrong.) I’m sure you’ve seen the signs and what not where people want to exterminate us, but we don’t have to stoop to that level, do we?
And I won’t be coming back to this thread, so go ahead and post whatever abuse you’d like.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Only with religion?
Try nationalism, racism, xenophobia, and any number of situations in which people feel they are doing something in the name of an accepted authority.
I hope I won’t be guilty of a Godwinism if I bring up Adolph Eichmann’s quote “we were only following orders” in a relevant context.
And there’s this little experiment, which has been repeated recently, with similar results:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
And of course it begs the question of how you define your terms “good and bad people”.
And yes, the mormons exterminated the Utes, unlike the rest of the whites who sent them cookies.
TANK
Atheists don’t kill the faith of other people. Quite the contrary, religious people want to kill atheists. I mean, George Bush 1 said that atheists aren’t entitled to u.s. citizenship… No atheist would say that of a believer, no matter how insane their beliefs are.
There’s nothing inherently wrong about “murder,” as it’s defined. If it causes unnecessary suffering, it’s wrong. IT causes people distress and suffering from that (loved ones who obviously don’t want those they care about murdered) it’s wrong. Simple. But murder on it’s own? I think that if one were to murder a stalin or a hitler, they’d be more than justified.
I’m not advocating killing mormons. I just said that if mormons were exterminated by others in that time period (which would be wrong, of course–and especially for the reason), there’d be less aggregate suffering today. That is, if mormonism were no more, than aggregate suffering would be less, and it would be a good thing (that aggregate suffering would be less today as a result). It didn’t happen, obviously. But if mormonism didn’t exist today, it’s undeniably true that there’d be less unnecessary suffering directly related to mormonism. That can be said of any religion, almost…except the jains…I don’t see them carrying out genocides like the mormons did upon native americans, subjugating women to ghastly sexist values that resulted in the suffering, and abusing children. Nor being on the vanguard of lgbt discrimination (as the mormons are today).
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Nationalism, sexism, xenophobia…all bad…their evil deeds don’t legitimate the evil caused by religion. I never said ONLY religion.
TANK
I’m well aware of stanley milgram’s experiment. That simply doesn’t work for me. I don’t care if it’s a natural innate tendency–we are as moral entities required to use what we’ve evolved to be moral (consciousness and the ability to reason) to rise above instincts in many cases to do the right thing.
Dwight
I am on the side of gay marriage being made legal, but seriously gay people are their own worst enemies. This isn’t going to win over anyone who isn’t already converted, but it does go to prove the point of the opposition, if gay marriage is legal the “gay agenda” will be forced down their throats at home, church and school. The LDS church has carefully worked within the law as a private organization to be able to discriminate gay people. You may not like it, I may not like it, but they are legally protected. I don’t think because I disagree with someone is any reason to infringe on their legal rights. (especially a hypocritical position for gay supporters since that is why their rights are being denied, cause the majority don’t agree with them) The sad thing is churches and people that haven’t worked within the law are used as examples for LDS people about how gay people will be able to force their marriage being done in a temple, when it’s the farthest thing from the truth. However it get the LDS people to get off their couches, vote, and donate their time and money.
People may disagree with it now being the LDS church’s private property, but there it is. It’s a little too late to change that. There are signs posted letting you know that it’s private property, public is welcome so long as they are respectful. To those complaining about being inconvenienced the alternative is that the LDS church will just stop letting the public through, it’s within their rights, so why can’t there just be a smidgin of respect. If you want to walk on it they will let you as long as you are respectful. Sure a straight couple may not be asked to leave for a peck on the cheek, but if they do something offensive they will, and if they refuse they’ll be charged with trespassing too. I think that’s where people are talking past each other the LDS church is saying anyone doing something offensive will be asked to leave, and gay rights people are seeing blood that to them a gay couple kissing is offensive and a straight couple isn’t (at least so long as it doesn’t go too far)
As to the LDS church should show respect first what about Ghandi’s an eye for an eye makes the world blind. The gay community is better than this, or so they try and tell me, but they love to roll in the muck with the rest of the world. Rather than win on substance they pull out tired old stereotypes and attack straw men.
The sad part is we all lose with things like this. No one comes around except the already converted and the religious raise their guard.
TANK
I would like to see the LDS church make the easement private and block it off from the public’s use. I’d like it because it would precipitate a lawsuit about that, and they’d very well lose. It needs to be challenged.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Excuse me?
Post #135:
“I never said ONLY religion.”
From your post #129:
“only with religion (it takes a FAITH, fuckhead!), do we have otherwise good people doing bad things.”
@TANK:
And Atheists don’t kill the faith of other people?
Are you aware of what is going on in Xianjiang province right now, or what the Chinese have been doing in Tibet for years, or what they have done to the Falun Gong, Christians, and every other religion in their country?
How about the treatment of Jews, and non-orthodox christian sects in Soviet Russia?
And the treatment of virtually every religion under the Nazis (who, though they may have been ostensibly christian, really worshipped only one person).
And frankly, I think the suppression of native religion on this continent had less to do with Christian dogma than with nationalism. After all, as you said, it was not so much a case of conversion as attempted extermination and assimilation.
Dwight
there is not easement, Salt Lake City traded it for land elsewhere and the ACLU tried to fight it, but the 10th circuit court of appeals held it up that the easement is gone, it’s no longer a public forum
http://www.acluutah.org/mainstreetplaza.htm
strumpetwindsock
@Dwight:
Perhaps you should call up some of your bishops in Canada and ask if the gay agenda is being forced down their throats up here.
The fact is nothing has changed, and nobody is compelling any church to go against its doctrine.
The church authorities in Salt Lake know this is true. If they are telling you otherwise it is a complete lie.
Dwight
that should read there is no easement. When I revise a comment I should revise the whole thing.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Once again, I never said only religion. Read it again. I said that religion is harmful enough to do away with, and it would result in less aggregate suffering. I stand by what I said. You don’t comprehend what I said…think about it. That doesn’t entail “only religion”. I don’t think for a second that nationalists who perpetuated genocides (milosevic) were ever good people–bad people doing bad things.
I am aware of china’s treatment of tibet. COmmunism isn’t atheism. You lose. There are atheist’s who can do bad things because atheism isn’t an ethic, and it’s not a worldview, really. It’s simply not believing in god or gods (or what I prefer, baseless superstition)–from that, we can’t derive communism, nationalism, sexism, or national socialism…LOL! Because atheism isn’t an ethical theory, or a “theory” about the world (like religion’s false theories)–well, sure, atheists can be bad people…but for bad reasons…LOL! Unlike religion, we does cause otherwise good people to do bad things. This is unlike anything else.
To reiterate: the world and all of its inhabitants would be better off without religion. And sure, sexism, too (which religion trades off of and encourages and develops in many cases).
TANK
@Dwight:
Oh, I think it still is despite the ruling. And it stands that I sincerely hope the LDS closes the plaza off to the public, for that would cause a lawsuit. It needs to be challenged.
TANK
And frankly, I think the suppression of native religion on this continent had less to do with Christian dogma than with nationalism. After all, as you said, it was not so much a case of conversion as attempted extermination and assimilation.
Really? I think you’re a fool if you believe that. Christian belief that there is only one god, and that he is the christian god, and that the christian faith is the one true faith…caused the supression of native faiths. To suggest that it’s nationalism is to deny the difference between christianity and nationalism.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Very convenient of you to have this imaginary group of atheists whom you think are going to save the world, but who can’t be held responsible for their actions because they don’t actually believe in anything.
Do you actually think anyone is going to buy that bullshit argument?
Or you making a mealy-mouthed attempt to weasel out of a clear contradiction instead of just owning up to your words?
Dwight
@strumpetwindsock: I know the gay agenda is not being forced down anyone’s throat, and that it wouldn’t be. Try and explain that to people who see stories like this. Explain to me how this is anything but Aune and Jones trying to force their gay lifestyle upon the LDS church’s private property.
@TANK:
You can think that all you want, but the law of the land says otherwise. Get the Supreme Court to listen? The LDS church actually closing public access doesn’t change anything about the case. You are just muddying the debate with a tangent. What if this happened on LDS property that was always LDS property? Would it still be cool for these guys to make a stink about being asked to leave when they kissed?
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
The British did business in western Canada for two hundred years without attempting to convert or suppress the native people here.
They didn’t care.
It only became an issue when they built the railroad and started moving out here themselves. And they didn’t invite them to church. They took all their kids away, put them in prison-schools, cut their braids and made them speak english. In the early years half of them died from TB.
You want to call that religious conversion?
TANK
@Dwight:
IT does, though. It changes the pledge to keep it accessible to the public. That’s grounds for a suit.
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Founded initially on the belief that they were not christian, but heathen people. It is inextricably linked. The history around this and the justifications used to supress and destroy native americans is laden with christian superstition. You’re really going out on a limb here, and it’s shameless.
strumpetwindsock
@Dwight:
It goes back to the question of private encroachment on public-use land, which I think is the real issue here. The church should not have taken that land in the first place if they were not willing to allow normal public conduct there (and sorry, I consider a kiss to be normal).
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
But their religion and their heathen status was not an issue for 200 years, from the late 1600s until 1870. Until then whites and natives lived together and intermarried.
At the time Rupertsland became part of Canada there were more people of mixed-blood than there were whites or natives in the larger settlements. It was only when we wanted their land that they became “others”, and the policy came from the government, not from the churches.
marten77
Mormonism is such a pathetic joke, I’m surprised people even attempt to treat them seriously. I guess we should be charitable to the feeble-minded, though. Fortunately, here in Europe this organisation is perceived as it should be – as an amusing (if a bit disturbing) distraction.
Dwight
@TANK: Wrong, while the public, if respectful, being allowed there is a nice gimmie to appease people, legally it means nothing. In fact that is why the ACLU got so involved, cause they knew it meant squat. If they closed it tomorrow nothing would be different enough about the case to get anyone (legally important) to care.
Let’s look at this how many of my friends and family that live in Utah will. The gay people said that it wasn’t about shoving their beliefs down our throats in our homes, schools and churches. Then here they are trying to do just that on our church’s private property (whether or not you think it should be the LDS church’s private property is irrelevant). Again, a big mark in the loss column, it’s going to take a long time and a lot of work for me to overcome this with people, help them see past the smoke and mirrors.
Rikard
What the news has yet to cover is how much these men had been drinking. They had come from a free concert where beer and wine is served. They will be easy to discredit in this town (SLC) if they were tipsy. What happened was not right, but a shrill voice on our part will only cede the high moral ground to the mormons. I’ll be on the plaza in the morning with friends and looking for a kiss, in spite of the disturbing people here who seem to have time to fling posts back and forth like monkey turds. Rule of thumb, if you have more than five retorts to others “yer just talkin ta hear yer head rattle” as my mormon mother would say (and I think my fb friend Sister Dottie S Dixon would agree). This is not about what the mormons believe faithfuly. It IS about their belief in equality and getting them to understand how it applies to us.
Joe
wwsd?—what would salamanders do?
galefan2004
@strumpetwindsock: I didn’t say anytime soon. I said that conservative churches are losing more members than they gain, and that will lead to them having less and less members and eventually no longer existing.
Also, I don’t agree that the majority of the country will see this in a negative light. If you think the Mormon church cares what the majority of gays think then I have to disagree with you.
galefan2004
@schlukitz: I support your right to act however you chose. I support your right to shove your homosexuality in the face of whomever you chose. That is your right. However, sorry, but what I will not support is someone that has your view on the subject matter playing the victim card when they decide to be all out and open in a neighborhood where they know damn well it was unsafe to do so and paying the price.
galefan2004
@No Homophobama: For such a great lawyer you should probably understand the difference between circumstantial and direct evidence. I mean, I assume you are that intelligent. Thank you for your list of circumstantial evidence. However, considering every single of of those things is easily explainable all that circumstantial evidence isn’t going to win you the case.
Obama stated that he is against marriage equality because “God be up in da mix.” (sorry paraphrased)
Obama doesn’t support gay marriage. I never said he did. He has directly stated that he doesn’t support gay marriage. However, Obama has always put his personal views aside for the good of the country. Obama doesn’t support abortion either, but he has yet to do anything to stop it.
He campaigned with gay bashing Donnie McClurkin.
Obama would have campaigned with anyone that got him votes. He is a politician first and foremost. Never doubt that.
He gave gay hating Rick Warren a position of honor.
Perhaps Obama doesn’t place personal creed at the beginning of the list of qualifications when he hires someone. Perhaps he hires the best person for the job instead. I know how hard that would be to comprehend after GW, the Ivy League graduate, decided to put personal creed as the only requirement for the position.
He compared LGBT people to those who practice incest and pedophiles in HIS DOJ brief (I am a lawyer from a top law school, and I read the brief!).
Good for you. Many people read that brief. Many people disagree with your stance on it. That is why we have courts. If being a lawyer from a top law school (and possessing the ability to shove your personal views in everyone’s face) was enough for providing actual proof then this country wouldn’t need a court system.
How is this douchetard NOT a homophobe.
NOW GO LICK OBAMA AND HIS MAN ARMED WIFE MA-CHELLE.
Ramblings of a racist asshole. Lets just be honest, the reason you don’t like Obama has very little to do with anything he has done and a lot more to do with the fact that you can’t stand that a man that has pulled himself up from his bootstraps is getting more respect than you and your privileged family. I’m sure the fact that he is black pisses you off even more.
galefan2004
@TANK: Actually, justice is in the law. However, justice is based on the will of the (majority) of the people. If the will of the people is to value freedom of religion more highly than they value the rights of two gay men to kiss each other on church property then that is legal justice. Recognized religious groups are often given a pass when it comes to any and all civil rights regulations.
galefan2004
@TANK: You are wrong. Every system of morals ever created only had one goal. That goal was to uphold the belief system of society. That is the whole core of a moral code of conduct. They are used to further the beliefs of the society itself. This society still respects freedom of religion much more than it respects the rights of gays and lesbians, so in this society the church is in the right and the gays and lesbians are in the wrong. The church wins here. The gay and lesbian community loses. This decision enforces a precedent where if gay men do not remove themselves from religious property when asked then they can be arrested.
galefan2004
@TANK: I fail to see where being asked to leave public property is “suffering”. I would have to say that the Mormon church suffered more here because they had to deal with these two people that decided to make a point. It took time and effort of the security guards that could have been used much more productively. These guys brought it on themselves when they refused to leave the property.
Loren
@DuttyBarb: From 24: “A straight couple would have been told the same thing as you well know.”
Apparently you are not from the Salt Lake area. The private/public walkway is heavily frequented by hetero couples holding hands and kissing in public. The area has a tremendous draw to newly marrieds and engaged hetero couples due to the large fountains, amazing landscaping and proximity to the temple. Many times throughout the day hetero couples will be having professional photos taken for their engagement, for their just completed wedding/sealing, or just because the area is so beautiful. During those photo sessions there is always much kissing, hand holding, hugging. Hetero couples frequently stroll through the area holding hands and sharing brief kisses.
This is not a case of wanting no kissing, hand holding, hugging on the property. What happened is clearly an action directed at a gay couple. This is another example of the continued hatred, bitterness, and prejudice towards gays that has been happening in the organization for decades. The church speaks of support for gays if they are willing to be totally celebate. Know what that means in the church’s context…NO touching, No kissing, No dates, nothing with another man. Fundmentally, the church will love the gay who voluntarilly becomes an emotional physical eunuch.
All one has to see is the extreme high incidence of young male suicides in Utah, the highest in the nation. A forest ranger in Provo, Utah was quoted as saying that his job would be ideal except for having to frequently pull young men’s dead bodies out from the area after another successful suicide. Or, the BYU security raids on gay establishments. Or, the shock therapy performed on gays that has destroyed many of their lives. On and on, etc. and etc. And no apologies for the deaths and destroyed lives. The church preaches love and inclusion for all, unless you are gay. That is the bottom line.
galefan2004
@TeleUte83: This country respects the rights to bear arms. Please show me where the right to kiss for anyone (straight/gay) is guaranteed in the constitution.
galefan2004
@TeleUte83: What you fail to take into account is that the Mormon church didn’t kick them off the property because they were gay. They kicked them off the property because they were being sexually overt. Yes its not fair that kissing your boyfriend and holding hands in public is seen as being sexually overt when its a gay couple and seen as normal when its a straight couple, but that is how the majority of people view it, and laws which exist only to uphold the will of the majority in a democracy should side with how the majority of people see it.
schlukitz
@strumpetwindsock:
Are you really that surprised some of them don’t feel like sticking around or speaking up?
Not really. ;o)
Thanks for the link. I do, in fact, recall that happening.
That’s encouraging.
strumpetwindsock
@Rikard:
Speaking of monkey turds, if there was nothing in the news about them being drunk, perhaps that is because they were not.
The police mentioned that one of them used profanity when he was thrown to the ground and cuffed. Do you think they would not have mentioned something if they even smelled alcohol on them?
And this is a blog – and I do take your point about rudeness and repetition. Nevertheless I’d rather have room to talk an issue through than worry about going over my quota of five posts and being considered a natterer.
@galefan2004:
They might care about what the general public thinks, and if you read the comments on that newspaper article, it’s not all good.
@Dwight:
And I think you might have it backwards about who was assaulting whom. Again, this was a section of your main street, not inside the temple.
galefan2004
@strumpetwindsock: I don’t think they give a damn what the general public thinks as long as they keep their members. Seriously, the general public already thinks they are anti-gay. You think they care? I don’t agree. I think that nationally the general public will give the black eye to the gay community not the Mormon church because in this country the majority of Americans (80%) are Christian and respect the rights of the church much more than they respect the rights of gays and lesbians.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
However, sorry, but what I will not support is someone that has your view on the subject matter playing the victim card when they decide to be all out and open in a neighborhood where they know damn well it was unsafe to do so and paying the price.
Wow! Your need to apologize for the actions of gay people who are denied the same expressions of love and affection that straight people indulge in 24/7 and feel no need to explain to anyone about, is staggering and mind-boggling. Uncle Tom-ism at it’s finest!
“We iz sorry, Massah. We shouldn’t a been a doing dat in front o’you. Please don beat us too hard, Massah.”
You obviously failed to read the post no. 163 from Loren, who speaks from first-hand knowledge of the area and what transpires there. I know…you’ve already made up your mind and don’t want to be confused with the facts!
No doubt, you would have been equally as quick to defend anyone who might have thought about bashing these two guys, in public, simply for displaying their feelings. Such a “They had it coming” attitude, you display.
But, what I find most disturbing and angering in your response, is your “treatment” of the word “Victim”.
You say it like it is a bad thing and it comes off sounding like a 235 lb. bully who has just beat the crap out of a skinny, 95 lb kid and says to him “And what the fuck are you sniveling about, you little runt? STFU and take it like a man, or I’ll give you more of the same.”
By blaming the misfortune on the victim, you legitimize the evil perpetrated on him and give it permission to occur again and again. You give credence and tacit approval to a hypocritical double-standard system wherein the behaviour of one group of people (straights) is ok, but if duplicated by another group of people (says), it is now wrong and ostracized if they persist in engaging in it, therefore deserve everything they get as a result.
Godwinesque it may, indeed, sound, but do you also feel that the Jews got what they deserved as well? And, if you do, just what was it that they did to offend and bring the Holocaust down on themselves? Work hard? Run businesses? Take care of themselves? Just being themselves?
I sincerely hope that one day, you may learn to love and respect yourself a little more and have a little more compassion and empathy for the downtrodden than you apparently do. And if that ever occurs, I think you will find it very hard, in good conscience, to blame the victims (one of your own kind, btw) for the misfortunes and suffering laid upon them.
Until that shift in thinking occures in your mind and in the minds of other gay apologists, the gay bashings, the illegal arrests, the destruction of GLBT homes, families, property, and the social stimatizing and witholding of basic human rights of millions of LGBT people all over the world, will remain alive and well, unfortuantely.
Apologists like you help support apartheid and make it happen on a daily basis.
We are not thankful to you.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
I neglected to respond to another comment you made in your reply to my post.
I support your right to shove your homosexuality in the face of whomever you chose
The very manner in which you couched your comment, reeks with str8, anti-gay sentiment. It was deprecating, demeaning and meant to instill guilt, humiliation and shame. It makes me feel “tolerated”, but not accepted…and that sucks!
Your third-person usage of the words “your homosexuality” places it at the feet of others who are not ashamed to admit to or live their homosexuality with pride and dignity. You speak exactly like a person who has removed himself from the pool of human feelings and emotions, as well as the LGBT community itself, and who feels that the expression of feelings and emotions (at least for gays) is something to be apologized for and avoided at all costs, lest we bring the wrath of God on our collective heads.
To be totally fair about this, if you are going to equate the showing of feeling and emotions by GLBT people as “shoving their homosexuality in the face of whomever you choose”, then you need to attack straight people with the same conviction and fervor by telling them that you support their “shoving their heterosexuality in the face of whomever you choose” as well.
And that goes for the Mormons and the Christers, as well, who have been “shoving their religious believes in the face of whomever they choose”, legally and tax-free, for far too long now.
What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
schlukitz
Typo: Believes in the last sentence should read beliefs.
galefan2004
@schlukitz: You can call it Uncle Tom-ism. I call it lack of stupidity. If you know damn well what you are doing is going to offend others than maybe you should consider their opinions as well. Personally, I’m offended when a guy/girl couple needs to make a big issue out of their love for each other in a public place as well. However, I realize that many more people have a problem with gay people shoving their relationships in their face, and I don’t support the right of gay people to make other people uncomfortable. We aren’t talking about DADT, ENDA, MSA, DOMA or any other gay cause here. We are talking about people that couldn’t show respect to other people because they felt that their own desires were more important. I’d love to walk down the street hand in hand with my man, but I think for a bit before I do that, and I decide not to do it simply because I don’t feel the need to push my life style into the face of people just because I desire to.
I don’t agree with you at all. For starters, if this would have been a gay bashing I wouldn’t have found it acceptable. I don’t find gay bashing acceptable. I would have felt that they were stupid for purposefully infuriating the people that attacked them, but I wouldn’t have sided with the bashers. Two wrongs don’t make a right. In this case there was only one wrong and the situation was dealt with in the correct manner.
Also, I did read about how the straight couples use this place to take photos. However, as a gay male that is from a smaller community, I understand that being open and affectionate with my boyfriend in public is probably going to be seen as me trying to force tolerance of my life style on others. I simply don’t feel that I have the right to force tolerance of my life style on anyone.
You are also wrong about the way I use victim. I use “the victim card” because these guys were not victims yet they are trying to make themselves out to be victims. Its a huge difference. If they had been beaten for kissing in public then yes they would have been victims. They weren’t. They were asked to leave and refused and then arrested for criminal trespass. That does not make them victims. Calling them victims is an insult to any real victim.
God, you make a huge leap when you go from two gay guys being arrested for criminal trespass to the Holocaust. If these guys were killed for the trespass then I wouldn’t have supported that. However, if they are going to try to shove their life style in the faces of people that they know do not accept it even after they are asked to stop and to leave the area then they deserve to be escorted off the property by the police, and I’m going to assume they were absolute assholes to the police when they got involved and that is most likely why they had actual charges pressed on them. This is just yet another case of a couple of gays trying to make trouble where there really isn’t any.
I love and respect myself just fine. I have championed the cause of the downtrodden. I just don’t consider two gay men trying to force their lifestyle onto the public, a church no less, victims. There is a time and a place for everything and a Mormon church is not the time and place to hold hands with and kiss your boyfriend.
I didn’t ask you to be thankful to me, but lets be honest here, the people that attempt to FORCE their personal business onto others are much more responsible for the abuse that the gay community receives than those that respect the rights of others. I don’t remember a single case of abuse where the abuse was perpetrated because the victims were being respectful. In almost all cases, the victim starts the shit with the inability to finish it and then screams assault when its finished for them. I respect the rights of others to ask me not to do things they don’t feel acceptable in their presence. If that makes me a “gay apologist” then I will gladly claim that title.
Mike in SLC
Something that should be pointed out, that neither QWERTY nor the Salt Lake Tribune reported is that the only reason this story got noticed was because it involved a gay couple. Bad behavior by Temple Square guards is old news for those of us who live here. Nowhere is it posted that bikes aren’t allowed on the plaza, still twice now I’ve seen security guard PUSH bikers over yelling at them that bikes aren’t permitted. Something that neither also covers (because they just assume everyone knows) is that the plaza looks just like about half a dozen other PUBLIC parks in downtown SLC, unless you are familiar with the area it would be easy to assume that it was also a public space (the couple in this story though probably don’t have that defense). Using the plaza as a shortcut is quite common… look clean cut and like you belong not a word is said… wear an ipod and a pride wristband and you get followed by the security guards from one end to the other at times.
The mormon church’s only mistake was to actually do something high profile during a time when the Tribune doesn’t have anyone else to witch hunt after… had this been during the legislative session nothing would have been said.
galefan2004
@schlukitz: I don’t agree. You see, my problem isn’t that these guys were holding hands. My problem is that they were doing it on land that they knew belonged to a church and they refused to stop when asked. I would have the same outrage if this was a straight couple that wouldn’t stop holding hands and kissing when asked. However, we just don’t live in a world where that will ever happen so it is a moot point.
However, if I had an issue with a straight couple making out in front of me I would ask them to stop. Its not fair that kissing your boyfriend is equated with two straight people groping each other, but that is part of the society that we live in, and I support the right of other people not to be offended by any level of contact simply because I feel that the contact is acceptable.
Rather they felt what they were doing was acceptable or not is irrelevant. The facts are they were asked to stop and then refused and only escalated the behavior. Rather you like it or not, this is not a gay rights issue. This is simply an issue of thinking about others viewpoints and opinions before your own. I can see where that would be an issue for just about every loud and proud gay male though. Then we wonder why we don’t have our rights.
As others have commented, this little event didn’t help our rights at all. Now, when the Mormon church solicits money and attention to the cause of stopping gay rights they have a nice cover story to put on the front of the donation envelope.
Freud's Mamma
@galefan2004:
1) “Personally, I’m offended when a guy/girl couple needs to make a big issue out of their love for each other in a public place as well.”
You seem to be thoroughly sexually repressed, and maybe a little self-loathing. If you are Mormon (or otherwise Fundagelical), I sympathize. It’s tough to get out from under that.
2) “My problem is that they were doing it on land that they knew belonged to a church and they refused to stop when asked.”
The point is, a straight couple would not have been asked. The point IS that straight couples aren’t harassed by the church in the way at all.
3) “If you know damn well what you are doing is going to offend others than maybe you should consider their opinions as well. ….For starters, if this would have been a gay bashing I wouldn’t have found it acceptable. I don’t find gay bashing acceptable. I would have felt that they were stupid for purposefully infuriating the people that attacked them, but I wouldn’t have sided with the bashers.”
No, acquiescence is not a solution. And where do you see the Mormons stopping to consider their opinions about Equal Rights for Gays and Lesbians. Do church officials and church elders stifle their opinions about the morality of being gay and lesbian? There’s a time for dialog and a time for confrontation.
Also, there’s a huge difference between acts that defy government oppression or challenge institutional bigotry, and acts that potentially compromise one’s personal safety when dealing with individual thugs/criminals/bigots not acting in any offical governmental or institutional capacity. Governments and institutions have a different level of authority and influence, and thus a different level of responsibility and accountability.
It is time to start holding the institution that is the Mormon Church to account for their bigotry, and confrontation and acts of civil disobedience are an effective way to expose biogted Mormons for what they are.
I wish you well personally in dealing with your repression and self-loathing. If you are trying to be an active member of a Mormon or other fundagelical church which preaches active hatred and bigotry against Gays and Lesbians, or if you live in an area like SLC where it can be difficult to be openly gay, I would encourage to consider some life changes (i.e., leave the church and leave the area) for the sake of your own mental health. Good luck.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
I call it lack of stupidity.
Scratches head….
Das vas a mischtake, ja?
Duttybarb
For all you who say straight people are not harassed. Newsflash..yes they are.
I was walking across church premises in a pair of shorts and a tshirt to cut the distance. On a Monday. In the Afternoon. And guess what..i was warned(very severely) that i should never try that again. In my life.
What i was doing was considered indecent exposure and though i was angry(tame) i understood that fair or unfair..the church, its property, its rules. I dont know if straight unmarried couples would be allowed to kiss in full view of the church security but duh if you are married and the church knows you are married, im pretty sure that would be offensive too.
Whether u want to admit this or not..churches consider homosexuality a sin. So yes, going to kiss your same sex partner in the full view of the church might actually piss people off. Its like a black man who knows that he is standing on Klan property and decides to grab his white girlfriend and give wet one in full view of them.. Provoke much???!!
If he is attacked in any way and cries wolf..we may be pissed or even outraged but that nagging lil voice will say ” What exactlly was he doing kissing his white gf in a well known Klan meeting ground…
Or a gay couple walking a swinging hands in a Sharia country. Of course, they will be stoned to death, as Islam punishes such behaviour by death..we will be pissed but again, that lil voice” Why were two muslim men fully aware the Quran is against homosexuality and the outcome, swinging their hands in public in a Sharia country?
Your gay bros were trying to provoke a response or they would have done it elsewhere. Just like if i grab my boyf and kiss him on church premises..i would have provoked a response.
I have said this before.. you want to live in peace..STOP GIVING CHURCHES, CONSERVATIVES..ANYONE AMMUNITION TO BUILD AGAINST YOU.
Do you think the small victories you have cant go away like that?? Read a history book.
galefan2004
@Freud’s Mamma: Funny, you think my desire to not see two people going at in public means I’m sexually repressed. I’m not sexually repressed, I just have respect for myself and others. That respect keeps me from having to show off in public. Maybe you are to overly sexualized because it is obvious you have a need to show off based on what you have said.
I don’t really give a damn that straight couples aren’t harassed. I’m not able to change that. I never said it was fair. Actually, I said it wasn’t fair about 2-3 times in every post. What I said was it doesn’t have to be fair to be the way it is. I’m sorry, but I don’t accept that because its not fair we should challenge it. We need to respect people’s opinions if we want them to respect ours.
Two wrongs DO NOT make a right. I hold myself to a higher level. I know that the Mormon church doesn’t give a fuck about me. I never said it did. However, at a higher level I consider what they think before I act. I understand that that level is unapproachable for many that just want to shove themselves in everyone’s face.
This entire country is quite aware where the Mormon church stands on the issue of homosexuality. The Mormon church espouses it at every single step. They don’t need to be exposed for bigotry. They proudly admit to being bigots. The only thing a direct attack on the Mormon church is going to accomplish is a black eye for the gay/lesbian community. Rather you like it or not, this country still values freedom of religious practice (especially Christianity) way more than gay/lesbian rights.
I am not self-loathing. I am not repressed. I also am out and open. However, I don’t feel the need to hold my boyfriends hand in public in order to wear my sexuality as a badge. I’m sorry that you feel that is important. I’m sorry that you think that shoving your sexuality in everyone’s face is important to you. I really hope that it goes well for you that you decide not to consider anyone else when you decide to make the decision to make people feel uncomfortable. I suggest you make some changes (for example you could feel comfortable enough with yourself that you don’t have to shove your sexuality in everyone else’s face like some sort of badge). I worry about your mental health as well if you think that you need to force your sexuality in everyone’s face and bitch about not being accepted when someone is turned off by it. You are gay, we get it, you don’t have to force everyone to stand up and kiss your ass because of it.
galefan2004
@schlukitz: It was in no way a mistake. Also, I’m American and that means I attack all languages that aren’t English, so speak English.
TANK
@galefan2004:
OMG! Just a big wall of stupid!
galefan2004
@TANK: I’m sorry Tank, but I just can’t come to understand your level of maturity and intelligence. Mostly because I’m not a kindergartner in elementary school. I’ll try harder to shred my brain cells to back everything that you try to sell. My bad.
Freud's Mamma
@galefan2004:
“Funny, you think my desire to not see two people going at in public means I’m sexually repressed. I’m not sexually repressed, I just have respect for myself and others. That respect keeps me from having to show off in public. Maybe you are to overly sexualized because it is obvious you have a need to show off based on what you have said.”
You couldn’t be more wrong about me. I don’t engage in public tongue kissing or groping–but I’m not repressed that I get upset seeing other people do it. And I’m certainly not so repressed and self-loathing that I can’t kiss my partner or a friend in public and feel guilty about it if someone else disapproves. That’s fucking pathological.
“I don’t really give a damn that straight couples aren’t harassed. I’m not able to change that.”
You’re right, you wont’ever change shit if you don’t confront and engage corrupt institutions like that Mormon church, if you sit back and shield yourself from those perverted freaks who actually kiss each other in public. No, you’ll sit back and let those same perverted freaks do all the heavy lifting, and THEN you’ll come forth and reap the benefits.
“Rather (sic) you like it or not, this country still values freedom of religious practice (especially Christianity) way more than gay/lesbian rights.”
I don’t like it one bit. And the fact that this country allows corrupt, false religions to condemn individuals, and spew hate and bigotry and actively encourage violence against all kinds of people (not just gays and lesbians) means there’s a lot of work to be done. If you ain’t helpin’ us, you’re helpin’ them. Standing on the sidelines, where you seem to be firmly and proudly planted, doesn’t help.
Judging from your (rather extensive) writings here, yeah, you ARE repressed; yeah, you ARE self-loathing; and yeah, you ARE in denail about it. It’s a tough nut to break out of, believe me. And when I read your thoughts, I feel a wave of sympathy and compassion and sorrow for you. But sometimes you need a slap in the face to get you to realize what you’re doing. I hope that the slap you get is only metaphorical, and that it comes from someone who feels empathy toward you for what you’re going to, NOT from the a baseball bat wielded by some thug egged on by the hate speech emanating from places like the Mormon church.
I certainly don’t have anything against you personally, and if you don’t feel comfortable showing affection to your partner in public, DON’T. But for you to feel like you have the right/obligation to try to stop other people from doing it? That’s not just self-respect; that sounds suspciously like projected self-loathing, the kind that comes from years of parental, familial and institutional shame and condmenation. And I also hope that you don’t ever feel so self-righteous as to wise off to some hetero couple making out and end up with a broken jaw.
You sound like the type who’d deserve it though.
Russ
@galefan2004:
“… I’m sorry, but I don’t accept that because its not fair we should challenge it.”
..An interesting point of view. I wonder if Rosa Parks had been as cowardly as you are what would have happened to the civil rights movement? Why do you think that if something is not fair that you should not challenge it? I don’t think you are sexually repressed or self loathing, I just think you are a coward. Move over and let otherz do the heavy lifting so you can one day benefit from them challenging what isn’t fair.
strumpetwindsock
@galefan2004:
Hey arschloch, hier gibts kein Amerkanische grenze.
Es heisst internet, wie international.
Wenn du dumm bleiben willst ist mir egal, aber hier rede ich wie und wass ich will.
strumpetwindsock
@galefan2004:
But I suppose you were just making a joke, so it’s okay.
M Shane
i don’t know if anyone mentioned it, this is so long, but it is strangein the first place to make a public area private so as to avoid demonstations of “free expression”, in the vicinity of the church.
schlukitz
@Duttybarb:
Its like a black man who knows that he is standing on Klan property and decides to grab his white girlfriend and give wet one in full view of them.. Provoke much???!!
Absolutely, Dutty. You could’t blame the Klu Klux Klan in the least, if they lynched the black man, right there and then, from the nearest tree or lamp post, right? You’d think people would know better, wouldn’t you? *sarcasm font on*
A black man giving his white girlfriend a wet one on Klu Klux Klan property is so far over the top that it makes cross-burning on the property of a black man sound like childish whinning, doesn’t it? I mean, all the Klu-Klux Klan asked of black people, was to show some respect. After all, the Klu Klux Klan was only exercising their right to free speech. It’s so important to keep things in proper perspective. *sarcasm front still on*
It’s not the LGBT community that is giving Churches, conservatives or anyone ammunition to build against us.
It’s people like you, giving acquiescence to outmoded customs, antiquated traditions and primitive behavior. It is not for us to stay the fuck out of their way or yours to avoid any confrontation. It’s for you and them to get the fuck out of our faces. You are the intruder here; not the other way around.
You preach at us to show respect for the feelings of others, yet feel free to come into OUR blog, as an uninvited guest and lecture us on minding our Ps and Qs and showing you respect???
This is no longer 15th Century Europe, a flat earth or a planet that is graced by the sun revolving around it.
Nor, have we taken a vow of obedience to you or anyone else. You want to be a slave to your stupid beliefs and traditions, fine. Go for it.
And reading history books, do not right all the wrongs have been perpetrated in the name of religion, so keep your well-intentioned advice to yourself, please!
galefan2004
@Freud’s Mamma: I never said I felt guilty. Its fun to read into it whatever you want isn’t it. I said that I am respectful of others. I don’t have a problem with them holding hands or kissing until they were asked to stop. When they were asked to stop they decided to move closer and kiss longer. That is proof that they honestly didn’t give a fuck about anyone but themselves at that point. I’m simply not that selfish. I’m sorry, but I honestly care what my actions will do to affect other people when I perform those actions. I know that is a hard concept to grasp for many though.
That is just it. If you think that forcing your sexuality in the face of the Mormon church is helping you are insane. The rights we have gotten have been through mutual respect not by forcing our sexuality in everyone’s face. History has not been very kind to people that want to force their sexuality in everyone’s face. Case in point, compare the original coming out stories of Ellen and Rosie. When Rosie came out she didn’t decide to force the fact that she was a lesbian in everyone’s face and the result is her career was left untouched. On the other hand, when Ellen came out she decided to shove it in everyone’s face. The result is she lost out on quite a few contracts and even now is just a talk show host. Shoving our sexuality in everyone’s face simply does not help our cause. I do my heavy lifting by getting gay friendly legislator’s elected in conservative districts. I’ve done plenty of heavy lifting on that front. I don’t need to go kiss my boyfriend in the town square to create a confrontation with the police only to lose a law suit down the road and play the victim card in order to further gay rights.
Actually, I backed a gay friendly Representative (and by back I mean put hundreds of hours into his campaign) in the last two elections. I worked my ass off for this guy simply because he was pro-gay. I’m not sure what you have done, but you are wrong thinking that I am sitting on the sidelines just because I don’t wear my sexuality as a badge of courage in public.
Think what you want, but I’m actually not repressed or in denial about not being repressed. I’m actually quite out and open. I just don’t see the need to wear my sexuality as a badge. I’m also not the only gay in my area that feels exactly like I do. Apparently, the entire community I’m from is just repressed and in denial because we respect others when committing actions.
If you knew me, you would know that I can mouth off to just about anyone and back it up. If I’m going to mouth off, which is normally not me, I’m going to be damn sure I can back it up. Normally, I’m also traveling in the company of a bunch of people that no one would dare to mess with. If I feel that someone else is making me uncomfortable, I’m going to deal with it in a respectful manner and ask them to stop.
You are wrong about me. I support the right of gays and lesbians to hold hands and kiss everywhere they want to. I personally don’t feel the need to do so, but I’m not ashamed of who I am and I would kiss my boyfriend in public. However, my real issue with this whole situation is 1) these people knew exactly where they were making out was on church ground and they did it to make a point 2) when the expected result came around they played the victim card instead of just admitting that they might have been in the wrong 3) there is no reason why they needed to stay on the ground after being asked to leave and just kiss and hold each other until the cops came. The problem is that they were trying to promote their agenda in the matter (they wanted this to create controversy for the church) and instead they just managed to piss the Mormon church off at gays even more than they already were, and because like you have agreed with, the majority of this country respects religious rights over gay and lesbian rights these two people just managed to get everyone pissed off at the gay community for trying to push their “agenda” onto the church.
strumpetwindsock
@M Shane:
Strange, yes.
Uncommon, I doubt.
galefan2004
@Russ: I do plenty of heavy lifting behind the scenes. I feel that the movement in the case of gays and lesbians should be behind the scenes. In my view, the two causes are completely different. When Rosa Parks took a stand she was respected for it. I don’t feel that this couple kissing on church ground is going to end up in them being respected. If anything, this will hurt the cause not help it. The Mormon church just got its cover story when it tries to raise money by claiming that if gays get rights they will do their best to force their “agenda” onto the church.
Tallskin
What is wrong with you people????
Go out with a gang of 50 or more and have a KISS IN in the same place. Make sure the TV cameras are there
Then go do the same thing everyday at the same time for a week
TANK
@galefan2004:
Fork to face?
TANK
@Tallskin:
at different times. Don’t make it predictable.
TANK
And if there will be news cameras, we should bus in some attractive gay and lesbians, for chrissakes. Probably from out of state, as utah’s populated by some really REALLY ugly people. Mormons (in general) aren’t known for their looks… We’re trying to make an difference in media perception, and ugly people can’t do that.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
so speak English.
Zo zorry, Herr Commandant.
Plese don’t shoot me. I am only trying to do my job!
strumpetwindsock
@galefan2004:
Why not just surrender everything to them and save them the trouble of having to raise any money at all? Then we can make them really happy.
We can all pretend we’re straight, then maybe they’ll leave us alone.
I don’t know what your concern is. Obviously some of these groups are going to take anything, however innocent as a threat, And that goes double for the Mormon Church given their siege mentality they have been holding on to for the past 180 years, and the fact that evidently they think they own that town.
Even with out us standing up to them they seem to have no problem actively organizing and attacking us, so I’m not sure what you think we have to lose. I would recommend again that you read the comments in the Salt Lake newspaper. They’re certainly not all lining up behind the church.
And this is not just a gay issue, so there are certainly some local people who are our allies in this who might not otherwise be onside.
schlukitz
@strumpetwindsock:
Wenn du dumm bleiben willst ist mir egal, aber hier rede ich wie und wass ich will.
Achtung! Herr Commandant Galefan hat gesprochen! Not only does he assume to tell us how to think and act, he how deigns to tell us how we must speak! No doubt, he would fearlessly tell the vintners of Zeller Schwarze Katz Riesling from the Mosel-Saar-Ruwer region in Germany to speak English as well.
Gelefan wird wirklich ein arroganter kleiner Stichel,
And, if he wants to know what that means, he can go look it up in his Funk and Wagnalls. ;o)
Marius
@schlukitz:
I got the rest, but what’s a “Stichel?” A tool, or am I headed in the wrong direction?
Unrelated, but if Walt Disney started a religion, his churches might look a lot like the Mormon Temple. A cartoon version of Ludwig’s cartoon castle.
strumpetwindsock
@schlukitz:
Yeah, I kinda figured he might be joking (hard to believe anyone thinks that way nowadays), but I couldn’t help but take advantage of the opening.
Hast du mal gesagt du bist niederlaender?
galefan2004
@schlukitz: Actually, much as you could give a damn less what I say, I could also give a damn less what you say no matter what language it is in.
I’m all for anyone that wants to hold hands and kiss their boyfriend on church property. I support their right to do that.
However, I also respect the privacy of the church. My issue with this couple comes with the fact that they refused to leave the grounds when asked. The Mormon church did the right thing in this occasion and called the police to have them escorted off the property.
Where I’m from, I would hope that the agency/church/group that had a problem with me kissing my boyfriend on their property would call the police to handle the trespassing situation when they asked me to leave instead of handling it the way trespassing is normally dealt with around here.
schlukitz
@strumpetwindsock:
Hast du mal gesagt du bist niederlaender?
Ich bin ein erste Generation Deutscher aber meine deutsche Rede ist sehr die Armen, traurig zu sagen.
schlukitz
@Marius:
I got the rest, but what’s a “Stichel?”
It has to do with the male organ of copulation…and not in a nice way. ;P
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
Actually, much as you could give a damn less what I say, I could also give a damn less what you say no matter what language it is in.
Then why do you keep repeating yourself, ad nauseum?
Where I’m from, I would hope that the agency/church/group that had a problem with me kissing my boyfriend on their property would call the police to handle the trespassing situation when they asked me to leave instead of handling it the way trespassing is normally dealt with around here.
And I would hope that you would hold your own mother and father to the same high, fastidious standards that you would hold you and your boyfriend to.
strumpetwindsock
Deutscher aus welchem gebiet?
Es wird traurig deine sprache ueberhaupt zu verlassen.
DU sollst ueben. Entweder Deustschland besuchen, oder eine Deutsche freund in den V. staaten finden. Sprachstunden ging viel schneller im bett.
Ich… ich bin kein Deutscher. Habe alles von besuch gelernt. Und meine gramatik ist auch nicht perfekt, wie du siehst.
This is fun, but we should probably switch back now.
galefan2004
@schlukitz: Actually my parents are divorced. So, if my mom and dad kissed in public there would be a major issue. My mom doesn’t kiss her boyfriend in public though. My dad doesn’t kiss his girlfriend in public either. Hell, my brother doesn’t even kiss his girlfriend in public. We are just not a family that believes in any type of PDA in any form.
galefan2004
@galefan2004: Oh, and I keep speaking, to keep pissing you off, and apparently that is working just fine. I have very little respect for the gay community as a hole. I have seen more gay assholes than I have ever seen decent guys that just so happened to be gay.
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
We are just not a family that believes in any type of PDA in any form.
Yessss (purposely drawn out as only Carry Grant could have done), it certainly shows.
galefan2004
I’m sorry, but I think Cary Grant stopped being relevant before I was born, so you will have to forgive me if I don’t get the reference.
TANK
well, that’s true. There are more gay assholes…we’re a community filled with people driven insane by discrimination. There’s a lot of ’em…but there’s a lot of sane gays, too. THey’re boring and we don’t talk about them. They usually are brought out to make a good example in front of the republicans.
galefan2004
@TANK: Damn it Tank, you aren’t supposed to make sense. Its a scary world where you and I agree on anything at all.
schlukitz
@strumpetwindsock:
Yes. I agree totally. While it is, indeed, fun to brush-up on our German-speaking skills, we do so at peril of making everyone else feel left out of the conversation, which wouldn’t be very polite of either of us. LOL
In response to your question, my Dad was born in Frankfort am Mein. He spent his mid-life in the USA, but also lived in the Hamburg, Bahrenfeld area of Hamburg in his latter years and spoke hochdeutsch.
The limited amount of German that I do know, I learned from him during my early teen years before he returned to Germany. Unfortunately, I never knew any other German speaking people with whom I could continue to practice it, so I did not have sufficient motivation to go to language school and improve my skills.
Despite the fact that you are not German, you seem to be quite proficient in German.
My commendations to you. 😉
schlukitz
@galefan2004:
Sooner or later, we all stop being relevant. LOL
Marius
@schlukitz:
I had a German father as well. My mother found him in Greece. He ran away before I learned how to speak, so I know it wasn’t something I said.
TANK
@schlukitz:
Speak for yourself.
strumpetwindsock
@schlukitz:
Great city, Hamburg. Only place i know of where the president of the football team is an openly gay man (FC St. Pauli, actually – there’s a difference).
My favourite city over there is Berlin, but I spent most of my time in niedersachsen and nordhessen.
@TANK:
No, he’s right… unless you are planning to be bigger than jesus.
haha
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
That’s setting the bar particularly low.
jojoko
looks like they are in front of disneyland!
Phoenix (Rider of the Purple Sage)
Salt Lake City sold the property to the church in the late 1990s, it remains a popular pedestrian thoroughfare by Mayor Didi Coridini for approx. 12 million dollars with the contingency it would remain public accommodation and accessible. The LDS own several of these plazas and thoroughfares and you can be several blocks from the temple and still be on Temple property. The sale was rather legally sketchy, which is why it was protested.
That being said, the plaza is used by newlywed Mormon couples who also perform PDAs similar or same as the gay couple. The security guards/cops expressly stated that the gay couple was being singled out because they were gay and the police/security guard disapproved of their ‘lifestyle’. Excuse me, if this is a public accommodation, you don’t get to impose your religion on other people.
p.s. they already had a protest. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705316423/Kissers-protest-near-Temple-Square.html
Rick
@HiveRadical: Oh yeah. They wanted to be handcuffed and arrested and cited. Give me a fucking break.
Rick
@Brother August Ludwig: How would you know either of those things even happen. Which I’ve done to my wife a million times. Grow up and leave that nutty environment.
duttybarb
The long and short of it is….the guys were wrong. You can lament from now till forever. They were wrong.
Gays need to understand that as long as a bible or quran or torah continues to remain..people will always have an issue with you.
Get over it.
TANK
That’s not an argument, you stupid twat. Just saying that they’re wrong is not an argument, fuckhead. Try thinking.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Though you have to admit you probably agree completely with her second sentence (though I don’t).
TANK
@strumpetwindsock:
Third sentence? But you have nothing to say about that other than “I’m canadian, and I know a thing or two about straight people who are christians and gay friendly…I gotta friend somewheres..” Fuck you.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Nope, I meant second paragraph ( which is the fourth sentence actually).
And I just found it interesting that two people of such differing opinions are you and her are probably in complete agreement on that point.
And you have a good evening too.
TANK
Oh okay, fourth sentence. You have spectacular evening!
Tally Ho
Gotta say this for Galeforce 2004–he takes on all comers on this issue. And gets his ass kicked every time.
Between Jul 11, 2009 at 5:11 pm and Jul 12, 2009 at 7:34 pm I count 25 of his postings in this thread alone, to which I can only say,
“Get up. Get away from the computer. Get a life. Learn something about the real world.”
Johnny
@schlukitz: Rosa Parks WAS looking for trouble. Several other civil rights activists attempted the same thing but the circumstances were not quite right to rally around–look it up. There’s nothing wrong with rallying around an act of provocation to underline a stupid and hateful believe system, and a bad land deal to boot. These guys were doing exactly what Rosa Parks did. Good for them. When’s the all-gay Kiss in? I’ll fly in for it
hyhybt
If I’ve understood this correctly, they were walking across the square to get to a place outside it: in other words, they were already leaving. There simply is no other reason for security to ask someone already leaving to go other than to start trouble.
Keep The Heat On
@Martin Luther Queen:
Second ‘Kiss-In’ on Mormon Plaza Draws Shouting
Published: July 19, 2009
Filed at 4:30 p.m. ET
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — A mass-kissing protest near the Mormon church temple drew a shouting match between gay activists and a group of faithful Mormons.
About 100 people gathered Sunday for the second consecutive weekend to stage a ”kiss-in” to protest the treatment of two gay men cited for trespassing July 9 after they shared a kiss on the plaza owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Demonstrators were greeted at the south entrance by a group of faithful Mormons carrying large signs that denounced homosexuality, prompting a heated verbal exchange.
Police say no one was arrested or cited, despite a large group exchanging kisses by a reflecting pool at the plaza’s center.
The church bought one block of Salt Lake City’s Main Street to build the plaza in the 1990s.