"Shame on you"

[FoxInSox]

I'm very new to this whole scene. I think I've been aware of this site for two weeks? Since just after the election. I found this site through a Wikipedia page relating to civil disobedience or non-violence or Ghandi or Dr. King....

According to Wikipedia*, Ghandi set forth 9 principles for non-violence. These include the following:

3. In so doing he will put up with assaults from the opponent, never retaliate; but he will not submit, out of fear of punishment or the like, to any order given in anger.

7. Retaliation includes swearing and cursing.

8. Therefore a civil resister will never insult his opponent, and therefore also not take part in many of the newly coined cries which are contrary to the spirit of ahimsa.

At the same time I'm reading, learning and being astounded by these, I'm on this site, excited that people are using NVCD to combat intolerance/hatred/prejudice/etc for GLBTQ people.

And then, a few days later, I'm reading on here people supporting the chanting of "Shame on you" at the Mormons who gave lots of money to support Prop 8.

I first heard of this incident on NPR, and in the beginning, I wasn't sure who was chanting. My gutteral response when I learned it was the Yes-on-8 folks shouting was seemingly justified indigination. But, then I thought about Ghandi and about the concept of shame, and how its one of the worst things in the world and undermines so much intolerance and hate, and I decided I didn't want anymore shame thrown around than I did violence.

So, I'm the newb, and I wonder if I'm misunderstanding this. I also wonder if I have a unique response to the concept of "throwing shame" back on the oppressor. (Of course, the GLBT community and all oppressed groups are on the receiving end plenty :sick::'(:mad:)

So...what are y'all's thoughts on this?

TIA,
Michelle

[Steven E. Webster]

Michelle,

I'm sure many of us here need to learn (and learn again) Gandhi's principles of nonviolence.

A lot of what we see happening now is spontaneous and not well-organized. Naturally, with emotions running high and folks not being properly trained in nonviolence not everything is truly nonviolent.

Steven

[FoxInSox]

Steven,

I'm noticing the lack of overall organization and spontenaity. And, I know that particular event wasn't a SoulForce event.

I think that, becauase I interpret "shame on you" to be an insult and verbally violent, I expected other SoulForce members to do so as well. I was surprised to read otherwise.

Then I began to wonder...maybe I misunderstood Ghandi's precepts. Perhaps I have a unique response to "shame on you."

So...curious...:)

[BruceChris]

First of all, this is one of a few, some say the only time in which the matter of taking away the legal rights (as in case law), of a minority has been put to popular vote. There is serious debate as to whether such procedure is even legal, and a test case will be coming up shortly.:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Gay-Marriage-Lawsuits.html?_r=1&scp=9&sq=gay&st=nyt

While I can't say that the behavior of some of the individuals involved strictly reflects the principles of nonviolence, they weren't our people. I will say:

I'm not really concerned that they called the Mormons out,

Not all Mormons are part of this.

The numbers are moving in our direction,

And clearly, they started it, and they're going to lose.

Some religious minorities love to self-righteously criticize others, and then as soon as they meet any opposition, cry out that they are being persecuted. Some Mormons, I have found, rank fairly high on that list.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Alecto]

1) A lot of us here agree with the Soulforce mission and methods to varying degrees. I think they do good work, but I don't personally feel bound by their specific interpretations of nonviolence (and, truth is, I don't know that I agree with nonviolence as a lifestyle: I intend to take self-defense classes for example).

2)I don't know what the official Soulforce response would be, but personally, I don't see shame as violent. Shame = guilt. Yes, I've had enough of it flung at me throughout my life unjustly, but there is something to be said for pointing out to people that they SHOULD feel guilty about something they've done: I don't think "Shame on you" goes anywhere near far enough, and I think it would make a LOT more sense to actually communicate and storytell just how this is hurting us and hurting our families (and the righteous guilt and eventually forgiveness would follow), but...it's a pretty recent hurt like you said.
Another way to look at it is that, if you break it down, these laws are pretty dehumanizing. There is no reason to support any of these laws that doesn't break down to "your love isn't REAL love", and if our emotions aren't real emotions, then that means we're not really people. By refusing to accept that, and sulk away and be ashamed of who we are, and by calling out the people who have tried to do so, it does help send the simple message to others and to ourselves that we ARE in fact human.
That said, I've expressed in a different thread my discomfort with targetting the LDS church for actually a couple different reasons.

[wmanion]

Everything that I have read said the "Shame on You" signs and shouts came about because of all people, the Mormons faced a lot of discrimination and they were not received with open arms in the religious community. Many denominations still view the Mormons as a cult. Many felt that since the Mormons have historically been discriminated against that they had a lot of nerve being involved in discrimination against another group of people. With this being said, maybe a better shout would have been, "How dare you?"

Bill

[FoxInSox]

Bruce,

I'm wondering, more specifically, if you think that chants of "shame on you" are verbally violent and/or insulting. Similarly, do you think yelling "shame on you" meshing with the precepts I mentioned in the OP?

Also, I thought laws existed preventing the marriage of whites and blacks? (feel free to educate me on that, as I write, I'm wondering if those were Jim Crowe Laws?)



Alecto,
What I hear you saying is that you aren't necessarily against violence and that you don't really see cries of "shame on you" as verbally violent and/or insulting.

One thing I noticed is that you equate shame and guilt. I think this may be part of our disagreement. My perspective is that guilt means someone has done something wrong; shame, on the other hand, means that someone IS something wrong.

For me, just as I cannot support anyone calling people who are GLBT shameful, I cannot support anyone calling anyone shameful.

[tdogg]

I'm not sure sure about "shame on you" being equated with being a shameful being. After all, growing up many children were subjected to being told just that (I was) when doing something the adults thought was bad. I never felt it was telling me I was shameful as a person, but that the act was wrong. However, in the context of the protests, it might not necessarily be considered totally non-violent (especially by those not in agreement with the protest, namely the mormons).

In light of recent events and emotions, I'm also not necessarily convinced that the chants of shame on you were unacceptable. It could have been much worse. I also think Bill has a better idea "how dare you" which better addresses the sentiment of such a huge 'mormon' support of Prop 8. To me, how dare you sounds a little rougher than shame on you, but I like it.

No matter how you feel on the church protests (I'm personally in favor of them as long as they are controlled and verbal only, and conducted on public property), in the long run I don't think they either help or hurt the fight for equality. I believe our protests and rallies in general will only serve to help, but the real conduit for change will be in the grass roots outreach efforts, one-on-one discussions and group dialogue, to get our stories, lives and truths out. That will be what begins to open minds and change hearts. Meanwhile, the protests let people know we are here, we're out and we are resolved to realize equality.

[sauu4equality]

For me, just as I cannot support anyone calling people who are GLBT shameful, I cannot support anyone calling anyone shameful.


Why is this such an issue with you? GLBT people are human. If some of my straight family was suddenly not allowed to marry, they would be hosing people down with assault rifles. We're saying, "shame on you." A fairly innocuous phrase. Here's where you're getting caught up. Soulforce is a peaceful organization that believes in the methods of King and Ghandi. The protests are not being put on by Soulforce. So, if you separate yourself for a moment from these principles and you think about what it feels like to be thrown out of your family because your church told them you were a demonic faction and then on top of that not be recognized as a human being by your government, how can you possibly not understand this mentality? I understand where your coming from. But right and wrong are not always that easy to distinguish.

That being said, no one has been hurt by the peaceful protests while some people may have been hurling insults. These crowds have not been "violent" if you operate under the definition that violence requires that someone is injured. So, while they may not be as great as King or Ghandi, they are still not being what I would call violent. Especially, if you compare them to the thousands of murders of GLBT people each year because of hate (of which the churches are responsible). You certainly don't have to call anyone shameful to support equality. And Soulforce will never do this. But I really don't understand why you are so perplexed by this. Apply it to a different thing like, the government raising taxes and people standing outside the white house saying "shame on you." Would that be wrong? You're getting caught up with the fact that this has been aimed at a church. However, this group has not been acting like a church. They have been acting like a political machine. This isn't the first time. And attention must be called to this.

One final note. I think Tdogg already made this point, but it seems to need saying again. Saying shame on you is not the same thing as saying someone is innately shameful. What the church did was shameful. Acting politically to oppress a group of people you don't agree with is shameful. This chant does not call out a specific person. It just says shame on you for your actions as an organization. It doesn't say it's shameful to be a mormon. It doesn't say it's shameful to be religious (because most gay people are religious in one form or another). It just says shame on you for committing your shameful act. Something I think is perfectly justified. This is not an advocation of violence. This is not violence. Just a phrase spoken to a group that overstepped its bounds.

[Steven E. Webster]

Steven,

I'm noticing the lack of overall organization and spontenaity. And, I know that particular event wasn't a SoulForce event.

I think that, becauase I interpret "shame on you" to be an insult and verbally violent, I expected other SoulForce members to do so as well. I was surprised to read otherwise.

Then I began to wonder...maybe I misunderstood Ghandi's precepts. Perhaps I have a unique response to "shame on you."

So...curious...:)

Michelle,
I should have been clearer. I think you may be right. The "shame on you" chant may be violent. In Soulforce we are taught to avoid the violence of "heart, tongue or fist."

I think you raise an important issue, and I thank you for that.

In my experience with Soulforce, I find that we often get into discussions about what is and isn't violent or nonviolent. As with many ethical questions, the answer may not always be readily apparent.

Steven W.

[FoxInSox]

sauu4equality,

As I read your post, I hear how passionate you are about these issues, and I get the sense that you're pretty shocked that I'm so bothered by this one phrase.

I would like to clarify that I know the event wasn't a Soulforce event. What I noticed, though, was that people on the Soulforce forums were excited about the event, even the chanting of "shame on you."

Now, when I heard this news story on NPR, and I learned that it was the protesters shouting it at the Mormons, my first response was to think, "Good! The Mormons deserve it!" Because I do think their support of this ban is awful. I believe it to be immoral and unethical, and I'm angry with them - and Dobson and all the brothers and sisters of my own faith - because of their support for the ban.

After that initial response of feeling superior and justified and right, I started thinking about the precepts that Ghandi had set forth the day before. And I wondered if that phrase was insulting the oppressor. It seemed that it was to me, but the Soulforce community seemed to feel otherwise. So...I'm curious about how we came to our different conclusions.

As I'm reading, what I'm really noticing is that I may have a different response to the idea of shame than most. Perhaps it's from my personal experiences, perhaps its just semantics, perhaps its from my counseling background/education. Probably all of the above.

In my head, shame is feeling or belief that one is bad, unacceptable, unworthy, worthless, innately sub-human. It's pervasive, and it eats away at people's soul. What I'm noticing as I read, though, is that most of you guys don't interpret shame that way. This suggests that I am more sensitive than most to that word.

And, fwiw, the throwing around of shame towards any group...the Mormons, the people who have deeply wounded me from churches, the government, straight people, gay people, xyz ethnicity, terrorists, pacifists, Pres. Bush, Mother Therersa...I can't support it. Even when there's a little (or really big) part of me screaming that someone deserves it...

It's alot like throwing around hate or fear. There's already more than enough out there, and it doesn't solve the problem. It also means I am condoning the acts of the oppressor by doing them myself.

[sauu4equality]

It's alot like throwing around hate or fear. There's already more than enough out there, and it doesn't solve the problem. It also means I am condoning the acts of the oppressor by doing them myself.

While I understand you having a problem with people saying shame on you and you may be justified in feeling this way, it is not appropriate to compare this to the evil that has been done by the Mormon Church and Others ("condoning the acts of the oppressor by doing them myself" implies that the support of prop 8, evil torture tactics coded as therapy, and excommunication from families are no worse than saying "shame on you"). While it certainly does not solve the problem, saying "shame on you" does very little to exacerbate it. It is one of the most insignificant things that has been done at the rallies. And no Mormon is concerned that a bunch of homos think they did wrong. Also, this type of frustration should be expected. We are in pain, and need avenues to vent. We are human and have been devastated by injustice. Our expression of frustration should not be judged. Especially not by allies. Eventually, we will be compassionate toward our oppressors as we have been for so many years. But it is too soon after the punch in the gut that was prop 8's passage.

[BruceChris]

Ghandi and King may have been practicing a classic, or strict form of non-violence, but I'm sure that not all of their followers were. Many movements have been successful without being perfectly NV. I was just over at feministing.com, and this subject was thoroughly discussed, see link. Some of the posters gave some very blunt and detailed examples of how Mormons have persecuted others. There were several related discussions linked to this site.

http://community.feministing.com/2008/11/mormon-feminist-and-kind-of-af.html

Some religions do not believe in freedom of religion, they seem to believe that they have the right, even the duty to tell other people, members of other religions,what they can and cannot do.

"If you don't like abortion gay marriage, don't have one."

I can't tell you just how NV the protest was, I wasn't there, and I don't even have computer audio right now. Other than that, I've said pretty much all that I want to in the last post.

I do appreciate your concern, and your question. I appreciate all that was said at feministing, their people are very articulate.

Peace, Love, and respect for others, Bruce Chris

[Matt Algren]

Why is this such an issue with you? GLBT people are human.
I think this is key to the issue. We (The Homosexuals) have been trained from an early age to separate emotion and action. Then it was love vs. physical and vocal expressions of love, in this case it's anger vs. physical and vocal expressions of anger.

People are allowed to be human. Even The Homosexuals. It's well and good to say that people should be peaceful and not raise their voices and all that, but the fact is that the emotion is real and needs to be expressed. Not like a cold book report read by a fifth grader, but as a real emotion that comes from a real place that deserves recognition. And we don't need to be asking straight folk if it's okay to be angry.

Should we be chanting that forever? Probably not. For now, two weeks after our rights were taken from us, I think it's reasonable. (And peacefulness does not mean anger is unwarranted.)

One other thing: People have been asking whether the forums are passe or whatever, and wondering why there's a decline in activity. I think this is one of the reasons. If someone asks a question, or offers an opinion, they're shown the Soulforce rulebook and conversation tends to be cut off because they don't want to break the rules.

Honestly, it reminds me of what fundies do with us and the Bible.

[FoxInSox]

sauu4equality,
My questions really seem to have hurt you, and I aplogize for the pain I've caused.


Bruce,
Thanks for the link. If the discussion is as you describe, then I think it will probably be good reading and thought-provoking as I consider NVCD as something I want to integrate into my life.

[sauu4equality]

sauu4equality,
My questions really seem to have hurt you, and I aplogize for the pain I've caused.


Bruce,
Thanks for the link. If the discussion is as you describe, then I think it will probably be good reading and thought-provoking as I consider NVCD as something I want to integrate into my life.

I think Matt's post above gets to the point of what I was trying to get across. You seem to be willing to take these concerns into consideration and that's all I can ask. We all want equality. And while I disagree with your earlier post, I am still glad you are here to participate in the conversation.

[Daniel]

What a curious thread: debating the efficacy or moral authority in chanting "Shame on You!"

Here's what I think.

1) No one likes or wants to be shamed.

2) No one likes having their rights taken away.

On one hand you the those in the 2nd group (us!) feeling shamed by the tryanny of the majority. Why? We're not good enough to be married, that's why. That's the message of Prop 8: You HO-MO-SEX-UALS don't deserve marriage! It's OURS!"

It's one hell of a double whammy.

On the other hand you have Mormons who feel abused somehow because the homosexuals have the temerity to stand up for themselves. The surreal thing is that I have read from more than one church leader that we should all shut up and sit down and mind our place. We got voted down and should eat it. It's the stance of the hand on the hip school yard bully who steals your lunch and then gets in your face and intones "Na-na-na-na-na......you LOSER! Now SHUT YOUR FACE!"

Now isn't that just dandy? Not only are we shamed, we are supposed to eat that shame in silence. That's pretty sick don't you think?

So we're found our voice, our anger, and we are expressing it. The chant "Shame on You!", I think, can be viewed as mirroring back to others what they have done to us.

Putting the poison back in the bottle- as it were.

Know what I think the real shame is? That we have to lose our rights in order to stop being so complacent. Wake up. Get busy. Really work for something instead of waiting for 'others' to do it for us.

There is no other. It's you and me baby!

[Zerbie]

Well put, Daniel. :award:

I am fine with other people saying "shame on you" to those who have done such an egregious wrong to so many thousands of people, and who still do not see that they have forcibly revoked the civil rights to which those people are entitled.

Does hearing them chant that make me feel warm and fuzzy? No.

Am I glad as hell to see gay people standing up for themselves? Hell, YES!! There hasn't been enough of that in recent years. Not for decades. I have been waiting and wondering, wondering and waiting when more than just a few gay people would finally stand up for themselves. As a group, the gay community has been so sweet. So quiet. So minding their own business and not 'offending' anyone by speaking out against all this unbelievable ridiculous b*llsh*t. I am glad to see folks resisting this and making the point that stripping citizens of civil rights is unacceptable and even shameful. It is!!

For me personally, 'shame on you' is on the edge. I personally won't chant it, nor will I use it on my sign.

Is it non-violent? Maybe more NON violent than violent, but because it is a negative judgment on others, somewhere on the edge. Should we always avoid the edge? Good question. Maybe not.

We're in new times now, and the era is still SO new, we do not yet know what will define it. We will find out how far to go, what to say, what our cohesive message is, as we go.

[Gennee]

I wasn't at the demonstration but I need to caution you that words can hurt and separate people. I had hurtful words hurled at me but I chose not to respond. I have learned in life that you never stoop down to the level of your tormentors. Bashing someone's head or defaming someone's character puts me to the level of those who spew venomous vitriole against us.

Many came out in protest at the Mormon church. I am reminded that in Salt Lake City, a predominantly Mormon city, there were demonstrations by GLBTQ Mormons. It's great that people all over the country are making their voices heard.

Gennee

[tdogg]

It's interesting to have these discussions, especially as Soulforce advocates non-violence. Many (most?) of us are in the 'still learning' phase, and for me I'm probably at the beginning of that. While I'm with Zerbie on not using "shame on you" either in my language or protest sign, I'm not necessarily against how it's been used as it relates to the Prop 8 protests. In a perfect world, we could all sit down and have fabulous and compassionate discussions about the issue, but then Prop 8 wouldn't have been passed. I think organized religion MUST know how their efforts affect us, and the negative effect on all of society, and if it takes some chants of "shame on you" in front of a church to get their attention, I don't have a problem with it.

OTOH, I think you are also entitled to your opinion on the use of the phrase, Michelle. :love:

[FoxInSox]

Zerbie, Daniel, tdogg, and Gennee,

Thank you for your responses and for helping me learn.

~Michelle

[Daniel]

I think we should not forget a few things in our rush to take our own temperature regarding matters of nonviolence ie 'are-we-doing-it-the-right-way'.

The fact remains that there are a hell of a lot of angry gay people right now. And the sanest thing to do, I think, is to channel that anger into constructive rather than destructive activity. And my sense is that this is happening on a national and local level. There will be bumps in the road, but I don't envision major set backs.

I don't think we are doing to see burned out cars and blocks of neighborhoods burned down like we saw in the 60's with the civil rights movement. We may be angry right now, but we are also a very peace loving people.

We're going to figure this out as we go. As we always do. In fact, we're the ones who go into burned out neighborhoods and makes something out of them. It's what we do.

And we are going to rise to this occasion. So help me Buddha! :D:lol:

[tdogg]

Perfectly said Daniel. :love: So very true.

I feel there is much to learn from you also, Michelle. That's what is great about being here, there are so many different points of view to talk about and mull over.

[FoxInSox]

"The fact remains that there are a hell of a lot of angry gay people right now."

I think there's a hell of alot of angry straight people, too.

Daniel, where do you get all your hope? Every post of yours I've read is hopeful :).

[Daniel]

"The fact remains that there are a hell of a lot of angry gay people right now."

I think there's a hell of alot of angry straight people, too.

Daniel, where do you get all your hope? Every post of yours I've read is hopeful :).

Yeah...there are a lot of pissed off straight people out there. But on which side? Methinks that the opposition is shrinking as I write. Their nadir has come and gone. It's only a matter of time before those under 35 assume positions of responsibility. And they don't have issues like their parents with gay folks.

Tims is on our side. Still....we better not be complacent. We have a window of opportunity to get some significant stuff done. And that's how I see Prop 8. It's an awful, searing, painful gift, but a gift never-the-less. It's staring us in the face, saying do something!

Carpe Diem!

If I sound hopeful, it's because I've been through a really rough patch the last 18 months (I had my own wakeup call with the sudden onset of severe tinnitus in March '07 and thought seriously about ending my life in the days and months after) and have had to work hard at pulling myself out of the dark place I found myself in.

With everything I have gone through- and it's been hell- I've made myself- and I mean - MADE MYSELF - meditate, sit quietly and generate compasson for myself and others.

(google Tonglen and you'll get a sense of what I do to keep sane)

Maybe that's where my hope comes from. Then again, it could be simple defiance. At 50, I am determined that the future and present be a lot better than the past. I believe that it's time to make things happen, not merely wait for them to happen. As I see it, we can't wait for anyone to make us happy. We have to do that ourselves.

Of course, my therapist and I thank you...

(wink)

[FoxInSox]

Daniel, I hope you know that when I said lots of straight people were angry, I meant people like me who are angry at the injustice, not the straight people who are angry and causing the injustice.

I think the day is coming when I will no longer think about meditation and actually do it. It's almost every day that someone says something to me about it, but I keep running into resistance. Thank you for being that person today.

[Daniel]

Daniel, I hope you know that when I said lots of straight people were angry, I meant people like me who are angry at the injustice, not the straight people who are angry and causing the injustice.

I think the day is coming when I will no longer think about meditation and actually do it. It's almost every day that someone says something to me about it, but I keep running into resistance. Thank you for being that person today.

Gottcha on who is angry! ;):pray::love:

And as for meditation, it might be helpful for you to not think of it as meditation, but as 'taking a breather', 'conscious relaxation' or 'chilling out'.

You can start by doing simple stuff like sitting down and taking 10 to 20 really slow breaths while looking at a spot on the floor or the wall.

This kind of thing encapsulates two of the main components of all meditation systems: eye fixation and breath awareness. Together, they bring about a lessening of the flight or fight response and help the brain go from a beta to an alpha wave form- the latter being what we are in when we daydream.

Reistance? If you feel it coming up when you do the practice above, you note it mentally and go back to what you are doing. Fighting against one's resistance only makes it stronger. ;)

Now. I KNOW you can do what I've outlined above.

Piece of cake actually. Takes all of- what- 5 minutes? And 5 minutes is better than 0 minutes. Know what? It's been researched that if you do this sort of thing for 15-18 minutes, the body releases stress. Not making that up! It also changes the brain wave pattern permanently.

Cool stuff.

[Zerbie]

Fox:
If you're resisting doing the meditation, just get close to it in some form, like Daniel suggested. conscious breathing and eye focus exercises are SPECTACULAR! Or just make yourself sit for a few minutes, with the understanding that if you don't start to like it in 5 minutes, you're allowed to stop. :):)

Daniel, you are very special. :love: I don't know how often I hear people use the "I'm 50" statement to preface the fact that the world ain't never gonna change so they won't bother to try. . . much of anything. There you are sounding like a 50 year old child. :D You're magic. :dove:

We are talking here about engaging in society-wide alchemy, turning prop 8 and anti-gay hate into the magic stone that tinges everything we do and makes it all a movement of luminous love. That's what's gotta happen. First, the newness of what was done needs to stop being so raw, because of course tens of thousands are very angry right now. Only time will diminish that anger, I believe. Spending that time organizing and connecting more deeply with our communities, however, will begin to transmute that anger into positive energies like hope, and dedication to community service.

I can't tell you how long I have tried like mad to find a venue for getting involved in the kind of change we need. The fact of the matter is, those venues did not exist because so few of us were engaged. All of a sudden, thank you prop 8, communities around the nation are forming groups and creating venues for social change. Some organizers in Phoenix announced a new group we are all invited to help start up, and a first meeting was held on Monday. I am so proud and delighted to report that there were approximately 200 people there, and nearly everyone who spoke up at the meeting mentioned the importance of keeping this dedication over time.

Oh, how ironic it is, but all week I have been so grateful for the passage of Proposition 8 for the revivification of the gay and allied community, and for the spark that finally ignited our movement for civil rights.

[Matt Algren]

Oh, how ironic it is, but all week I have been so grateful for the passage of Proposition 8 for the revivification of the gay and allied community, and for the spark that finally ignited our movement for civil rights.
In addition, it's made the opposition get over-confident. They're starting to drop the pretense of reasoned civil discussion and are starting to be bold about the fact that theirs is an argument based on religion. That'll be their downfall.

[Zerbie]

In addition, it's made the opposition get over-confident. They're starting to drop the pretense of reasoned civil discussion and are starting to be bold about the fact that theirs is an argument based on religion. That'll be their downfall.

Oh? Where have you seen this?

Give 'em the rope. . . .

[Matt Algren]

Here's one example: http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2008/11/pro-family-an-e.html

The fact is that, whether homosexual activists want to accept it or not, Christians are protecting all people, including homosexuals, by protecting marriage. They appealed to the people to win the vote on marriage and they won.

Homosexual activists should learn from that. Fear, intimidation and violence will get them nowhere. It might give them a sense of power and maybe provide a place for some stress relief, but it will not make their position any more true or desirable. It won't change hearts and minds, and it won't change the Word of God, which is the basis for Christian belief.

[Witch of Hope]

Foxinsox,

I have the luck to live in Germany where we may also marry same-sexual, It is NO MARRIAGE, but something comparable. And I was former in the LDS (till 1992), and was excommunicated because I was born as a "man", but I feltmyself always as a woman, and also I wantd to live thus. In Cologne where I lived long a homosexual man committed suicide because the LDS threatened to expel him if he didn't stop. If he became "normal again.
If you visit the web page of Affirmation.org, you become many examples to see, how the LDS handle with homosexuality, and how many lesbians, gays and transsexuals killed themselves so. The attempt of the LDS, the marriage for homosexual feeling people to forbid, is another attempt of this cult to have political influence.
I can understand the fury and the annoyance of many people who see how this church places itself as a "moral authority, however, "overlooks" the fact that their founder not only the introduced the polygamy, but also took the women who were already married with another man. And also women under age weren't sure before him. I call this HYPOCRISY! How would you call it?

WoH