So proclaims Paul Mero, President of the Sutherland Institute, a conservative think tank in Utah.  And, he’s referring to the two sides in the so called “gay rights” debate, one that encompases the most basic of civil rights and the so called fundamental right to genderless marriage.  The Salt Lake Tribune published Mero’s thoughts in an article entitled Too Complicated to find Common Ground(more…)

Wow, this must have been some monumental victory for the so-called new “Civil Rights” movement.  Californians Against Hate (gotta love the name), and please take a gander at their website to see just how full of love they are, has announced:

A California gay-rights group announced Friday it is formally ending a boycott of one of Utah’s most high-profile car dealerships.

Fred Karger, director of Californians Against Hate, said Friday the two-week boycott of Ken Garff Automotive Group was being called off immediately, following a series of meetings that included face-to-face discussions between company principals John and Robert Garff and Utah philanthropist Bruce Bastian, a leading gay-rights advocate.

A two week boycott–impressive–probably brought the dealerships to their knees- I’m sure.  And, what resulted from this massive boycott?

The former Word Perfect executive said, among other steps, the Garff company would be formally adopting “a non-discriminatory company policy, even though they are pretty much there already.”

Why, the Garff company is adopting a policy they already practiced–non discrimination.  Yes.  I can see how the gay rights movement is indeed the new “Civil Rights” movement of our time.   And, just how is it, again we who oppose genderless marriage on religious and legal grounds are so full of hate?  Please.


The anti-8 zeal without knowledge crowd defaces a gay-friendly Catholic Church in San Francisco.  They just don’t quite get it yet, do they?  The way to promote your cause, win friends and influence people is probably not like this.

anti-8-crowd

The California Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Proposition 8 challeges, and defenses over the course of the next few months.  The court issued its order this afternoon, which you can read here.  The briefing schedule outlined in the order begins now and goes through January 2009.  It is unclear when there might be oral argument and a decision.  The Los Angeles Times reports: (more…)

For my other Tolerance posts see Tolerance I, Tolerance II, Tolerance III.  Well, its been almost two weeks now since election day, and amazingly one issue remains in the news cycle on an almost daily basis since that time:  Proposition 8 and the Mormon Church. That’s right, the Mormon Church, its members, and other persons of faith have been singled out and targeted for engaging in the exercise of an actual constitutionally protected fundamental right–the right to vote and participate in the political process.  The vitriol, hate, intolerance and lawlessness in some cases exhibited by those who disagreed with Proposition 8 supporters has been frightening and should give pause to those who truly cherish our democratic institutions and the rule of law.  See also S.P. Bailey’s These Cultural Wars post over at A Motley Vision.  And, there is Marc Bohn’s Rhetoric, Ideology and Prop 8 over at Times and Seasons.

Meridian Magazine has two articles with incredible photos, that if you have not seen, you should.  The two articles are: The Hypocrisy of the Tolerance Movement and In the Face of Hatred.   Both are well done, and you should read them both.  The photos accompanying the second article are truly remarkable and alarming.  The author, Paul Bishop of this article is an LDS LAPD veteran, who makes some good points.  Because I think the photos are particularly powerful, I repost them below, for those who may not get over to the Meridian website on a regular basis: (more…)

I’m all for political protest.  Unlike some recently judicially created rights, free speech and political protest is actually a fundamental right, with a long and well respected history of Constitutional protection, both at the state and federal levels.  I’ve watched, as I’m sure many have, the political upheaval and fallout from California’s citizens exercising their fundamental right to amend the constitution of their own state.   That is still a protected fundamental right isn’t it?–the right of the people to vote, to express their mandate at the ballot box.  That’s still a protected fundamental right, reserved by the people to define the social and political mandates of society?  I’ve tried to channel some thoughts in response to all this protest–in no particular order of importance: (more…)

The ACLU, LAMBDA, and of course the ubiquitous Gloria Allred, among others have filed three lawsuits with the California Supreme Court seeking an injunction against its implementation.  I have not read the entire petition, which you can see here:   Proposition 8 Petition(more…)

The No on 8 proponents now revealed its Anti-Mormon religious bigotry in their latest ad:

See David’s write up over at A Soft Answer.  See also Marc’s post over at T & S.

If ever there was any question that so called “gay rights” and religious liberties are set to clash–that question has now been answered.  Don’t think that these anti-Mormon zealots won’t use the force and weight of constitutional law to shut out, marginalize and destroy those of religious persuasion—well, think again.  So, I guess its just fine to defame a Church and its missionary program for doing its job–speaking out on the moral issues of the day.

Make no mistake.  This is a cultural and religious war–one waged by anti-religious bigots and zealots who define their entire existence by their sexual lifestyle.  And, it’s being waged against those whose religious beliefs disagree that lifestyle.  No question now which side has sunk below the gutter and sewer out of which it has crawled.  Check out Daily Kos for those who so proudly claim responsibility for this slime.

As I have watched the genderless marriage debate rage in California since the Ides of May, 2008 I have been amazed–perhaps even impressed at the effectiveness of the genderless marriage proponents to convince the electorate that this is an equal rights or fundamental rights issue.  While I vigorously disagree with that proposition (as I will explain in greater detail in this post), I think the genderless marriage proponents have done a incredible job of wrapping the debate in the cloak of equal protection and fundamental rights. (more…)