Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Homo / Religion Kissing In Salt Lake
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:57 PM
We've got some sweet pictures of happy couples kissing in Salt Lake City to protest the Mormon Church's heavy-handed, intolerant, and comically ineffectual ban on same-sex kissing on a quasi-public plaza. But first...
[A] gay couple was strolling by the lovely gardened plaza in front of the Mormon Temple when Matt Aune gave his partner, Dereck Jones a peck on the cheek—and got handcuffed and cited for trespassing and inappropriate behavior—or something like that. No police reports have been made public yet, the newspaper says. The men also admit to responding to the citation with profanity so no one may wind up looking good in that scenario.
Contrary to what USA Today's "faith and reason" columnist would have us believe, I think if you get thrown to the ground and arrested for kissing someone on the cheek—even in freakin' Utah—you can't be blamed for "responding... with profanity." Or with protests:
All photos by Carl Valentine Woldberg. Thanks, JJ, for sending the pictures. Two more—one featuring hot bondage action!—after the jump.
Share via
1
This the most beautiful protest activism I think I have ever seen.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
2
Aww! Is it weird that there is a little part of me wishing to be in Salt Lake right now? I'd SO make out for the cause!
3
I can already picture all the young mormons who witnessed this going home to masturbate furiously, which was assuredly followed up with a tearful apology to god for abusing their bodies and thinking impure thoughts.
5
Neat actions!
Remember, drink plenty of water - the hot desert air dries you out faster than you realize.
Remember, drink plenty of water - the hot desert air dries you out faster than you realize.
7
Damn, how long can we keep this thing going, and how soon can I get there? Nothing I like more than pretty boys kissing. ^^
9
So they're all kissing in that semi-public plaza, right? Cool. I hope that keeps up for weeks. Let the security guards harass everyone--they can't! The more attention these intolerant Mormon hetero scum receive for their craziness, the better. It's the fastest-growing religion in the US right now, though no one seems to know why...
11
Dear Queer Kids of Salt Lake City,
You have been awarded the honor of Loveliest Protest of the Day. The Committee commends your loveliness and your protest.
Most sincerely,
The Committee
You have been awarded the honor of Loveliest Protest of the Day. The Committee commends your loveliness and your protest.
Most sincerely,
The Committee
12
@9,
In other parts of the world, they have been able to win over converts, but usually from other Christian denominations, not among the heathens. In the U.S., I'll bet their growth is mostly/entirely due to overbreeding.
In other parts of the world, they have been able to win over converts, but usually from other Christian denominations, not among the heathens. In the U.S., I'll bet their growth is mostly/entirely due to overbreeding.
14
According to the police report, the guys were arrested NOT for making out, but for not complying with police when asked to move off private property. Also according to the report, one of the men was intoxicated.
This reminds me of the incident last year where two lesbians were making out 'a little too much' at a stadium and got tossed. They yelled discrimination. But when you make a scene -- which I'm sure the lesbians did.. did you SEE the Tila Tequila reality show the one chick was on? -- and when you don't leave private property when asked, you're asking for trouble. Period.
All I can say is that this fuss is as annoying and damaging to the gay community's image as when black people shout "racist" in unwarranted/non-racist situations.
I'm fine with calling the authorities out when they barge into gay bars and beat customers, but I don't think this is a comparable example. And no one at the Mormon church is changing their mind because of a kiss-off.
This reminds me of the incident last year where two lesbians were making out 'a little too much' at a stadium and got tossed. They yelled discrimination. But when you make a scene -- which I'm sure the lesbians did.. did you SEE the Tila Tequila reality show the one chick was on? -- and when you don't leave private property when asked, you're asking for trouble. Period.
All I can say is that this fuss is as annoying and damaging to the gay community's image as when black people shout "racist" in unwarranted/non-racist situations.
I'm fine with calling the authorities out when they barge into gay bars and beat customers, but I don't think this is a comparable example. And no one at the Mormon church is changing their mind because of a kiss-off.
17
@14, the point isn't to change Mormon minds, it's too late for that. It's to make the rest of the world sit up and notice (if they haven't already) that Mormons are uptight jerks. It's to make Mormons politically radioactive. And to show the world that queer people have more fun.
18
This is part of the "agora" problem: public places that are, in fact, private, even when they encroach on and are part of apparently public space. In Salt Lake City, I understand the church owns a chunk of what appears to be public and is de facto treated as public except that there's no rights -- it's private property, enforced by police.
This was part of the concern among freethinkers when business moved from downtowns and districts into malls. Malls are free-speech-free zones, private enterprises with no obligations to allow contrary views.
However, it's possible that with this economy, malls will collapse, and cheap space (business, retail, warehouse, and residential) will move people back into the core. Oh, and high gas prices, which we'll have again.
This was part of the concern among freethinkers when business moved from downtowns and districts into malls. Malls are free-speech-free zones, private enterprises with no obligations to allow contrary views.
However, it's possible that with this economy, malls will collapse, and cheap space (business, retail, warehouse, and residential) will move people back into the core. Oh, and high gas prices, which we'll have again.
19
Wait a second, they responded with a profanity is a bad thing? It's like a reaction to someone doing something so unbelievably stupid you need to take all your emotions and throw it at a word so you don't throw a punch. Spending tax dollars to stop 2 boys from kissing, let me know how that works out for you.
20
@14: I'll bet the Mormon Church's PR people aren't happy about this. They don't like being at the center of controversy.
21
@14 Drunk people, trashy people, ugly people, and even drunk, trashy, ugly people still have rights.
Have you ever seen a heterosexual couple kissing in public? How about a drunk heterosexual couple kissing in public? Trashy? Ugly? All of the above? I figured. Have you ever seen a drunk heterosexual couple be thrown out of a baseball game for kissing? How about being arrested for kissing while taking a stroll?
I don't care if the couples who've run into trouble aren't the ideal poster-children for your campaign for America's tolerant future. Ideal people don't run into trouble as often. The non-ideal ones, though, who are willing to stand up for themselves? They've got my vote, and I think they're doing just fine defending our rights.
Have you ever seen a heterosexual couple kissing in public? How about a drunk heterosexual couple kissing in public? Trashy? Ugly? All of the above? I figured. Have you ever seen a drunk heterosexual couple be thrown out of a baseball game for kissing? How about being arrested for kissing while taking a stroll?
I don't care if the couples who've run into trouble aren't the ideal poster-children for your campaign for America's tolerant future. Ideal people don't run into trouble as often. The non-ideal ones, though, who are willing to stand up for themselves? They've got my vote, and I think they're doing just fine defending our rights.
22
@14: But why were they targeted? What got security interested in them in the first place? I would love to know the number of straight couples kissing on that property that have ever been asked to leave.
23
Shelby @14: I believe that in the earlier reports it was mentioned that when the officer(s) mentioned that one of the men was intoxicated, the young man replied that they had just left a bar and because they had been drinking they were doing the responsible thing and walking rather than driving.
None of the initial reports seemed to give any indication that the two young men were in any way acting or doing anything inappropriate - short of being spotted and harassed by LDS security because they were "Kissing While Gay".
None of the initial reports seemed to give any indication that the two young men were in any way acting or doing anything inappropriate - short of being spotted and harassed by LDS security because they were "Kissing While Gay".
24
@ 22,
They were targeted. This section of main street is next to the SL temple and when the LDS purchased it, they had to agree to keep the space open to everyone.
The Mormon's stated that zero PDA is allowed in the plaza, yet every temple wedding starts and finishes on the plaza. With those weddings come the kissing and other PDA.
If the church wants to enforce the rule, that's fine. Just enforce it to everyone and not just gays.
Anyhow, Salt Lake City sold out it's non-LDS community by selling the street and everyone here is backpedaling trying to read the fine print. Imagine Boston selling part of the freeway to the Catholics?
They were targeted. This section of main street is next to the SL temple and when the LDS purchased it, they had to agree to keep the space open to everyone.
The Mormon's stated that zero PDA is allowed in the plaza, yet every temple wedding starts and finishes on the plaza. With those weddings come the kissing and other PDA.
If the church wants to enforce the rule, that's fine. Just enforce it to everyone and not just gays.
Anyhow, Salt Lake City sold out it's non-LDS community by selling the street and everyone here is backpedaling trying to read the fine print. Imagine Boston selling part of the freeway to the Catholics?
25
@18 - I thought the grounds were given/sold to the Mormon Church under the stipulation that it remains open to the public. Doesn't that imply that although the Church can 'own' the property, it's still supposed to be a public place?
Anyone have further info on the details of this purchase?
Anyone have further info on the details of this purchase?
27
I think the bigger concern is why the church was allowed to take over the most public part of Salt Lake City and claim it as "private property" where they can apply their crazy rules without respect for state or federal laws.
29
ACLU: Salt Lake City-Mormon church deal is unconstitutional
Appeals court: Judges say the city did not endorse the church by selling the right to public access on the Main Street site
Salt Lake City Tribune/October 3, 2005
By Heather May
A federal appeals court Monday validated Salt Lake City's controversial sale of its Main Street Plaza easement to the LDS Church, which turned a former section of historic Main Street into a religious park.
Three judges on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the plaza is private property and that the city didn't endorse the LDS Church by selling off the right to public access.
"Looked at objectively, the . . . case is one of neutrality and equal access, in which the city does nothing to advance religion, but merely enables the LDS Church to advance itself," wrote the court.
The ruling is a victory for the city and the LDS Church, which joined to fight the American Civil Liberties Union and four plaintiffs. The ACLU wanted the court to declare the plaza a public sidewalk and allow free speech there - though such a ruling could have led the church to wall off the plaza.
Practically, the decision changes nothing since the LDS Church has been controlling the property since 2003, when the City Council voted to eliminate the easement in an emotionally charged land swap. The church manages it like its other religious property - visitors are welcome but cannot engage in behavior the church finds offensive.
City and church officials expressed relief, though not surprise, at the decision.
Mayor Rocky Anderson - the main architect of the easement sale - declined to comment because he wanted time to digest the ruling. Steven Allred, an attorney who has represented the city in the case, said: "We're obviously pleased. We hope this puts an end to a very divisive time in the city's history."
"It's time to move forward," agreed City Council Chairman Dale Lambert.
The LDS Church was happy, too. "The church has always intended that the plaza be a place of peace, a quiet oasis in the midst of a bustling city where everyone can enjoy an atmosphere of serenity and reflection," Bruce L. Olsen, the church's managing director of public affairs, said in a statement.
The ACLU didn't know if it would appeal the decision. Dani Eyer, executive director of the ACLU's Utah chapter, said she was disappointed.
Lee Siegel, one of the ACLU's four plaintiffs, called the decision a sad day for the principle of separation of church and state and said it "adds to the feeling that I live in a state run by the American Taliban."
"Salt Lake City and the church have successfully weaseled themselves to a victory, but it doesn't make it right," he said. "I hope they enjoy their lily white, golly gee, clean, fun plaza."
It was a different mood in 2002, when the 10th Circuit sided with the ACLU against the city and church. After the city sold Main Street between North Temple and South Temple to the church in 1999 and the church created the plaza adjacent to the Salt Lake Temple, the ACLU challenged the plaza's free-speech restrictions.
The 10th Circuit ruled three years later that the restrictions were unconstitutional because the city retained an easement guaranteeing pedestrians a right to walk through the plaza.
That ruling said the city had to either allow speech on the plaza or eliminate the easement. For a time, protesters shared space with LDS temple-goers on the plaza, until the city sold the easement in 2003.
Nevertheless, the ACLU said the city, by selling the easement, violated the U.S. Constitution's right to free speech and its ban on government endorsement of religion. On Monday, the 10th Circuit rejected all of the ACLU's claims.
The court noted the plaza might function as a public sidewalk, but the church no longer is obligated to keep it open to the public without the easement.
"The asserted purpose of the plaza, unlike that of a normal sidewalk or other public forum, is to act as an ecclesiastical park," said the court.
But church and city officials initially pitched the plaza as a public amenity, a "little bit of Paris" meant to enhance downtown pedestrian access.
The ACLU's other main argument was that the sale was a sham transaction meant to further the beliefs of the LDS Church. The court called that a "most curious allegation" since the first Main Street Plaza ruling suggested the sale.
The judges also said the sale was "reasonable" because the city received $5 million for an easement valued at $500,000. The millions will build a center in the west-side community of Glendale.
"I would hope that with this ruling it would put an end to any concerns and controversy," said Pamela Atkinson, a member of the Alliance for Unity, which helped broker the easement sale by raising money for the center. "The Unity Center is going to be a place of healing for many reasons. We need to start healing any doubts that it was the right thing to do."
While the ACLU pointed to Anderson's turnabout regarding the easement as a product of undue pressure by the LDS Church - the mayor initially said he wouldn't sell the easement and then changed his mind after the church waged a major public-relations campaign - the court disagreed.
"The fact that the mayor changed his mind by first vocally opposing the sale of the easement and later supporting it or that this issue was controversial simply does not support the claim that the transaction was a sham," said the ruling.
Plaza-goers praised the decision Monday.
"Protesters have their rights," said Dawn Carlton, visiting from Rexburg, Idaho, with her husband and son. "I respect the fact that they have their own beliefs and want to share them, but there's a time and a place - and this isn't it."
Tribune reporter Cathy McKitrick contributed to this story.
Salt Lake City's payoff
In selling the Main Street Plaza easement to the LDS Church, Salt Lake City received land and $4.5 million to build a community center in Glendale. The Sorenson Unity Center was supposed to open by January, but is has been delayed for nine months. In 2003, the city also pledged to run it without taxpayer subsidy, but has struggled to find operating partners. The city now expects to subsidize the center at almost $131,000 a year.
What the decision means
The status quo remains. Protesters are out and LDS Church control of speech, behavior is in.
That means no smoking no illegal, offensive, indecent, obscene, lewd or disorderly speech, dress or conduct.
Proselytizing is forbidden, too, unless it's done by the property owner, the LDS Church.
The American Civil Liberties Union hasn't decided whether it will appeal Monday's court ruling.
More...
Appeals court: Judges say the city did not endorse the church by selling the right to public access on the Main Street site
Salt Lake City Tribune/October 3, 2005
By Heather May
A federal appeals court Monday validated Salt Lake City's controversial sale of its Main Street Plaza easement to the LDS Church, which turned a former section of historic Main Street into a religious park.
Three judges on the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the plaza is private property and that the city didn't endorse the LDS Church by selling off the right to public access.
"Looked at objectively, the . . . case is one of neutrality and equal access, in which the city does nothing to advance religion, but merely enables the LDS Church to advance itself," wrote the court.
The ruling is a victory for the city and the LDS Church, which joined to fight the American Civil Liberties Union and four plaintiffs. The ACLU wanted the court to declare the plaza a public sidewalk and allow free speech there - though such a ruling could have led the church to wall off the plaza.
Practically, the decision changes nothing since the LDS Church has been controlling the property since 2003, when the City Council voted to eliminate the easement in an emotionally charged land swap. The church manages it like its other religious property - visitors are welcome but cannot engage in behavior the church finds offensive.
City and church officials expressed relief, though not surprise, at the decision.
Mayor Rocky Anderson - the main architect of the easement sale - declined to comment because he wanted time to digest the ruling. Steven Allred, an attorney who has represented the city in the case, said: "We're obviously pleased. We hope this puts an end to a very divisive time in the city's history."
"It's time to move forward," agreed City Council Chairman Dale Lambert.
The LDS Church was happy, too. "The church has always intended that the plaza be a place of peace, a quiet oasis in the midst of a bustling city where everyone can enjoy an atmosphere of serenity and reflection," Bruce L. Olsen, the church's managing director of public affairs, said in a statement.
The ACLU didn't know if it would appeal the decision. Dani Eyer, executive director of the ACLU's Utah chapter, said she was disappointed.
Lee Siegel, one of the ACLU's four plaintiffs, called the decision a sad day for the principle of separation of church and state and said it "adds to the feeling that I live in a state run by the American Taliban."
"Salt Lake City and the church have successfully weaseled themselves to a victory, but it doesn't make it right," he said. "I hope they enjoy their lily white, golly gee, clean, fun plaza."
It was a different mood in 2002, when the 10th Circuit sided with the ACLU against the city and church. After the city sold Main Street between North Temple and South Temple to the church in 1999 and the church created the plaza adjacent to the Salt Lake Temple, the ACLU challenged the plaza's free-speech restrictions.
The 10th Circuit ruled three years later that the restrictions were unconstitutional because the city retained an easement guaranteeing pedestrians a right to walk through the plaza.
That ruling said the city had to either allow speech on the plaza or eliminate the easement. For a time, protesters shared space with LDS temple-goers on the plaza, until the city sold the easement in 2003.
Nevertheless, the ACLU said the city, by selling the easement, violated the U.S. Constitution's right to free speech and its ban on government endorsement of religion. On Monday, the 10th Circuit rejected all of the ACLU's claims.
The court noted the plaza might function as a public sidewalk, but the church no longer is obligated to keep it open to the public without the easement.
"The asserted purpose of the plaza, unlike that of a normal sidewalk or other public forum, is to act as an ecclesiastical park," said the court.
But church and city officials initially pitched the plaza as a public amenity, a "little bit of Paris" meant to enhance downtown pedestrian access.
The ACLU's other main argument was that the sale was a sham transaction meant to further the beliefs of the LDS Church. The court called that a "most curious allegation" since the first Main Street Plaza ruling suggested the sale.
The judges also said the sale was "reasonable" because the city received $5 million for an easement valued at $500,000. The millions will build a center in the west-side community of Glendale.
"I would hope that with this ruling it would put an end to any concerns and controversy," said Pamela Atkinson, a member of the Alliance for Unity, which helped broker the easement sale by raising money for the center. "The Unity Center is going to be a place of healing for many reasons. We need to start healing any doubts that it was the right thing to do."
While the ACLU pointed to Anderson's turnabout regarding the easement as a product of undue pressure by the LDS Church - the mayor initially said he wouldn't sell the easement and then changed his mind after the church waged a major public-relations campaign - the court disagreed.
"The fact that the mayor changed his mind by first vocally opposing the sale of the easement and later supporting it or that this issue was controversial simply does not support the claim that the transaction was a sham," said the ruling.
Plaza-goers praised the decision Monday.
"Protesters have their rights," said Dawn Carlton, visiting from Rexburg, Idaho, with her husband and son. "I respect the fact that they have their own beliefs and want to share them, but there's a time and a place - and this isn't it."
Tribune reporter Cathy McKitrick contributed to this story.
Salt Lake City's payoff
In selling the Main Street Plaza easement to the LDS Church, Salt Lake City received land and $4.5 million to build a community center in Glendale. The Sorenson Unity Center was supposed to open by January, but is has been delayed for nine months. In 2003, the city also pledged to run it without taxpayer subsidy, but has struggled to find operating partners. The city now expects to subsidize the center at almost $131,000 a year.
What the decision means
The status quo remains. Protesters are out and LDS Church control of speech, behavior is in.
That means no smoking no illegal, offensive, indecent, obscene, lewd or disorderly speech, dress or conduct.
Proselytizing is forbidden, too, unless it's done by the property owner, the LDS Church.
The American Civil Liberties Union hasn't decided whether it will appeal Monday's court ruling.
30
@22 and @23 The point remains, if you're doing something to tick people off on private property, then you're asking for trouble. It's something moms tell their children for a reason.
And I'll agree with you completely that perhaps being gay had something to do with it. Should we assume that? Maybe. Can we conclude that definitively? No.
And that's the point I was trying to make: jumping at the opportunity to protest and throw out the words "discrimination" is not doing anything but making those involved FEEL powerful.. otherwise it's a presumptuous, useless gesture.
The LDS can still say, "Yeah, they were on our property engaging in prohibited activity." And they're right.
And I'll agree with you completely that perhaps being gay had something to do with it. Should we assume that? Maybe. Can we conclude that definitively? No.
And that's the point I was trying to make: jumping at the opportunity to protest and throw out the words "discrimination" is not doing anything but making those involved FEEL powerful.. otherwise it's a presumptuous, useless gesture.
The LDS can still say, "Yeah, they were on our property engaging in prohibited activity." And they're right.
31
All I really wanted to say is that we might pick our battles more carefully. Perception of the gay community has a lot to do with our advancement towards equal rights. Being able to liken the LGBT community to "militant blacks" and "feminazis" doesn't seem be the way to build a pro-gay coalition with on-the-fence straights and religious folk.
I just don't think we can fight our battle in the same way that discriminated groups before us have.
I just don't think we can fight our battle in the same way that discriminated groups before us have.
32
@ 30,
Should we conclude that? Um... yes.
Come to Salt Lake and at any given moment of just about any day, you will see kissing, hand-holding and just about every other form of PDA on the plaza. So I'm pretty sure this happened 'cause they are gay.
The rent-a-cops even said it was "gross"
Should we conclude that? Um... yes.
Come to Salt Lake and at any given moment of just about any day, you will see kissing, hand-holding and just about every other form of PDA on the plaza. So I'm pretty sure this happened 'cause they are gay.
The rent-a-cops even said it was "gross"
33
@24 "The Mormon's stated that zero PDA is allowed in the plaza, yet every temple wedding starts and finishes on the plaza. With those weddings come the kissing and other PDA. "
now those would be some interesting pictures to put in a press release regarding the haphazard way that PDA stuff is enforced. I'm just saying.
now those would be some interesting pictures to put in a press release regarding the haphazard way that PDA stuff is enforced. I'm just saying.
38
@31 I see your point but offer that these demonstrations have as much to do with the original victims as the L.A. riots had to do with Rodney King.
In these images, I see an allegiance to something far greater than the two dudes who got stopped.
In these images, I see a variety of courageous people who wanted nothing more than to be seen and acknowledged. The whole "We're here!" mantra.
As important as it is to pick one's battles is the choice of how one responds to perceived attacks.
This form of non-violent protest reaches an audience far wider than the LDS Church (who, as you point out, will not be swayed so easily)
This form of positive and proud protest accomplishes far more than simply calling Mormons names or making fun of their undergarmentes.
Like many commenters here, I would love to see more of this, to even participate in such protests. The state of Washington may have its own battles to fight soon enough and this is a wonderful template for protest.
In these images, I see an allegiance to something far greater than the two dudes who got stopped.
In these images, I see a variety of courageous people who wanted nothing more than to be seen and acknowledged. The whole "We're here!" mantra.
As important as it is to pick one's battles is the choice of how one responds to perceived attacks.
This form of non-violent protest reaches an audience far wider than the LDS Church (who, as you point out, will not be swayed so easily)
This form of positive and proud protest accomplishes far more than simply calling Mormons names or making fun of their undergarmentes.
Like many commenters here, I would love to see more of this, to even participate in such protests. The state of Washington may have its own battles to fight soon enough and this is a wonderful template for protest.
39
Why should Mormons be any smarter than the other fools that believe horseshit. Kiss away people! Kiss away!
42
@36...so MARRIED kissing is OK. That makes it even more important to get gay marriage passed in Utah, so they can only harass non-married gay kissers. It's all that single-people-kissing stuff that's causing the hoopla....
43
Oh my goodness, bishops need to counsel these people about their little factories working overtime
45
@31
"The law often allows what honor forbids," as the saying goes.
The fact that mormons are within their legal rights to single out and punish a gay couple for kissing each other on their property does not mean it is ethical for them to do so. Larger cruelties grow from smaller ones, and it makes sense to pick this battle.
1) The offense is ridiculous, and most straight people are going to be sympathetic. Every straight person knows that they'd be pretty indignant if they weren't permitted to kiss a loved one in public. They can identify.
2) The law is ridiculous, and bringing up the old story of how the LDS church bullied the mayor into selling them rights is also going to expose them as high-pressure assholes
3) The protests cost almost nothing and normalize us. People all around see young people kissing, not people beating the shit out of straights or burning cars as in the Rodney King riots.
No one is accusing the LDS church of a legal crime here. They are just being accused of being cruel, petty, and monolithically unkind.
"The law often allows what honor forbids," as the saying goes.
The fact that mormons are within their legal rights to single out and punish a gay couple for kissing each other on their property does not mean it is ethical for them to do so. Larger cruelties grow from smaller ones, and it makes sense to pick this battle.
1) The offense is ridiculous, and most straight people are going to be sympathetic. Every straight person knows that they'd be pretty indignant if they weren't permitted to kiss a loved one in public. They can identify.
2) The law is ridiculous, and bringing up the old story of how the LDS church bullied the mayor into selling them rights is also going to expose them as high-pressure assholes
3) The protests cost almost nothing and normalize us. People all around see young people kissing, not people beating the shit out of straights or burning cars as in the Rodney King riots.
No one is accusing the LDS church of a legal crime here. They are just being accused of being cruel, petty, and monolithically unkind.
46
Shelby,
You are a little pussy and the world is not only about the lGBTVE or whatever.
You just like mormons because of all of your ex-boyfriends who were tops, but let you be the top
You are a little pussy and the world is not only about the lGBTVE or whatever.
You just like mormons because of all of your ex-boyfriends who were tops, but let you be the top
47
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
"LDS Church members in support of the protest, and troubled by their church's support last fall for California's Proposition 8, also made a showing. One handed out fliers promoting an online petition for reconciliation between the church and the gay and lesbian community."
Just saying... you know, to all the Mormon-bashers. They're not ALL that way.
This also goes to show how this is far bigger than that particular church, that particular stretch of property, or those two dudes in particular.
"LDS Church members in support of the protest, and troubled by their church's support last fall for California's Proposition 8, also made a showing. One handed out fliers promoting an online petition for reconciliation between the church and the gay and lesbian community."
Just saying... you know, to all the Mormon-bashers. They're not ALL that way.
This also goes to show how this is far bigger than that particular church, that particular stretch of property, or those two dudes in particular.
48
@31: your maligning "militant blacks" and "feminazis" is infuriating and ignorant. Those are not empirically extreme groups. Rather those are pejoratives used to discredit racial and feminist activists.
Don't be such a douche.
Don't be such a douche.
49
@48 I put quotation marks around them for a reason. Not because I hold those beliefs (I don't use those terms and I don't find use in using them), but to illustrate how perceptions become stereotypes/abuses and hinder progress.
If you can't discuss things with civility, check out the Fox News message boards.
If you can't discuss things with civility, check out the Fox News message boards.
51
@46 I've never dated any man who wasn't liberal democrat. I don't really understand your comment, but think you might be projecting a little.
52
Ya know, you gays with your kissing missed out on the best that Temple Square has to offer. Inside the temple, devout Mormons were undergoing their endowment ceremonies which involve sitting in a room half-naked with strangers and having your intimate body parts rubbed with hot oil by a same-sex volunteer while you apologize for the sins of your generation. They're rewarded for this ordeal with matching Mormon underwear. Now THAT is hot.
53
My suggestion: Bring "the Kiss" float in from Connecticut (the one of Joe Lieberman and George W. Bush kissing that Ned Lamont's campaign drove through all the Lieberman events in 2006)
56
@33: YouTube is a good source for Mormon wedding videos and photos with PDA.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfRmAUUnu…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB897Fu-I…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siAN6PZ2h…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfRmAUUnu…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB897Fu-I…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siAN6PZ2h…
57
This protest is beautiful because it takes our love right to the heart of their hate. I hope it becomes a tourist spot for gay couples. Take in a Broadway show in New York, ride the streetcar in San Francisco, and have a Temple Square kiss in Salt Lake City.
58
I live in SLC. I took my kids to the Prop 8 protests last fall. The Kiss-Ins have been a beautiful way to bring love and humanity to the sexually repressed streets of this town. Straight people make out all the time on the plaza, even unmarrieds. This is all about these guys' sexual identity. The letters to the editors of the local papers have been hilarious illustrations of how much the old white Mo's miss the boat, but the tide here is turning. It really is. The Church will never change their stance and grant queers their humanity and dignity, but they're looking more and more absurd. The funny thing is that if the Church PR people had made a quick apology, this would have blown over much sooner, and they would have gotten good PR for being "understanding".
59
@ 58
Nah, the church will change. Just so late in the game and under so much pressure that they look really stupid. Kind of like they did with allowing blacks into their religion and deciding against polygamy (I believe both of these changes were 'revealed by God'). I give the gay marriage thing 15-20 years for LDS before we see some seriously twisted face-saving action.
The LDS church really, really wants to be a winner. They want to be mainstream. They want to hang with the big kids who shunned them for so long. So when the pressure's really up and they're finally getting really unpopular, their sacred principles go out the window and they go along with the majority.
In a weird way I have more respect for Fred Phelps. He may be a lot more evil, but he doesn't turn his back on his religious beliefs to win a popularity contest.
Nah, the church will change. Just so late in the game and under so much pressure that they look really stupid. Kind of like they did with allowing blacks into their religion and deciding against polygamy (I believe both of these changes were 'revealed by God'). I give the gay marriage thing 15-20 years for LDS before we see some seriously twisted face-saving action.
The LDS church really, really wants to be a winner. They want to be mainstream. They want to hang with the big kids who shunned them for so long. So when the pressure's really up and they're finally getting really unpopular, their sacred principles go out the window and they go along with the majority.
In a weird way I have more respect for Fred Phelps. He may be a lot more evil, but he doesn't turn his back on his religious beliefs to win a popularity contest.
60
@59: The LDS did not ban polygamy outright. It still preaches that polygamy is a good thing, it's just something that, due to current anti-polygamy laws, will have to wait until the afterlife when each man gets his own planet. If polygamy became legal in the US, the LDS would immediately resume the practice with gusto. I should add that the various LDS prosecutors and district attorneys throughout Utah and Arizona have been noticeably sympathetic to polygamous Mormons, even when statutory rape, incest and welfare fraud are involved. It took the FBI to finally do something about the child molestation in Colorado City and Hilldale.
61
Shelby @49: People who use or sympathize with the terms "feminazi" and "militant blacks" are not people we will win over. Ever. They may be our neighbors, even our friends, but they are our political enemies. We cannot convert them, we must defeat them. The good news is that they will grow old and die, and their kids will be on our side.
Coming out is the most important and effective thing an LGBT person can do for the movement. Public, unashamed displays of gayness help remove the stigma and change the culture. This kiss-in is super awesome, no matter what the spark was. (And the spark in this case was also totally awesome - two tipsy young lovers necking in Mormon Central)
Coming out is the most important and effective thing an LGBT person can do for the movement. Public, unashamed displays of gayness help remove the stigma and change the culture. This kiss-in is super awesome, no matter what the spark was. (And the spark in this case was also totally awesome - two tipsy young lovers necking in Mormon Central)
62
@49 My point was not that this display was offensive or radical. It's the notion that we presume every act to be discriminatory simply because gays were involved. And as I stated earlier, I'm aware that it's the middle-ground straights and religious folk we should be influencing, not the hardcore haters. But jumping up to yell 'homophobes!' at every chance is neither flattering or productive.
Also, to comment on a previous post: I think comparing this incident to what happened to Rodney King is quite a stretch, both in terms of significance and sheer brutality.
Also, to comment on a previous post: I think comparing this incident to what happened to Rodney King is quite a stretch, both in terms of significance and sheer brutality.
63
@62: You strike me as being actually concerned, and not a concern troll. You do see that the original action in this case was discriminatory, right?
Yelling "homophobes" can be useful, because it helps marginalize our opponents. I agree that there is a downside: it also makes them feel embattled and makes them want to fight back. Ridicule is a better weapon - the target is rendered pretty much defenseless. And when the normal response to bigotry is to point and laugh, you'll find that no moderate or fence-sitter wants to be associated with a laughing-stock.
Yelling "homophobes" can be useful, because it helps marginalize our opponents. I agree that there is a downside: it also makes them feel embattled and makes them want to fight back. Ridicule is a better weapon - the target is rendered pretty much defenseless. And when the normal response to bigotry is to point and laugh, you'll find that no moderate or fence-sitter wants to be associated with a laughing-stock.
64
#62 So many people have pointed out that this WAS discriminatory because gays were involved. People who live there have seen many heterosexual PDAs. There are videos on youtube, fer crissakes! And yet you won't admit that you are wrong, that this IS about homophobia and discrimination and that the kiss-ins are a wonderful, creative and clever way to shed light on this particularly dark segment of society. No, you keep plugging away with your admonishments that we be good little gays and keep to our section of the bus and don't rock the boat, to mix transportation metaphors. Read the news accounts of the incident, read what people who live there are saying, and be a big man and admit you made a mistake.
Sheeesh.
Sheeesh.
65
@58
If Salt Lake has "sexually repressed streets" then why do "Straight people make out all the time on the plaza, even unmarrieds"
If Salt Lake has "sexually repressed streets" then why do "Straight people make out all the time on the plaza, even unmarrieds"
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: You're Tired Of Porn Fights? by Dan Savage
-
Hillary Clinton for President in 2012 by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Evidence of Absence by Dan Savage
-
Anarchists on Broadway and Pine by Kelly O
-
Meet The Bubbleator by Dan Savage
-
John Cole Is Mad As Hell And He's Not Going To Take It Anymore by Dan Savage
-
Americans Warming to Obamacare by Dan Savage
-
Want Your Kid To Eat Carrots? by Dan Savage
-
Twenty Does Not Seem Like Plenty by Dominic Holden
-
This Woman Is Ridiculous by Megan Seling
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (66) RSS