Posted on 11/12/2008 11:54:17 PM PST by stevelackner
The Prop 8 fallout continues.
The Los Angeles Times reports that Theater Director Scott Eckern's donation in support of California's Prop. 8 defining marriage as between one man and one woman "turned into a lightning rod in the debate over gay rights." The L.A. Times says that Eckern resigned Wednesday claiming he he wanted to protect the California Musical Theatre from controversy. The Theatre has been Eckern's "artistic home since 1984," says the Times. He has also been the nonprofit stage company's artistic director since 2003. Eckern's $1,000 donation had to be publicly reported under California election law. After this took place, the news of Eckern's donation began quickly spreading around the internet. Then Eckern began to draw criticism, according to the L.A. Times, "from some prominent stage artists, including Tony Award-winning composer Marc Shaiman ('Hairspray') and Jeff Whitty, the 'Avenue Q' librettist."
"I am disappointed that my personal convictions have cost me the opportunity to do what I love the most," Eckern said in a written statement. He said he hoped that his resignation would "help the healing in the local theatergoing and creative community." Eckern actually has a lesbian sister who is in a domestic partnership, but affirmed his right "to act upon my belief that the traditional definition of marriage should be preserved."
The left-wing loons that cost Eckern his job should be ashamed of themselves. This is inexcusable.
“He needed to go.”
Did he? It was not his treatment of his gay associates that caused the problem. It was the simple fact that he donated to a controversial political campaign. Now if a construction business owner pressured a project manager to quit because he had made a contribution to the No campaign, he would be hailed into court so fast they wouldn’t have even had to bother to serve the guy the papers. You can be pragmatic but pragmatism has never stopped the civil rights squads from forcing their concept of fairness down others’ throats. This guy might have to go, but only because he is poitically incorrect and the others are completely intolerant.
One of the strongest arguments against gay marriage is the principle of incrementalism in the gay agenda. Once they get something, they immediate begin pushing for more and more. California civil unions started out as a way for gays to visit each other in the hospitals and since AIDS was much in the news, it seemed compassionate to allow them that right. From the time that right was granted in the Assembly, the gays introduced legislation in every session of the assembly to expand their rights to the point that civil unions in California were the functional equivalent of marriage in the state (except as to federal benefits). In Massachusetts, after marriage was granted, they pushed for equal adoption rights.
Another problem is the history of the militant gays who attack those that oppose them. The Boy Scouts won a U.S. Supreme Court case affirming their right to prohibit active gays from serving as scout leaders. For that impudence, the militant gays are still doing everything they can to make life miserable for the scouts. When a doctor in California refused to help a lesbian be artificially inseminated and offered her partner as help, it wasn’t enough. That doctor had to be punished. When a photographer in Arizona declined to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, that photograph was punished. When a church in Massachusetts declined to rent their outdoor facility to a same-sex couple, again, it had to be punished. When the Catholic adoption agency in Massachusetts refused to place children with gays, it had to be punished. There is nothing preventing gays from creating their own youth organization (though what parent in his or her right mind would let their child join it?), from being treated by a doctor’s partner instead of the original doctor, from getting another photographer or renting another facility or going to another adoption agency. But if someone indicates he disagrees with the lifestyle, that person or company must be punished. In other nations where the gay agenda is further along, clergy are preventing from speaking publicly about homosexuality except in approving terms.
The problem with the pragmatic approach is that it means we cede, bit by bit, the place in society for those who act in conscience to oppose the gay agenda. Gays want nothing more than to force everyone who disagrees with their lifestyle into the closet forever.
Not sure I follow the linkage. We’re saying that because homosexuals are in the theater and the performing arts in big numbers, that by definition these organizations are “gay” and you have to support “gay” marriage to work for them?
What does one’s political beliefs or opinions about issues such as Proposition 8 have to do with being in a theater group? Or being employed by such an organization?
That reporter had to throw out the “apparently there’s a lot of anger and hate on both sides” at the end... yea... is there?
“Not sure I follow the linkage. We’re saying that because homosexuals are in the theater and the performing arts in big numbers, that by definition these organizations are “gay” and you have to support “gay” marriage to work for them?”
No.
I’m not saying anything, I’m just pointing to that giant neon sign in the middle of the living room flashing ‘REALITY’.
In political Fantasyland, you can mouth off about things that profoundly offend people and suffer no consequence.
Realityland? Not so much.
Donating money to a prop that resticted the rights of the same demo that buys the season tickets and makes the philanthropic donations that make the community theatre possible, not to mention originate a lot of the material that the theatre uses, is idiotic.
For every action, there’s a reaction.
It’s a no-brainer that this donation was going to be a big, gay-drama filled nuke.
This guy is an idiot if he didnt think this was going to happen. Does it make it right? No. But this reaction and outcome was as easily predictable as the sun rising in the morning.
So I guess I do have a point ... pick your fights.
Me in his shoes? I’d have had my parents make the donation. And I would’ve STFU’d about it at my friggin’ theatre job, the one where I’d be surrounded by gays 24/7.
Prop 8 won in Sacramento County.
Maybe the homosexual fundamentalists ought to boycott the whole county.
Gays are such a fussy bunch aren’t they?
And here is Scott Eckern's released statement.
Please ping.
This is a major civil liberties issue!
Eckern never said anything about it. The homosexuals have been poring over the donation lists. They unearthed it and made an issue of it.
Check out this blog. The gay/lib network has listed everyone, who by law, had to report their contributions to the "Yes on 8" campaign, and is targeting them for boycotts and potential firing!
I voted "No on 8" because I don't believe that the concept of what is or isn't a marriage belongs in the hands of politicians. But this is an absolutely outrageous injustice, using fascist tactics!
“Eckern never said anything about it”
$1,000 speaks loud and clear.
“The homosexuals have been poring over the donation lists. They unearthed it and made an issue of it”
... and the artistic director of the largest theatre company in the 5th biggest economy on Earth has zero chance of having his name avoid notice. Zero chance.
Like I said, and continue to day .. pick your fights. Scott Eckern picked the most idiotic fight I can imagine ...against the people paying his salary, supplying the material he’s working with, and the staff, and the ...
He picked his fight. He chose his action. Now, he gets the predictable reaction.
He had a right to act.
They have a right to react.
Yeah, the only braver man than him would be a straight, male hairdresser in open support of Prop. 8.
“But this is an absolutely outrageous injustice, using fascist tactics”
What’s the injustice?
Both lists are publicly available. Anyone has a right to go through them.
We all have the right to freedom of association. It’s a basic.
Gay X and Fat Straight Girl X have the right to rip there money out of CMT.
If Eckern is now a detriment to his business, they have the right to tell him to hit the bricks.
That belief, btw, is called ‘conservatism’. Look it up sometime.
First of all, he wasn't fired. He resigned, because several major producers threatened to pull their shows and not allow Music Theater to produce their shows because of his name on a list of Prop 8 contributors.
As for you being the great arbiter of what is and isn't "conservatism", stuff it!
The country is politically correct
I guess it's the same thing... never mind.
Eckern made the mistake of thinking that, since he was civil to those who disagree with him and he has no desire to punish them, the other side would extend him the same courtesy.
The homosexuals are not content with legalization of their deviant behavior, or even with general acceptance of it. They want to silence and punish anyone who says that what they do is sick and wrong. They want to make sure that every child in America is exposed to their deviant behavior early enough that they accept is an “normal,” instead of reacting with normal revulsion.
That should be, “. . . accept it as normal . . .”
“First of all, he wasn’t fired”
I know, he quit. I said that I believed if he had become a detriment to the business, they had a right to fire him.
“He resigned, because several major producers threatened to pull their shows and not allow Music Theater to produce their shows because of his name on a list of Prop 8 contributors”
Which made him the ultimate detriment to a theatre shop, eh?
“As for you being the great arbiter of what is and isn’t “conservatism”, stuff it!”
The right to spend my money where I want. The right of Scott Eckern to spend his money where he wants. The right of the theatre patrons to spend there money where they want. The right of property owners (playwrites) to determine where and when and why there property (plays) can be used, and by whom.
That’s conservatism. Again, at some point in your life you should check it out as a guiding philosophy for your life.
I’m assuming that Susan Egan (actress) and Marc Shaiman (composer of Hairspray), the theatrical powerhouses who spearheaded the campaign against Eckern, were not Obama supporters, since he’s not in favor of extending the right to “marriage” to gay people either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.