A life thrown into turmoil by $100 donation for Prop. 8

A life thrown into turmoil by $100 donation for Prop. 8

Margie Christoffersen didn’t make it very far into our conversation before she cracked. Chest heaving, tears streaming, she reached for her husband Wayne’s hand and then mine, squeezing as if she’d never let go.

“I’ve almost had a nervous breakdown. It’s been the worst thing that’s ever happened to me,” she sobbed as curious patrons at a Farmers Market coffee shop looked on, wondering what calamity had visited this poor woman who’s an honest 6 feet tall, with hair as blond as the sun.


That’s a shame- personally, I don’t think ANY marriage should be recognized by the state- I think we can agree that the state is not a sacred body dedicated to the truth of God, but a secular governing body. Want to get married? Just do it in a church- no secular recognition.

[quote=the article]“You can express yourself as a citizen,” said Archila. “Not everyone has to believe the same things.”

That’s true, but if your restaurant has a heavily gay clientele and you take a public stand against gay rights you should expect some blowback.

Everyone has a right to eat where they want, but people also have a right to their own opinion too.

The sad part is that this boycott has affected the employment of gay people too. Did the restaurant hang a sign that says we don’t serve gay couples who are married? I think not. Did it discriminate in its hiring practices? Apparently not either. You want to change a law, go to the legislature.


McCarthyism in the 21St century.She has been lavenderListed.:rolleyes:

Agreed. Sometimes u just gotta bear your cross in spite of the consequences.

I think it would very appropriate for those being negatively affected by the layoffs to find out who organized both the internet protests and the live protests and take them to court for damages caused by the protests.

Sure! And if the person you marry happens to have been inconveniently married to someone else - or perhaps to several other people simultaneously - no problem! After all, it’s not a legal contract, so no one really got hurt. No reason for the state to be involved at all. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I love how when conservative groups protest peacfully, it’s a violation of the protestee’s rights, but Liberal groups can protest violently and if they are asked to stop it’s a violation of their rights.

Can we say Double Standard.

I work in an office of both Democrats and Republicans and people respect that and leave each other alone. Why can’t everyone else.

This country is nothing without free speech and people not feeling threatened by expressing their opinions.

I think they should and that they have a valid complaint. It is public defamation.

I got an interesting perspective on state/government/federal recognition of gay marriage from a priest friend of mine very early on in this debate.

As he noted this recognition of the legitimacy (legalization) of gay marriage is clearly targeted at the Roman Catholic church. (Really, how many practicing gay Pentecostals can you see demanding a church wedding :smiley: ). The biggest concern being that if the legitimacy of gay marriage is made a legal precept then the Church would find itself being forced to perform them. However, as he notes a Catholic priest clearly understands the seperation of the sacramental from the legal in a Catholic wedding. A Catholic priest does not depend in any way on the stipend donation for weddings as an income. So as my friend said, let the state legitimize and secularize the marriage of gay couples. Too easy for him, he’ll just give the government their license back. The state can’t force him to perform that which he would not be legally entitled to do.

As Fr. Hardon said before his death, we should expect more of this “white martyrdom” in the future. These people will stop at nothing to advance their agenda. This is only the beginning.

If you look at what the early Christian martyrs had to endure, this is small, smal beans in comparison.

I agree somewhat there is a Double Standard. But there’s also a difference. Catholics are protesting to take what gays perceive to be rights away from them. Gays are protesting having their rights taken away. Gays are looked at as the oppressed party, and therefore having more involvement in the matter, so there passionate protests are considered more understandable. I mean, if the KKK protests at all, people generally get angry - because they’re trying to take rights away. But during the time of segregation if some black people protested strongly, many supported them because they felt the oppressive whites had it coming. It’s a double standard, but an understandable one. I believe in free speech and I believe people have the right to protest gay marriage, but that they must suffer the consequences of their position. So must people on the other side. I know, people will say being gay is not the same as being black - choosing to marry another person of the same sex is a choice. But gay people understandable don’t see it that way - they believe they are born gay and this s who they are and they should be allowed to embrace it - and I agree with them. You have every right to disagree, of course, but at least understand the other side’s position. Saying gays are just bad people who want to run around destroying America is not an attitude that will solve anything.

Maybe so, but would you want to be forced out of your job due to a personal opinion? I have kids to clothe and feed.

This is just the beginning before maybe we will have to shed blood for our beliefs. Hopefully not in our lifetimes, but you don’t have to look hard to see the beginnings of persecution. It starts with the marginalization and ridicule of faith in the modern secular culture. The belief that one’s personal opinion is more disruptive to society than the protests, threats and firings now being done. Completely illogical.

I fail to see similarities between the peaceful protests of the civil rights era and the actions done now by the homosexual community.

Hm? The column didn’t mention anything about violence.

“Civil” rights are fully in the secular domain so if they are being unconstitutionally denied any of the rights and freedoms of secular society then this is a civil rights fight. The comparison is totally valid.

Furthermore, I think if you were to reflect on it just a little bit you’ld have to admit that not all of the historic civil rights protests were peaceful and certainly only a few gay rights protests are by any reasonable measure violent.

Sliding down the hill toward the cliff for the last 50 or so years, and finally now we decide to hit the brake pedal.

It appears to me, that there is not much ground on which to reject gay marriage, when you compromise your morality to accept heterosexual “marriage” merely as a means to express “love” (ie. sexual gratification) with it’s full range of contraceptive/abortive options, and open to divorce when you’ve lost that lovin feeling.

Pope Paul VI had it right. Our culture rejected it. And now we have a mess on our hands. I thank God for the small (and growing) number of courageous voices out there, brave enough to tell it like it really is.


All too true.

A good many actually.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.