Page 1 of 5
More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:10 am
by _collegeterrace
This image from the article just takes the cake! Too funny -- at least the two signs to the right...
Article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27582369Local coverage in L.A.:
http://cbs2.com/local/Protest.Propositi ... 58272.html
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:20 am
by _Bond James Bond
LOl. The Mormon brand is going to be quite tarnished. Better get a new PR campaign going. :P
Lately it seems that about 1/2 of the political blog entries I read that mention Prop 8 negatively also mention the Mormon Church, also negatively. You reap what you sow bigots.
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:24 am
by _asbestosman
B23 wrote:You reap what you sow bigots.
So, where's the backlash against African-Americans who largely voted to get this passed? (Note: I strongly oppose any retaliation against African-Americans--they have suffered more than their share).
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:47 am
by _bcspace
Cool! Is that a ghostly Nephite army I see taking up defensive positions around the temple.......
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 4:53 am
by _EAllusion
There's a difference between the LDS Church being a massively disproportionate driver of the money and organization behind prop 8 and a given demographic group happening to vote for prop 8 in large numbers. Social conservativism and bigotry towards homosexuals is notoriously more prevalent among blacks than society at large, and their voting behavior wasn't shocking, but there is no comparable organization to protest. Ditto for the elderly. There have been complaints about the culture in both, but the way people think about responsibility here isn't the same.
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:02 am
by _asbestosman
So if I get this (incorrectly), bascially everyone is saying that Mormons should know better, but other demographics (like the Elderly) can be held to a lesser standard? I'll be sure from now on to be unorganized and use virtually no funds for causes I support.
*note: Asbestosman contributed $0.00 + 0 seconds to either cause.
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:08 am
by _Calculus Crusader
bcspace wrote:Cool! Is that a ghostly Nephite army I see taking up defensive positions around the temple.......
Ethereal Nephites are the only kind of Nephites that have ever existed.
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:13 am
by _EAllusion
asbestosman wrote:So if I get this (incorrectly), bascially everyone is saying that Mormons should know better, but other demographics (like the Elderly) can be held to a lesser standard? I'll be sure from now on to be unorganized and use virtually no funds for causes I support.
*note: Asbestosman contributed $0.00 + 0 seconds to either cause.
Huh? I'm saying that an organization led by people directing members to act in a certain way is a different kind of thing than demographic voting tendencies. Suppose that the CoJCoLDS had its tax exempt status removed after a campaign led by by a specific group. Let's say members of the group were disproprotionately, I don't know, hispanic. Now imagine in the immediate aftermath Mormons concentrated their ire on the organization rather than hispanics. Would you understand why?
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:13 am
by _neworder
asbestosman wrote:B23 wrote:You reap what you sow bigots.
So, where's the backlash against African-Americans who largely voted to get this passed? (Note: I strongly oppose any retaliation against African-Americans--they have suffered more than their share).
I don't know if this is true. Only 6% of all Californians are black (Source: U.S. Census Bureau) and this was a
good comment I came across.
Remember, only about 6% of Californians are black. The extra black turnout amounts to less than 2% of the total California voters. Even if every single one of those people voted for prop 8, that wasn’t enough to swing the election; it would have passed even if they had all stayed home. Plus, many of these “new” black voters were younger people, who were probably less friendly to prop 8 than the black voter population generally. Plus, Obama also brought out many non-black voters who tended to be younger and more liberal than the average voter.
Prop 8 would clearly have passed without Obama on the ballot, and my guess is the margin would have been even larger.
Re: More backlash: 1,000 protesters in front of L.A. Temple
Posted: Fri Nov 07, 2008 5:18 am
by _EAllusion
New -
You're confusing the issue. There was talk that higher black voter turnout caused by the Obama campaign would lead to the passing of prop 8 because blacks tend to oppose gay rights at high levels. What you are talking about is an argument that the projected "extra" black vote wasn't enough to swing the decision. Blacks as a whole, however, were enough to. In fact, they were the only racial demographic to support it.