.jpg)
Having lost at the polls for the second time this decade last year, gays and lesbians continue to lash out at those who disagree with them when they went into the voting booth back in November.
As former President Bill Clinton spoke for nearly an hour Sunday during the annual convention of the International Franchise Association at San Diego's Manchester Grand Hyatt, more than 100 Proposition 8 opponents and union supporters rallied outside the downtown San Diego hotel.
Pro gay and lesbian supporters want a boycott of the hotel after owner Doug Manchester donated $125,000 to the campaign to ban gay marriage in California. The complaint of union officials is that Manchester demands extra work of maids and other employees than most hotels.
If the allegations against Manchester are true that he is more demanding of his employees than other hotels, there is a simple solution to this issue - go elsewhere for work. If he is breaking the law and doing something illegal, then it needs to be brought to the public's attention. To date, that does not seem to be the case.
As for his support of Prop 8, Manchester is entitled to back this cause or that cause like any other citizen. He did nothing illegal like the thousands and thousands of us who supported Prop 8.
It seems tolerance from the gay and lesbian community is in short supply these days. They want us to be tolerant of their lifestyle, yet will stop at nothing to deny you your rights of freedom of speech. In this case, freedom of speech was voting for the second time this decade that while we support gay and lesbian unions, going to the next step of calling it marriage is not something we will accept.
If you are homosexual and do not want to spend your money at the Manchester Grand Hyatt, no big deal. If you are out to ruin the lives of Manchester employees who are likely impacted by this tough economy like the rest of us, that is a big deal.
Stop for a moment and think about who you are really hurting with these protests. Do you really think you are hurting Doug Manchester?
Comments
DEAR DAVE:
If it was YOUR marriage that had been put to a popular vote and subsequently invalidated, don't you think YOU would be just a little ticked off?
To be honest, I actually am willing to be diplomatic about this. When it comes to marriage vs. civil unions, if "separate but equal" means exactly that, I don't see the problem.
When you raise the specter of "separate but equal," people often harken back to the days of racial segregation when "separate but equal" was anything BUT. The facilities that blacks were forced to use were invariably substandard, and it became apparent that "separate but equal" was a farce.
What is more important: The word "marriage" or the benefits and responsibilities that are connected with it? I would take simple legal equality under the law, even if the operative term is "civil unions." If social conservatives simply wish to reserve the term "marriage" for heterosexual couples, they can have it, as long as Gay couples are treated fairly. If all the roughly 1,100 federal benefits and responsibilities that are bestowed on married couples would be equally bestowed on Gay couples that have entered into "civil unions," I really don't have a problem. Any couple in question would still refer to one another as "husbands" or "wives" or "married." So when I use the term "marriage equality," I mean equal TREATMENT under the law. I'm not going to quibble over terminology.
The problem with the civil unions that California offered Gay couples was that they differed from marriage in many legal respects. That's why the California Supreme Court correctly determined that there was no constitutional justification for denying law-abiding, taxpaying Gay couples the exact same legal benefits and responsibilities that Straight couples have always taken for granted.
So is it any wonder that Gay Californians, especially those who had become legally married, responded with anger and boycotts when those right were taken away from them by a slim majority? If you were Gay, don't you think you would be just a little irritated?
And would you care to comment about the boycotts that the American Family Association has organized against Ford, McDonald's, Pepsi, and Campbell's Soup just because those companies support fair treatment for Gay Americans?
Chuck,
Thanks for the response. I have no problem with people not wanting to spend their money at this business or that business....it is their right. I do have a problem, though, when those boycotts and protests impact the "little people" as they so often do. Do you really think Mr. Manchester is being hurt by this? Probably not. I do bet, however, that those he has to layoff when business scales back would take issue with the boycotts, etc. At the end of the day, people should spend their money where they want, but don't target the "little people" who likely had nothing to do with Prop 8 in the first place. It seems tolerance in the gay community as I noted earlier is in short supply.
Dave:
Your shifting attitude makes it pretty clear that bigotry is your real problem here. Please answer answer the issues brought up by Chuck (the gay community is legitimately angry over the immoral treatment we have gotten and the boycott approach is used often by those on the other side). I don't think you can.
Bryce,
I'm always amazed how those in or supporting the gay community go right to the 'B' word for those who voted in favor of Prop 8. As noted earlier, tolerance in the gay community is really in short supply these days. Go back to my original comments....do you really think you are hurting Doug Manchester by boycotting the hotel??? No, you're hurting the people who do the real work there. Direct your energies at the politicians if you are so outraged by this vote.....a vote mind you that twice now has said no to same-sex marriage. What's the sense of having an election if we don't live with the results. I didn't vote for Obama and don't agree with many of his views....yet my life goes on.
Nicely put Chuck!
As Little or Large People, they all have a right to support (work for Mr Manchester) or look for gainful employment elsewhere. In these economic times everyone seems to be struggling, but at some point even the "little people" (I dislike that terminology, your only 'little' if you allow yourself to be given such a label) have a choice to make. Continue to support a hotel manager that avidly supports bigotry and separate rights or to apply for work elsewhere. Studies have shown that had Prop 8 failed, the Hotel & Tourism industry in California would be experiencing a boom, not a bust. Little, bigot, closed minded, bitter, whatever the label we show our true selves through our actions.
DEAR DAVE:
You keep repeating, "Tolerance in the Gay community is really in short supply these days." Yet wouldn't you have to say that it's the GAY COMMUNITY that historically has been at the short end of the stick when it comes to "tolerance?"
That Gay couples seek to marry is not an attack on marriage. If anything it is an ENDORSEMENT of marriage, an acknowledgment that it far better to encourage couples toward monogamy and commitment, rather than relegating them to lives of loneliness and promiscuity.
Ask any Straight couple why they choose to marry. Their answer will not be, "We want to get married so that we can have sex and make babies!" That would be absurd, since couples do not need to marry to make babies, nor is the desire to make babies a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.
No, the reason couples choose to marry is to make a solemn declaration, before friends and family members, that they wish to make a commitment to one another's happiness, health, and well-being, to the exclusion of all others. Those friends and family members will subsequently act as a force of encouragement for that couple to hold fast to their vows.
THAT'S what makes marriage a good thing. Gay couples recognize that and support that. And those that want to prohibit Gay couples from marrying do so only because they don't want to allow Gay couples the opportunity to PROVE that they are up to the task.
Congratulation to those protesting Clinton's speech over at Manchester's hotel. Please, don't show any respect to people who want to strip us of our dignity and FULL equality.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!