Prop 8: I’m Spartacus! No, I’m Scott Eckern!
by Stage RightThat’s what I felt like yelling during last November’s horrifying public shaming of a theatre executive in California. Scott Eckern, the Artistic Director of Sacramento Music Theatre, was forced to resign after the public revelation that he donated $1,000 to the Prop. 8 campaign. I felt like calling all of my friends in the theatre industry and saying “I’M SCOTT ECKERN!” I felt like responding to all of the e-mails I received from my colleagues urging me to join the drive to remove him from his post by saying: “I’M SCOTT ECKERN!” “If you take him, you should take me! ” Like all those slaves standing in solidarity with Spartacus. I was also an executive in the industry with similar views. There but for the grace of God….
But I didn’t stand up and shout. I didn’t because I am a coward. I didn’t because I have children and a mortgage and I might need the next job that comes along so I keep my mouth shut.
But make no mistake, there are many of us working in the theatre industry and the spectacle that was Scott Eckern’s ouster was terrifying and enraging to us. Many readers of Big Hollywood suggest that as long as we are effective in our jobs and we “put butts in seats” then we should have the courage to speak out and fight for our beliefs even if we are a minority in a hostile environment…. I hope this morality tale speaks to you…
I was fortunate enough to witness this witch-hunt from inside the Facebook bubble that helped create it. You see, one of my friends, actress Susan Egan, circulated an open letter to all of her friends. And then her friends circulated it to their friends and well, by now you know what happened. Her letter has been reported many times and she seems proud of her involvement in this episode. She actually wrote her initial letter and then, within 24 hours wrote a follow-up. The full text of Susan Egan’s original letter can be found here. Her follow-up letter is harder to come by, but it contains much more revealing information. In the spirit of “full context” I include the entire second letter here: (my comments follow below)
Dear Friends –
Just wanted to follow up. It’s less than 24 hours since the email/post
I sent, and I am overwhelmed by the number of responses, which are
still pouring in. Thank you! I was very nervous about sending my
letter out there, signing my name and holding my breath to see what
(if anything) would happen. I expect backlash, but I am heartened to
know that my own initial response to the information about Scott
Eckern is echoed throughout our theatrical community. We have always
been a close-knit group, capable of so much, and standing in
solidarity for the civil rights of all our members is a worthy cause.
I am proud to be a part of such a group.Many messages back to me had questions, and I’d like to address them
here, as I have a nearly-two-year-old (now napping) who limits my
on-line time. It’s long … you guys wrote a lot of messages … get
ready ….Is it a fact that Scott Eckern donated $1000 to Yes on 8?
Yes, in the state of California, donations of this sort are public
record. You may find the record of his donation at:Many of you have asked for permission to forward my letter on to
friends, colleagues, press and so on. I’m fine with this. It’s already
“out there” … so you have my blessing. That said, if you feel
compelled to add your name to the letter, please do. Building group
support for civil rights was my impetus for the post.Many have written demanding Scott’s resignation and have hopes of
building a large enough group of supporters to achieve this. And here
is where I would like to expand both my thinking and what I’ve learned
in the past 18 hours … from many of you:I understand your position and passion, but I am not ready to sign a
petition asking for his resignation – please read why ….My philosophy: I have made so many mistakes in my life, done things I
regret and in so doing I’d like to allow for Scott to amend his
actions. I personally do not wish for him to resign, but rather to
write a public apology for offending so many in this theatre world we
all share. I’d also love to see him donate another $1000 towards an
organization of his choosing that would attest to his commitment to
the gay and lesbian communities, which have contributed so much over
the years to CMT and SMC, and to him personally. To me – this is what
we should be asking for first.A few of you smarties felt like we should take this to the Sacramento
Bee. I’m all for it. Perhaps they are already on it; other news
organizations are. But I’d like the message from us to be one from all
of us. Perhaps a statement, with all our names. As to what that
statement should be. I’d like to be on the side of compassion, not
hate. Vilifying any individual makes us one of them. And the idea of a
Blacklist is a scary one, to me, as it has ensnared innocent people in
the past. I simply choose to spend my money and pursue my career and
live my life in support of those who I feel are fair.
Sam Harris wrote such a thoughtful response and I feel, as he does,
that we should take the high road. He sited an article called Four
Lessons Gay Marriage Actvists Must Learn From Obama. Read the article,
but in a nutshell they are: Anger Loses, Get Organized, Outreach
Works, and Pick Your Battles. These won Obama the presidency. Heck,
these are life lessons.Read for yourself
A very wise responder to my post asked if perhaps Scott had been
coerced by his church (Latter Day Saints) to make the donation? And if
so, is he really at fault? We know the Mormon Church has been a major
supporter of Yes on 8, and it has “urged” its members to give
financial support. My feelings are: if true, what does it say about a
church that would make such “demands” on its parishioners? But more
important, as a leader in the theatre community I would hope that
Scott would also lead his church to better understand the Gay and
Lesbian community and the need for equal civil rights … something
early Mormons sought as they escaped persecution in the East and
traveled West. LDS has made great movement in its acceptance of
interracial couples and in expunging bigamy from its ranks. Equality
in marriage for all seems a logical next step. In the words of
Hammerstein, “You have to be taught to love and hate … you have to be
carefully taught.” So be a teacher, Scott.However, I realize it can be hard to be a lone voice – stand up and
make such points, and I do not personally hold it against Scott that
he did not make this courageous choice. I do not agree with his Yes on
8 vote, but his vote is his constitutional right, and I do not even
ask for him to change his mind about that. Rather, it’s the fact that
his income, the direct result of so many brilliant gay and lesbian
talents, was used to support the elimination of their given civil
right. This is a conflict of interest at the very least … and betrayal
at the worst. Prudence in refusing to donate towards the cause and
remaining quiet in his personal beliefs would have served him greatly.I feel for the position Scott is in now. Do not get me wrong … HE put
himself there and so all is fair. But my question to him is this: what
does your church think about the shows you produce? CABARET, A CHORUS
LINE, BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE IN TEXAS, RENT, to name a few. AVENUE Q
is heading to Sacramento – presented by CMT – does it hold the values
of LDS? Perhaps not. So how do you resolve that conflict? Does your
donation in support of Prop 8 (those 30 pieces of silver you gave) …
does it absolve you of your “sinful associations” and livelihood? Here
is where I cannot wrap my mind around the situation. And so it is.Bottom line. I felt the information was important to disseminate. I
was shocked and betrayed by Scott’s actions. I stand by my letter and
give my blessing if you feel you’d like to pass it along. I preserve
the possibility for a happy ending (the best piece of direction I have
ever been given as an actress) – that Scott will embrace his
theatrical friends, realize the hurt he has caused, and genuinely make
amends. Anything less and I personally do not consider him a member of
this cherished theatrical community. That other composers have written
me in the last 18 hours to say they join Marc Shaiman in his boycott
of granting rights to CMT until the matter is resolved is encouraging!I wish no one harm, Scott included. My intention is not to cause any
grief to him or his family, just as I’m truly certain (I have known
him for more than a decade) he meant no personal harm to his fellow
artists. But actions and words have consequences, and I’m afraid they
are personal.But have hope. Arnold Schwarzenegger has been persuaded, so will
others. In news just 15 hours old, and I quote:“[Schwarzenegger] urged backers of gay marriage to follow the lesson
he learned as a bodybuilder trying to lift weights that were too heavy
for him at first. ‘I learned that you should never ever give up. . . .
They should never give up. They should be on it and on it until they
get it done.’”Just holding the space; join in!
Susan Egan
I read this letter and I got ONE message: Believe what you want, but if you work here, you better keep your mouth shut and you better not be politically active or be ready for the consequences.
Susan is best known for originating the role of Belle in Disney’s Beauty and the Beast on Broadway and Los Angeles. That is when I met her and knew her best. As is the case with most people one meets in the theatre world, you know them intimately during the run of the current show, and once the show closes, despite promises to be BFF, things happen. New shows are mounted, new BFFs are made. But we all stay good friends. Even if you only see each other every year or two in New York or LA at an opening or just passing each other in Shubert Alley. I consider Susan a friend, and that is why her letter and the language she used in it bothered me so much.
How can the open-minded, free-thinking members of the theatre community not see the insidious nature of this situation?
Mr. Eckern was forced to resign his job and livelihood because, out of his religious convictions, he took a political position. And, in Susan’s words: “I preserve the possibility for a happy ending… that Scott will embrace his theatrical friends, realize the hurt he has caused, and genuinely make amends. Anything less and I personally do not consider him a member of this cherished theatrical community. “ And, how does she suggest “amends” can be made? “to write a public apology for offending so many in this theatre world we all share. I’d also love to see him donate another $1000 towards an organization of his choosing that would attest to his commitment to the gay and lesbian communities…” I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to suggest that this is a tiny step toward Mao’s tactics in the cultural revolution. This person must be publicly shamed and humiliated and we will extract a fine for his transgressions.
Also, what about this: “Prudence in refusing to donate towards the cause and remaining quiet in his personal beliefs would have served him greatly.” Translation: If he were smart, he would have just shut his mouth.
And did you catch this line? “Anything less and I personally do not consider him a member of
this cherished theatrical community” . Get it? If you don’t agree with our point of view, you don’t belong in this business. Go work somewhere else with people who think like you.
This issue revolves around Prop 8, and I will purposely not reveal how I voted on this issue, because my reaction to this particular situation is not related at all to my position on Prop. 8…. my greater concern has to do with the propensity of those in the theatre industry to so easily adopt intolerant and totalitarian positions towards those who may genuinely hold differing viewpoints.
I consider myself a center/right leaning person, and I know, FOR A FACT, that there are many in the theatre industry who hold similar views as I. Do you hear much from them? Honestly, we don’t say much in public, because we are genuinely scared to. And this episode is exactly why.
One other disturbing part of Susan’s posting on Facebook. It received close to 100 comments from her friends lauding her “courage” for speaking out. Courage! Please… In this industry, what Susan did was the opposite of courage… does ANYONE doubt that she would have been applauded for her actions? Please! The self-delusion here is almost funny. Susan herself suggests that Mr. Eckern would have shown courage by standing up and being a lone voice in dissent of his church’s position on same-sex marriage, yet she can only find contempt for his standing up and being a lone voice in the theatre world in support of traditional marriage.
In fact, far from Susan showing courage, a cynic might think that since she was quickly aligning herself with a recent Tony Award winning composer, Marc Shaiman, she might have known that this public stance would put her in very good stead with the powers-that-be in our industry. It’s not a secret that a huge number of writers, directors and producers (you know, the men doing the hiring) are gay men. Yes, in theatre, gay men!
After Mr. Eckern resigned, Susan posted on more letter. Again, for full context, I re-print it here:
Scott Eckern Resigns
While I never wished for Scott’s demise, nor unemployment on anyone in this economy, I understand that his resignation may be the best outcome for all involved and watching.
I don’t want the arts community to be one that cannot accept the diversity of all — including those who may have unpopular political opinions among artists. My beef with Scott was his use of money made from the blood, sweat and tears of the gay community towards the prohibition of the civil rights of that same group.
CMT was in a difficult position. Had they fired Scott, they risked looking intolerant themselves. Had they kept him, they risk financial backlash from artists. Scott’s resignation is the best solution, and offered him an opportunity to something selfless. Let’s give him that.
His statement is fascinating, but I am ill-qualified to analyze it. I do wonder what his lesbian sister thinks of Prop 8. He seems to live in two worlds and that must be exhausting. BUT … changing Scott’s mind about the proposition was never my goal. Informing the theatre community of how he uses his earned income was my goal.
I am overwhelmed still by the tremendous storm of these last three days. I suppose we have all had a button pushed, and now … isn’t it amazing (!) … how lots of individual people … frustrated, angry, disillusioned … are now a unified group … organizing, sharing, loving each other and the message we wish to deliver.
I am so moved by the messages I’ve received from you guys — thank you. The backlash is nothing compared to the new friends I have made. I’m honored to be in line, on the line, picketing the line with all of you.
I also know that some are still angry — even with Scott’s resignation. Perhaps his words frustrated you. I understand your passion, but urge all of us to take the win and move on to the next battle. In no way should CMT be hurt further. This is a great, inclusive arts organization …. beloved by so many of us and the community it serves. Celebrate it. We lose so many theatres across our nation … let’s support this one which has given so much. Scott’s resignation may, in fact, cause backlash from Yes on 8 supporters — so now we MUST stand behind CMT with every fiber of our beautifully diverse selves.
I want to stand strong, make our message clear …. and err on the side of compassion. I know we are right, and with that on our side, we can afford to make considered steps that when scrutinized by reasonable people will be seen as fair, intelligent, and clear. Let’s be bigger than our opponents. Only then can we gain the support of those who are open to hearing — a growing group! So much mis-information was put out in CA and across our nation; we need to re-educate and people will hear. But the moment we sensationalize anything, we lose all integrity, and supporters.
I have learned so much from you in the last few days — thank you. Let me know how I may be of service.
Holding a growing space,
Susan Egan
Let’s take a look at how Susan summed up her biggest objection to Mr. Eckern exercising his rights of free speech and association: “My beef with Scott was his use of money made from the blood, sweat and tears of the gay community towards the prohibition of the civil rights of that same group.”
The Orwellian use of “civil rights” in the context of a man forced to resign for making a private, political contribution is too easy of a target (isn’t free association and the expression of political ideas the very first of our civil rights?), so I’ll focus on the first part…
I wonder if Ms. Egan (or, the actors, writers and directors applauding this episode) would be pleased with a group of families forcing Disney to no longer hire her because their ticket money is being used to support ideas which, they believe, undermines the basic structure of our society? Of course, it would never happen… but right-wingers are the intolerant and ignorant ones, remember?
And by the way. Let’s help shed some light on the economic realities of the theatre business for the self-aggrandizing artists involved in a show: The MONEY was not made by the “blood, sweat and tears of the gay community…” (blood?). No, the art, or the product may have been made by their efforts, but the MONEY was made by the sale of tickets to the general public (the majority of whom agree with Mr. Eckern’s position), and by the careful and prudent management of the business… the business MANAGED BY MR. ECKERN!!!!
You see, this is the world I work in. The “Theatrical Community” as it is so often referred to. A community where a respected executive with decades of exemplary service to his city and to his industry donates money to a proposition that merely maintains the legal definition of marriage as one man and one woman, and he must step down in shame. Mr. Eckern was great at his job. He got “butts in the seats”. He is now unemployed.
If only we had our own Arthur Miller to write a new version of The Crucible.
Stage Right is on Facebook.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
61 Comments
Dude… it’s “I’m Thpartacuth!” Gotta get that good Tony Curtis lisp in there.
Stage Right, if you want to remain anonymous you’d better be more careful about revealing personal relationships and other personal facts. You’ll get fingered fast if you don’t. You’ve just alerted the Thought Police that you know Susan Egan and where / when you met her, and that you were on the distribution list for the first email. If you really are vulnerable to retribution, please be careful. The more information you give, the more likely you are to get nailed.
Freeking scary!!
Despicable woman. Despicable actions. If they had really cared about whether or not someone like me would hate them, they would have stood up for the right of this man to have the freedom to support what he wanted to support. Instead, they sacrificed him and now I hate their tyranny.
Susan, what goes around, comes around…
That’s actually pretty scary. How about the part of the last letter that reads:
“BUT … changing Scott’s mind about the proposition was never my goal. Informing the theatre community of how he uses his earned income was my goal.”
“HOW HE USES HIS EARNED INCOME.”
Somehow, if Scott used his earned income to by cocaine, rent hookers, or kiddie porn, she’d say it was his “private business.”
The posting system is really starting to drive me nuts, guys. I know there are going to be a lot of glitches, so no worries, but Im starting to get a little paranoid…LOL
Scott Eckern was fired because his moral and religious beliefs opposed gay marriage. If you think opposing gay marriage is dangerous to your career, read what happened to a top West End actor in London who objected to working with a convicted child sex offender. The ACTOR was fired!
I wish I was making this up but I’m not. Here’s the link from the Daily Mail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1110304/West-End-star-sacked-refusing-work-sex-offender-Chris-Langham.html ”
West End star sacked after refusing to work with sex offender Chris Langham By Daily Mail Reporter
The lead actor of a West End show has been sacked after he refused to work with disgraced comedian Chris Langham.
Jud Charlton, 40, was due to star in a new version of the play ‘Hit Me! The Life And Rhymes Of Ian Dury’ but was unhappy at the script written by Langham, who spent 10 months in jail for downloading child pornography.
Such was the interest surrounding the fallen star, producers reportedly asked Langham to work in secret on the musical, which held its first preview performance at the Leicester Square Theatre last night.
Producer Irving Rappaport brought in Langham, 59, who wrote and starred in the BBC comedy The Thick Of It, last month to work with the show’s original writer and director Jeff Merrifield ahead of the West End run. However, the comic writers changes to the script led to a fall-out with the play’s star, leading to the sacking of Charlton last week.
‘I was very unhappy with the script that Chris Langham wrote. I had an argument with him, and he questioned my reputation, which I thought was completely hypocritical’, Charlton told the London Evening Standard. ‘It was mindblowing that he couldn’t see the irony given his past. I made it clear that I didn’t want to work with him and his new script, which I thought was disrespectful to Ian Dury, and for that I was sacked.’ Several key people associated are also said to have objected to the move.
The show, which tells the story of the ground-breaking Blockheads singer who died of cancer in 2000, transferred to the Leicester Square Theatre this week after a successful run at the Courtyard Theatre in Shoreditch following rave reviews at the Edinburgh festival.
Charlton, whose performance earned him a best actor nomination in The Stage awards last year and a string of positive reviews, added: ‘After I said that I wouldn’t work with Chris, straight away Jeff Merrifield and Irving Rappaport talked about recasting the part.
‘I spent Christmas trying to get the show back to what it was, but couldn’t work with Chris Langham over what he had written. ‘It simply didn’t work and he added all these crude jokes. What was a celebration of Ian Dury and the Blockheads has turned into a character assassination.’
Langham did not comment as he slipped out of the theatre last night after the audience had left. His close friend, playwright Merrifield, defended the actor saying many people on the show had known Langham for years and are standing by him. He added that Langham had not been paid for helping with the show.
On Wednesday, the play’s West End debut was called off after a power cut, leaving nearly 400 people being offered refunds or new tickets.
Paul Roffey, director of leading child protection agency Ray Wyre Associates, said producers should make Langham’s involvement public. He said: ‘Why have the producers been so secretive about Chris Langham’s involvement? The fact remains that he’s been convicted of crimes to warrant a custodial sentence.’ He is required to state his place of employment on the sex offenders register and if his work on this play means he will be spending time at this public place then he has to declare it.’
Producer Irving Rappaport said in a statement: ‘The play is written by Jeff Merrifield and contains elements from various people including The Blockheads, Ian Dury’s family, the producers and various members of the creative team. ‘Due to contractual difficulties, which include artistic differences, the actor was replaced by Adrian Schiller at very short notice. ‘On the opening night he received a standing ovation from a full house of Ian Dury fans including John Turnbull, his friend and original Blockhead member. ‘We are extremely grateful to Jud Charlton for his pre-West End portrayal of Ian Dury and would like to congratulate Adrian Schiller on taking over the part. ‘Chris Langham is one of the many friends and writers who have contributed over a long period of time in preparation for the West End run.’
A registered sex offender, Langham was cleared of abusing a 14- year-old girl, but was jailed for downloading child porn in 2007.
Sharon – I’m feeling the same way myself. My posts disappear with the message ‘you’re typing too fast’. Huhhh?
I also am getting ‘a little paranoid’.
I move in theatrical circles in Los Angeles. It’s hard enough trying to get something produced. I’m not about to jeopardize my career by publicizing my political leanings.
The irony here, that conservatives find it safer to stay “in the closet,” is really too much at times. The same people who are up in arms about unfair treatment and meanspiritedness start a “blacklist” of people exercising their First Amendment rights! Susan Egan says: “I think at this point I shall do my best to “out” him and any others like him. Folks who show (and make money) playing one game, but with an inner intolerance that denies everything our industry represents.”
Outing people with an inner intolerance? I think she may have outed herself as well.
Funny how the diversity that the Left holds sacrosanct never seems to include diversity of opinion.
Considering Disney was boycotted by I believe the Southern Baptists some years back for for giving benefits to gay partners of its, employees, that might not be a good analogy, Stage Right. Disney has also been taken to task for its “Gay Days” at various parks. Personally, I still fail to see why gay marriage will Destroy Civilization, but I agree that the “outing”/harassing of individuals who supported Prop 8 is out of line.
But I still won’t go to El Coyote because the food sucks.
Stage Right, THANK YOU!!!
I work in a small theatre in the middle of flyover country, and aside from one middle-age woman on the board of directors, I am the only conservative/libertarian in the place, not to mention one of three hetero males associated with the entire program, board and staff included.
I constantly have to swallow my thoughts and words while all others speak freely, impugning the things I believe in, as I’m the lowest low man on the totem pole. I’m often regarded in a manner of, “uh, yeah, Sean, that’s nice, now did you get the website updated and the wireless mics prepped for tech runs this weekend?”
It’s good to know someone else in the biz feels like I do about this Eckern issue, and that I’m not a complete island unto myself (single, hetero, athiest, libertarian/objectivist 30’s male who takes things at face value.)
re: Posting issues. Get a grip girls! It’s universal. Sensitivity is set too high. It also refreshes the screen if you click the Back button and you lose your comments, etc. Type in Notepad first and cut and paste. Be persistent and they will get posted eventually.
Use the BH Contact page to report issues. I did this am and have seen some improvement. DH said on his old site that the Contact page goes directly to the techn-no-geeks.
The one thing I got to say about about the demise of Scott Eckern is: about time you guys caught up with the rest of the world on what is happening!
The theatre insolates not only The Left from the real world but also conservatives from the conservative world. Ask any gay or lesbian Republican and they can tell you that this type of HATE for people permeates the Gay Left community. The GayLeft and the GayDems couldn’t find love or tolerance for anybody even it took a big poop on their face.
The GayLeft and the GayDems blame EVERYBODY for Prop 8 – except themselves. GayDems: YOU LOST THE ELECTION ON PROP 8! You pick yourself up by your bootstraps, try to get this on the ballot again, and try again to get Prop 8 repealed. Blacklisting was unpatriotic in the 1950’s, and guess what? It still is today.
If there was a reinvigorated movement to ban marriage between races and the same scenario played out, you wouldn’t be batting an eye at his demise. Yawn.
If there was a reinvigorated movement to ban marriages between races and a similar scenario played out, you wouldn’t be batting an eye. Yawn.
Thanks for letting me know who’s the fascist behind the Scott Eckern episode. That way I will not see anything with her in it.
Stage Right,
Thanks for another great post. I saw Marc Shaiman and his husband on the local NYC PBS show “Theater Talk” shortly after this episode. They were literally preening about their power and accomplishment in getting Eckern to resign. The show hosts, Micahel Reidel and Susan Haskins, piled on willingly too. It was disgusting. I would have cancelled my Channel 13 membership over it but I did that years ago over something equally disgusting.
The thing that really irks me about Susan’s letter though is the following:
“I do not agree with his Yes on 8 vote, but his vote is his constitutional right, and I do not even ask for him to change his mind about that. Rather, it’s the fact that his income, the direct result of so many brilliant gay and lesbian talents, was used to support the elimination of their given civil right.”
Does she not realize that her ability to earn a living as a musical theater performer and to voice unconsidered opinions via facebook to a large group of friends with impunity are graciously provided by this great country of ours? If she does realize it, does she ever think twice about say, Bush-bashing? Palin derangement? Of course not.
This all comes down to that basic left right argument: opportunity vs. outcome, process vs. results, que sera sera vs. cogito ergo sum. Liberals believe that their utopian ends justify any means. Even totalitarianism, which is exactly what her letter reeks of.
In fact her letter is a great example for those who propose that satire is no longer possible. If I wished to mock the theater industry’s absurdity with a shallow, bizzarre, ill-considered, self-righteous but eerily sincere diatribe, I wouldn’t change a word. But so few would get the joke.
Did Egan out Eckern’s sister? Regardless, the line about that woman is akin to what swarmy Edwards in the 2004 VP debate by bringing up Marcy Cheney. Wish the messiah Obama had been around to tell him that a candidate’s family is off limits….so why did Johnny have to sneak around to see his latest offspring?
Republicans were at the forefront of the civil rights movement, and Charlton Heston marched for those rights in the 60s. So, we would be up in arms if anyone tried to outlaw interracial marriage.
;D I wuz kidding, Timmy. Really, I was…
Why does this episode surprise anybody? The fundamental mindset of the left we’ve come to see dominate our culture is totalitarian in nature. Visit any university in America and you’ll see what I mean. Liberty is a foreign concept to the committed leftist, which includes most who self-identify as liberals today.
Let’s get this straight: Same-sex marriage advocates don’t give a rip about “gay marriage” or “civil rights” for homosexuals. And those who blithely say, like a commenter above, “I still fail to see why gay marriage will Destroy Civilization” are naïve. Of course two homosexuals having a sexual relationship they want to call marriage will not affect my marriage or “destroy civilization.” That is not the point.
Here is the point: the objective of SSM advocates is to coerce everyone to agree with them that homosexuality and heterosexuality are morally equivalent. Period. That the latter is not more normal or better or moral than the former. Period. That is why they are using the strategy of marriage and race, in which the good Supreme Court (or four of them) of California cooperated last May forcing SSM on the people of California.
The analogy to race is critical to their strategy, and indicates what will happen to those who disagree with them should the courts force this farce upon the land. Anyone who dares to express a moral opinion about homosexuality that is at variance with the arbiters of what is right and true and noble will be branded as haters and bigots akin to racists. In fact, they already do that, but after SSM becomes the law of the land (God forbid), they will have the law on their side as well. If you think what happened to Scott Eckern was bad, just wait.
My love of the theatre has been diminished by this sorry episode. I knew that the theatre world was dominated by gay men, but it didn’t matter to me. Now I see they can be just as vicious as the Fred Phelps clan.
It is my personal belief is that those who indulge in injustice experience it. Black American’s in particular shamed themselves in California by embracing the discrimination, embracing the very demon the have fought so hard against. As usual, the justification is the Bible, or religious belief. A person’s right to believe and practice their faith ends at the point other human beings are being denied basic rights and liberties…..no matter how despised they may be by the majority. Some only understand the pain of injustice when it has happened to them, and many of those have very short memories. Gay people are a part of God’s plan, whether the average person understands it or not. And what are they so guilty of? Wanting to get married? Karma will visit the lives of many that have participated in the oppression of an already despised class of people….people that have already suffered terribly at the hands of hetero-sexuals throughout history. The Nazi concentration camps were just a drop in the bucket. May those that practice injustice also know it’s sting.
Hako I’d really like you to say that to a guy like lets say the Late Great Reggie White or even Jeremiah Wright (A racist on a scale that is mind boggling) who did not support Gay marriage. You have no right at all to compare your little pet issue with hundreds of years of slavery and racism. And in fact nothing nothing that has happened to the 2 to 10 percent of the population in all the collective years of human history can even remotely, even in the most oblique way compare to the fight for Civil Rights that blacks have had to fight. So really as a white woman I am telling you right now HOW DARE YOU! When you get a gripe and some PERSPECTIVE let us know.
Absolutely chilling. Although none of us should be surprised. To be tolerant today is to to be open to anything and everything, except those people that hold to positions that contradict this new “tolerance.” “Tolerance,” “diversity,” “multiculturalism,” “civil rights,” all are terms that have been put into a left-wing, postmodern semantic shuffle and now mean different things from what we once thought.
We conservatives/libertarians/traditionalists have to understand that such cases as this Egan/Eckern situation are indicative of something bigger happening in Western culture. Much of our so-called “culture wars” are based in this semantic shuffling, where terms like “tolerance” are shaped to fit a leftist, relativistic paradigm. And when you control the words in an argument, you control the argument, because you can redefine it to fit whatever position you hold.
Too Scary …. punished for having an opposing opinion.
Intolerance by those who expect tolerance.
Miss Egan regardless of all the support you most certainly have received you should hang your head in shame for not allowing the same understanding that you expect for your beliefs.
Agreed, Pope.
Liberals aren’t very liberal
jeeze.. overreact much, folks ? were any of you “frightened” and “chilled” by religious groups calling for boycotts against disney for granting benefits to gay employees, against budweiser for selling its product in gay bars, or against ford motors for having the nerve to actually advertise in a gay publication ? .. and since when is stripping fellow citizens of their civil rights a ‘religious belief’ and ‘moral conviction’ anyway ?! get a grip.
meanwhile, great new site andrew ! you have ‘wonkette’ in a tizzy this morning.. haha. just be sure we get a steady dose of my hero, greg gutfeld, and i’ll be a faithful reader.
No, El Polacko, the overreaction is evident in the attacks on people who were against same-sex marriage. You know, the Mormon and Catholic congregations harrassed by militant pro-gay groups. The swastikas and death threats sent to churches, etc. What you see here are people concerned about the Orwellian logic following Ms. Egan’s actions. The fact that you don’t apparently find that concerning is rather shocking.
This rhetoric of stripping fellow citizens of their civil rights is getting tired too. I can’t marry my sister, nor can I marry both my sisters, or three of the ladies that I work with. I couldn’t marry my wife when we were both sixteen, and immigrants from countries with polygamous communities can’t have all of their marriages recognized in this country. So, are our civil rights being violated? Come on.
“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” (Edmund Burke)
Avon: Thanks for the “heads-up”. I thought it through and I’m ready to face the consequences if they figure it out…
Sharon: She actually is not a despicable woman. The thing about this whole episode is that it was carried out and championed by the nicest, mainstream elements of the theatre community… they just don’t see what they are doing. If she were despicable, it would be easier to deal with.
Carolyn : Funny, I plan on posting on that very issue next week… amazing, isn’t it?
OHIO WOLVERINE MOM: No, Susan did not “Out” Scott’s sister. Scott referred to her in his letter of resignation: “My sister is a lesbian and in a committed domestic partnership relationship. I am loving and supportive of her and her family, and she is loving and supportive of me and my family.”
Thanks for all the comments. The “Conversation” here at Big Hollywood is the most exhilarating part so far!
@ Hako
Please support your claim that gay people are a part of God’s plan. I’m sure you would not make such a claim without years of study on the subject. Which Bible Passages(I assume you mean the Judeo-Christian “God”, not Vishnu, Odin or Zeus, yes?) supports your claim?
While I wait for your response, I have a couple questions for you:
Why do homosexuals want to get married? What is it about marriage that appeals to homosexuals? Don’t homosexuals find the concept of marriage, in some way, offensive since it is infused with concepts (gender roles, gender difference, etc) that homosexuals do not adhere to? If not, why doesn’t the concept of marriage offend homosexuals?
In an irony apparently lost on Avon and other posters, isn’t Stage Right attempting to do to his alleged friend Susan Egan (i.e., harm her career because he doesn’t care for her politics) exactly what he accuses her of doing to Scott Eckem? Couldn’t he have anticipated the vengeful reactions from the LazyPadawans of the world? What exactly was gained by revealing her identity? His argument (such as it is) would have lost none of its power if he had extended her the same courtesy (anonymity) that he insists on for himself. And Stage Right isn’t fooling anyone with his coyness about his own position on Proposition 8, a point brought home by all the supportive comments he’s garnered from all you principled conservatives (for which read: bigots).
As MikeD put it so well in his post, this is not about taking anything from gays. NO ONE has done anything to their civil rights! That is just bs. They have every right that every other person has, and they still want more. They don’t care about marriage, it is just a way to try to make people accept their relationships and unions as normal as hetero unions. The right fought for Civil Rights, they fought for blacks far, far more than the left ever has. It is not fair to equate the treatment of blacks to gays, one is based on skin color, the other on sexuality. I just hope the very brave STAGERIGHT is not outted or harmed for his exercising his rights.
gotta luv the radicals – whine about the baptist boycott of disney and compare it to the personal massacre of an individual and his livelihood. Baptists did not take names and put anyone out of work, but al gayda works hard at personal assassination. I go out of my way to deprive al gayda and its members of my hard earned money and will make sure my family does that same. El coyote, I luv the place and have increased my patronage since the massacre by the gaystapo.
Sounds like Susan wants to bring in the days of Soviet self-critisim where the unfortunate who stepped over the party line publically ‘confessed’ his sin and promised to make restitution. So this man must make a $1000 donation to a cause he disagree with? Disgusting.
Does anyone else see the parallel between the behavior of lesbian/gay/bi cabal after the election and the behavior of Mugabe’s thugs after people voted for the ‘wrong’ candidate in Zimbabwe?
Hot and Bothered: I’m not outing Susan or anyone. She did not request anonymity. She is mentioned in the NY Times, LA Times and Playbill and Variety articles. She says herself in her OPEN letter: “Many of you have asked for permission to forward my letter on to friends, colleagues, press and so on. I’m fine with this. It’s already “out there” … so you have my blessing”
If you “Google” Susan Egan, the 7th item is a Huffington Post article about her involvement in this issue with her picture. She has not requested anonymity.
[...] A smart blogger added an interesting post on Big Hollywood Blog Archive Prop 8: Im Spartacus! No, Im …Here’s a small excerptHartz DENTAL Multi Pack Chicken and Chedder Basted. Beefeaters Rawhide Flavored Twists, Sticks & Chips. Dentley’s Small Dog & Puppy Rawhide Bone Multi Pack. More about Premier Gentle Leader Headcollar Small Red. Beefeatersr Cow Hooves Premium for Dogs Large- 10 Pack. Beefeaters Multi Flavored Cuisine Cow Ears come in a large 10 pack and include natural, beef, peanut butter and chicken flavors for variety. Smith Premium Extra-Thick Rawhide Chips Multi. Month Supply; Beefeaters Dental Rawhide Stix For Dogs 50 Pieces; Beefeaters Multi Flavored Cow Ears 10 Pack; Pnp. and Crossbones Charm- Large Silver; Natural Balance Ultra Formula for Cats- 6 oz Cans; EVSCO Methigel Urinary Acidifier for Pets- 4.25 oz; Beefeaters Multi Flavored Cow Ears- 10 Pack. Smith Premium Extra-Thick Rawhide Chips Multi-Packs. Dingo Mini Indulgence Flavored Rawhide Chews. Big 100 count box of 100 digestible cow ears are a lower. Beefeaters Rawhide Flavored Twists, Sticks & Chips. Dentley’s Natural Rawhide Variety [...] [...]
Susan Egan is a despicable person. What about Scott Eckern’s family, what are they to do now? Susan reminds me of the characters in “Animal Farm”, so sure they are right about everything and destroying a community and a way of life in the process.
The second thing is, what if we want to send a letter of support to Scott? I tried to find an address for him but got stuck –
To SR and all the other anonymous folks:
I understand and appreciate the real dangers to your livlihoods when it comes to revealing your political predelictions. I was fortunate to have left the Seattle area after law school, but I knew friends who didn’t who had a very difficult time finding employment if they let their views be known in the community. Some had to go back into the closet so they could pay their bills. I write the following not to chastize, but merely to lay out the reality of our predicament, and to point out what is necessary to accomplish this mission.
First, it is NOT true, SR, that your anonymous contributions aren’t helpful. They are, and anyone who says differently is wrong. After all – “Publius” wasn’t really the name of the guy who wrote the Federalist Papers, and those worked out pretty well.
But eventually, conservatives need to take back their right not to cower in fear, and to stand in the light. Anonymous blogging by itself WON’T be enough.
Taking back our popular culture, or at least regaining a substantial presence within it, will entail real sacrifice, just like everything worthwhile. MLK knew that without being willing to eat the consequences of standing up to an unjust culure, he would never garner the greater sympathy of good but politically neutral people. For him, that meant beatings, jail time, humiliation, etc. And think of our soldiers who are willing to sacrifice so much more for us – pop culture is a critical front, but it’s not the only front.
And ultimately, whether you anounce yourself or not, it’s only a matter of time before your ID is known. The consequences you fear are inevitable. But they will be less if you aren’t “exposed” as if you had something shameful to hide.
The more people who come out, the more people will feel safe to follow them. We need leaders who will pave the way and get the ball rolling. The blacklist will backlash, as more and more people like Eckern are treated so unjustly and so publicly. There will undoubtedly be slings and arrows to endure. That leadership in the entertainment industry starts on this site – thank you to all the posters for it.
Boycott Susan Egan’s work. I wanted to be the first person to blast her on the IMDB forum for her, but someone beat me to it. Thank you for bringing this to my attention Stage Right. My minions and I will post until we can’t post anymore. I just hope IMDB doesn’t delete them all.
BOYCOTT!
Please! All we, on the other side, need to do is never go to a movie, rent a movie or theatre in any form. The loss of over 40% of paying clients might just make imbeciles like Egan and her ilk wonder where their jobs went. As usual, these types think their profession makes them “smart” whereas it really shows their stupidity for all to see. There has not been anything worth seeing for over a decade…why do we continue to pay good money to see bad stuff. Let’s all get together and do our bit to shut off their profits!!
Throughout this episode angry gays and their apologist Liberal enablers have shown just how hate-filled and intolerant they really are. They should respect democracy and accept the outcome of Prop 8 with dignity and move on. They should be happy that we as a society no longer outlaw homosexuality or kill gays and leave it at that. Liberals always push too far in creating “rights” from wants…
The not-so-subtle bigotry in this statement is equally as frightening from Ms. Egan:
“A very wise responder to my post asked if perhaps Scott had been
coerced by his church (Latter Day Saints) to make the donation? And if
so, is he really at fault? We know the Mormon Church has been a major
supporter of Yes on 8, and it has “urged” its members to give
financial support. My feelings are: if true, what does it say about a
church that would make such “demands” on its parishioners?”
But, of course, it’s only Mormons…so that’s ok, right?
When this happened to Scott Eckern I was appalled. This is one of the most dangerous things that can happen to our country. I don’t mean just specifically in the theater world or Hollywood, but anywhere that people feel their careers, and education, and lives are endangered by ideological extremists. Susan is a strong example of someone so blinded by their own beliefs and groupthink that they will harm other people. Susan nor any other person has the right to tell Scott what areas he is allowed to spend his money. He earned it through his own hard work, someone else didn’t earn it for him. How ridiculous and horrifying that she would think others earned it for him and therefore he was not entitled to decide where it went. I wonder how she would feel about those who a actually paid for the tickets filling out forms as they left the theater to tell her what things she was allowed to spend her money on.
I hope and pray that Scott Eckern lands on his feet and comes out better than before. No one deserves to lose their livelihood for donating to a cause they believe in.
Stage Right – I understand your defense of her, but the fact that she basically bragged about leading the charge of terrorizing a fellow American citizen for exercising their freedom to put their money where they choose to put it is despicable. I wont mince words there. And since I have no fear of ever having to work with her, Ill call it to her face. While I dont agree with those who want to force people to call homosexual unions “marriage” Im perfectly willing to allow the battle be played out in the manner our Founding Fathers established for us: representation and elections. Which is what the state of California accomplished – and the homosexual lobby LOST that battle. They didnt get the numbers of people they needed to agree with them. And if they want to sit and pout about how unfair it is, they I fully expect them to STFU when I express my disdain for the election of The Obamassiah. As a citizen with only the power of one vote, my opinion of who would be the best President for this country got outvoted. Am I looking to financially cripple those who voted for The Obamassiah? No. Im perfectly content to sit back and wait for the Schadenfreude. That’s teh difference between me and Susan Egan. Im not going to stoop to the lengths she has. And if she didnt want this coming back on her she should just Shut Up and Sing/Act.
Sorry, Stage Right – but the battle line has been drawn. I will call them as I see them.
Sharon, I sympathize with you, BELIEVE me… I’m just trying to make a distinction between the person and the act. I think that good people are capable of despicable acts because of their blind faith or ignorance… I truly believe that this is the case. In the same way that the Cardinal at the Vatican this week attempted to side with Hamas, I think that is despicable, but I’m not going to go out on a limb and call the Cardinal despicable… Unless he’s Albert Pujols.
– SR
I will personally do all in my power to not support these homo’s. They want to boycott business or people that supported prop 8 well I say it’s time to boycott them so that’s what I am doing. Anything that’s homo related I will not be supporting, two can play your little games. And yes I am very secure in my homo-phobia. And what “rights” are you people missing out on? Still can’t get anyone to give me anything you don’t already have, seems “they” just want special rights.
To Hot and Bothered & El Polacko:
Let’s get the standard stuff out of the way-I have gay friends and family. This is not a disclosure to give me credibility within the GL community, or with anyone; it’s just a fact. I also support Prop. 8. But before you add me to your Bigot List, know this also: I support equal rights for my gay and lesbian friends and family, and the GL community as a whole. I think anyone in a committed, legal relationship should be given the same opportunities that others have. I take offense to the Disney, Budweiser, and Ford boycotts for that very reason. I’d gladly be on the front line rallying support for laws already in place covering civil unions, and decry those who would strip those civil rights away, which are practically equal to those associated with traditional hetero relationships. And where those rights aren’t equal, I’d lend my support to rectify that. Again, I am ready to stand up for the CIVIL RIGHTS of all within the GL community. So, the question I pose to you both is how does my objection to surrendering the term “marriage” nullify all of that? Follow up: Why must it mean something other than what it always has for my support of gays and lesbians to be valid? As far as I know, no one has the right to be called something that, by actual definition, they’re not. This argument seems to be about nomenclature, and nothing more. I find that, and thus the backlash surrounding Prop. 8, ridiculous.
When the real fight for civil rights is waged, I’ll be there. I’ll be the “bigot” standing beside you.
marriage is unfortunately a concept that hovers between the religious and legal worlds. Either every long-term bond between two consenting adults should be recognized as a marriage or a civil union. It has to be one way or the other.
It bothers me that Randal says people don’t get killed anymore for being gay. And Waxman . . . really? Really? What grade are you in? “Homo’s”?
[...] This chap added an interesting post today on Big Hollywood Blog Archive Prop 8: Im Spartacus! No, Im …Here’s a small readingkelly bag kelly armstrong kellogg company kellie. this time I have no signs of thrush (no slime on my teeth. itch relief spray for dogs from Pet Nutrition . panel van, 8121, todd steussie-), nylon garment bag. plumbing continue to work, finding child gates for her dogs. easter treats easter wreaths eastern accents eastern. PNP products are manufactured under Federal cGMP guidelines to ensure Quality, Purity and Potency. pointer dogs point pleasant new jersey point pleasant beach nj. Purina Canine Lite Snackers for Dogs- 24 oz Bag. labradoodle dogs rdgguappbq Nov 15, 08:20 PM. pnp quote pnh pneumatic pumps pneumatic cylinders pnet. Then called me to drink 2 16 oz ‘berry’ flavored barium. Pnp Healthy Teeth Dental Care For Dogs 8 Oz Bottle Natural Balance Sweet Potato Fish Treats For Dogs 8 Oz Bag. Healthy Teeth Dental TreatsT for Dogs- 20 oz Resealable Bag EZ Order. or less nothing seems [...] [...]
“Either every long-term bond between two consenting adults should be recognized as a marriage or a civil union. It has to be one way or the other.”
No, it doesn’t. As I posted on Mr. Bean’s “Blacklisted” thread, this issue is about whether interest groups have a right to redefine our fundamental social units to suit their personal preferences. “Why just two to a marriage? Why be so arbitrary with ages? Why even require that both spouses be human?
“Because the status we grant to marriage is not about our personal fulfillment. Our lifestyles can be for that if it is what we want to pursue above all else. So far, this institution works best for creating stable families from which the next generation will arrive as healthy and well balanced as possible. It also requires sacrifices from each of the sexes to accommodate the other in a way that uniquely tempers our characters. The fact that marriage is under attack from other directions and less strong than it has been in the past doesn’t change this fact. Those problems just suggest other battles that have to be fought to preserve the benefits of marriage.
“That doesn’t mean marriage is best for everyone or even tolerable for everyone. It is just a reason for according it a special social status. And if other kinds of relationships prove over the generations that they are as good or better, they would also deserve that status. But so far they have not.
“We can have the lifestyles we want. Nobody even has to approve of them to tolerate them. But we don’t get to rearrange social institutions to accommodate our preferred lifestyles or, to borrow from Mr. Bean, we have no real institutions at all. We will just have words.”
I hold these views and support them. A substantial number of “liberals” would pat themselves on the back for destroying my livelihood and possibly my entire career over even modest acts of such support. If I didn’t already know about them, that would tell me all I needed to know about these people who long to become masters of their fellow citizens.
Ralph Waldo,
Didn’t you and Walt Whitman give each other hand jobs? I thought I read that somewhere.
I personally don’t particularly care what name a civil union, or whatever, takes, call it marriage if you want. You could call poop cheese if you wish, but it doesn’t make it so. What I want to know is where, exactly, in out legal documents, does it state that there is a RIGHT to marry. Really, if there is one, I don’t know of it, and if someone can point it out, i’d appreciate it, and happily admit my ignorance in the matter. It seems that rights seem to just appear out of thin air these days. Anything that something someone wants, and yells loudly enough about, quickly becomes a right.
The long and short of it is, a man was forced out of his livelihood due to nothing other than his politics. And people celebrated. What if a preacher who opposed Prop 8 was un-ordained? Lost his congregation and was ousted from the church. Would the Left go to bat for him? Would the Right celebrate his demise?
I wonder what has happened to Scott? Has he found new employment? I hope so. I’ve been laid off several times in my life (but not for my honest beliefs) and I always found better employment. My attitude to my former employers was, “Good riddance to bad rubbish.” If they don’t want me around I really don’t want to stay. Perhaps we need an organization called something like “Victims of Gay Abuse” that help folks put out of work by those who don’t like how they vote.
“What I want to know is where, exactly, in out legal documents, does it state that there is a RIGHT to marry.”
Loving v Virginia seemed to find that right as “substantive Due Process.” “Substantive Due Process” is one for the more dubious projections of constitutional law. I don’t think you will find it anywhere else.
What an infuriating woman. She’s trying to compare Prop 8’s impact on gays to the 1800s persecution against the Mormons? I want to scream and rip my hair out right now. She’s either counting on an ignorant reader base, or is ignorant herself.
I’m a member of the LDS Church myself. I served a mission in Spain, I pay my tithing, I read my scriptures daily and I try to do the best I can by my fellow man. No matter what is happening in my life, my faith brings me happiness and fulfillment, as faith from different churches does for other people as well. Yet Susan signs her name on the long list of people who try to slander us in the name of advancing a corrupt cause.
History lesson: The Mormons were chased out of Missouri by mobs in the mid 1800s. Their homes were burned down, their women raped, their men tarred and feathered. They went to Illinois and broke a swampland into fertile territory and built a temple. Mobs moved in after them there, and the same thing happened that went down in Missouri. Their leader was taken to court on trumped-up charges (of which he wasn’t legitimately convicted) and then shot by a mob and fell out of a prison window.
Then the Mormons trekked west to Salt Lake and did the same thing to the western desert that they’d done to the swamps. Because of Mormon settlers, the West became a land that could be used and cultivated (even my hometown of Las Vegas was originally settled by Mormons). And even then, lies spread to the government about their activities, and an army was sent to stomp them out. Countless men have been beaten and slain, women have been violated and homes have been destroyed in the name of blind hatred toward the Mormons, and just because now they stand up for preserving the sacred institution of marriage, WE’RE the ones doing something just as bad or worse to gays?
A more significant comparison to the Mormons and Prop 8 would be something like Israel and Gaza (though on an extremely small scale). We take a beating forever and the news outlets tell us it’s our lot to suffer it, and the moment we stand up for something, suddenly we’re the oppressors.
BH, thanks for creating this blog and calling for more common sense on the part of the American people.
I have been noticing since 9/11 an amazing amount of attention and resources being spent on this special interest group. They appear to be nacississtic in nature and down right facist in imposing their will on their families friends communities countries. i too have family and friends that are gay and really hate this self centered sub group who like the terrorizing muslims in the world pretend to speak for all muslims. Grow up! i am all for health benefits etc for a civil union but same sex couples do not make a marriage. I watch in small town usa the pride parade runs the same weekend as fathers day. Your agenda is clear. boycott’s of the shop that won’t hang your posters. And then the parade- wow-what role models for a healthy family- give me a break.
Your self centered pity party about basic rights being denied is a bunch of crap you built up in trying to build a case. You have no case. You are some of the most privileged people on the face of the earth. Why don’t you start acting like it. Do you ask yourself how many hours of your life you have frittered away with this crap? When was the last time you helped someone in a truly substantial way?
[...] at the Gershwin. The star-studded Internet video was released in response to the Scott Eckern episode in which Marc Shaiman was a central [...]
Susan can’t compare history. Plus Gay marriage was forced on the public. Tom Hanks is un-American for supporting “forced” legislation in opposition to what the masses wanted. Now the Gay and Lesbian groups will scare people to push this over the 50 percent needed in the next election. What a bunch of whiners…
You must be logged in to post a comment.