Korean Job Discussion Forums

[moosehead]

this is growing as an international protest agains the ban of gay marriages - read more here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-stein14-2008nov14,0,2377851.column

******

UPDATE: No Gays For A Day has been officially changed to Dec 10. It turns out another guy was working on the same idea, and he's gay, and produced the Lifetime movie "Wedding Wars," and there's no way I'm going to get in a fight with a guy who's both gay and willing to work for Lifetime. He's willing to do anything. For further details see JoinTheImpact.com.

- Joel Stein, Nov. 14, 5:25 p.m.

__________________

You wouldn't think gay people would need tips on staging a splashy event from Mexican immigrants. Yet since they lost the right to marry in California, gays appear to have no game plan, marching around West Hollywood and Silver Lake with their old "No on 8" signs, which makes about as much sense as holding a John McCain rally next month at John McCain's house.

That's why I'm declaring Dec. 5 No Gays for a Day day. Patterned after the 2006 Great American Boycott organized by Latino immigrants, on that Friday, gays should stay home from work, school and do no shopping, to prove how crucial they are to American society. No Gays for a Day will demonstrate what it would be like if -- as so much of the non-coastal U.S. seems to desire -- gays just disappeared. You may not even know who all your daily gays are, so there's no predicting the impact. It probably won't shut down the restaurant industry like the immigrants did, but know this for certain: Dec. 5 will be a day that fashion does not move forward.

To gauge this strategy's effectiveness, I called Sonja Eddings Brown, the spokesperson for the Protect Marriage coalition that put Proposition 8 -- which defined marriage as exclusively heterosexual -- on the ballot. Brown, to my surprise, sounded defeated. I reminded her that Proposition 8 passed, so maybe she should pep up a bit. "Did we win?" she asked. "It doesn't feel like it." When I ran No Gays for a Day by her, Brown said, "I have so many dear friends who are such invaluable parts of this city and California who are gay." It was the boldest use of "some of my best friends are ... " I had ever heard.

My main concern about enacting my plan is that I'm not gay. And my previous attempt as an outsider to rally folks to a cause was a miserable failure: Right before I applied to college, I suggested Asian students protest being stereotyped as overachievers by skipping the SAT.

Also, I'm really lazy. So I called Amy Balliett for help. Balliett is a lesbian in Seattle who, just last Friday, created JoinTheImpact.com, which has organized an expected 250,000 people nationwide to march Saturday in protest of Proposition 8. Balliett immediately embraced No Gays for a Day as JoinTheImpact's second event. We worked out some kinks, like "pretending you are sick" for people who aren't out of the closet at work. For economic impact, we picked a Friday -- one of the big shopping days before Christmas and the day People, Us Weekly and Star usually sell out at newsstands. We also decided that because this is a general strike, not a directed boycott, even gay-owned, gay-patronized businesses should shut down. "I hate to say this, but we should even say, 'Don't even go out to the bars,' " she said. "I just don't know if the community can stick to that."

To get media attention, Balliett -- a search-engine marketer -- is going to use the social networking sites she used for Saturday's march. Although that sounded promising, I decided to hunt for a No Gays for a Day celebrity spokesperson. I chose Kathy Griffin because she's so well connected to the gay community and because it's hard to get Ellen DeGeneres on the phone at 10 p.m. when you're drinking and coming up with ideas like No Gays for a Day.

Griffin -- who is a spokesperson for the Foundation for AIDS Research, AIDS Project Los Angeles, Aid for AIDS and, I'm guessing, AIDS, AIDS, AIDS -- was thrilled to get the official celebrity spokesperson job. And she thought our impact would be significant. "Forget Pinkberry. It's over for them. They could go under in one day," she said. "If you do two days without gays, Bravo would go under too." People, we figure, will have no assistance at libraries or gym class and will madly butcher their hair. Subaru dealerships shouldn't bother opening. Entertainment journalism will take such a hit, TMZ will have to report hockey scores.

Griffin was getting more excited about our plan until I mentioned this might slow up the remodel of her house. "My remodel? What about the audience for my shows? The only reason I'm doing this is on Dec. 5, I don't have a show. I'd never do this if I had a show that day in Palm Desert," she said. Then -- and you'll have to trust me that this actually happened -- Griffin got quiet for a few seconds. "If my assistants don't go to work," she said, "who's going to go to the bathroom for me? I'm screwed on a day without gays. I've made a huge error in judgment. Me, Cher and Bette Midler are going to be the three most screwed Americans. We all might actually die that day. And what if Ryan Seacrest doesn't go to work? The state will collapse. This will wake up California."

But Griffin decided No Gays for a Day is a cause worthy of her suffering. Now the rest of the world will find out what Griffin has known all along: We need our gays. If it turns out I'm wrong, and we don't miss them, then as a married man, I can tell you this: The best way to keep them at home is to let them get married.

*******

Join the Impact here:

http://jointheimpact.com/

[moosehead]

for the record, I'm not gay but have lifelong gay friends and have been a supporter of gay rights since my teenage years when I was first acquainted with their issues.

I will support this action on Dec 10th and urge everyone else to do it also; it really doesn't matter if you honestly like or don't like homosexuality - it really is about human rights. You don't have to agree with someone's life - just that everyone should have the right to live the way one wants.

Of course, here in Korea that's a very radical concept!

[Adventurer]

Well, some employers might fire someone if they take off from work for political reasons. I am not sure how this would really take off. If the majority of people in California supported gay marriage, then Proposition 8 wouldn't have passed. I think there is stronger support for civil unions for homosexuals in the U.S., but not as much for using the word marriage. The Supreme Court doesn't seem to view the lack of gay marriage as unconstitutional. Of course, one could argue that in 1950 the court found segregation to be okay until 1954. As it stands the court and the majority of Americans seem to be of a certain mind. I don't think it's useless for those who want gay marriage to protest. It's useful. They put their case to the American people and get attention that way.

So, you have a conflict between the democratic will of the majority of Americans as to when the word marriage can apply. For me, it's not a pressing issue, but I think homosexuals should be able to have civil unions, legal rights to where there can be adequate financial ties between the partners. Based on mainstream interpretations of religion, in America, gay marriage is not supported. However, in general, only a few Western countries have gay marriage. I saw no need for Proposition 8, but the voters decided in a certain way. That's the way democracy works. At the same token, those who support gay marriage can protest.

[seosan08]

There's lots of protests and other things going on on the left coast. If these sodomites keep pushing, someone will push back hard and some will end up hurt badly or found in a dumpster.

[JMO]

[bacasper]

The gay business establishments ought to remain open on that day. Not that every straight one is anti-gay, but it would bring home the point that it is in business' interest that they be gay-friendly.

[Gopher]

All gays would have to "come out" and participate in "No Gay Day" for this to truly work. I do not believe they are willing to do that, although they could surprise us. Wait and see.

[seosan08]

[ernie]

so will dec 11th be called 'no gays getting paid day'?

while i 100% support equal treatment of homosexuals, this is no excuse for a day off. can straight people take the day off too? if not, guess what: that's discrimination! if i was your boss and you pulled this stunt, you'd be out on your ass. this sounds like something dreamed up by the extreme right to get a bunch of gay people fired.

while i believe the decision to ban gay marriage in many states is a step in the wrong direction, i have a few questions for the pro-gay marriage crowd:

1. isn't it a constitutional issue? i mean, if some state voted to re-establish slavery, it wouldn't be valid because it's a judicial matter, not something you can vote upon. this is to prevent 'the tyranny of the majority' and is a fundamental part of western democracy.

2. what's the difference between a 'marriage' and a 'civil union', anyway? wouldn't a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

[mises]

With "2", I wonder this too. It is the benefits that should matter the most, not the title. I'd reckon first normalize the civil unions and when the country becomes more comfortable then go for the name change.

[JMO]

[moosehead]

[Quack Addict]

[Enrico Palazzo]

[moosehead]