Anti-Prop. 8 mob watch: L.A. Film Festival director resigns over donations
This is such a shame. I mentioned the uproar in Hollywood over L.A. Film Festival director Richard Raddon’s contribution to the Yes on Proposition 8 traditional marriage initiative campaign last week (link). Well, the tolerance bullies have won. Raddon has resigned.
Via Variety (hat tip - Steve G.):
Under mounting pressure, LA Film Festival director Richard Raddon has ankled his post.
Raddon and Film Independent (FIND), the festival’s parent org, have faced a barrage of protests over Raddon’s contribution to the successful Yes on Prop 8 campaign that banned same-sex marriage in California.
After bloggers published his name, culled from public records of donors, Raddon tendered his first resignation on Nov. 13 to Film Independent’s board of directors, which was not accepted. Film Independent then released a statement saying, in part, “Our organization does not police the personal, religious, or political choices of any employee, member, or filmmaker.”
Yet Internet message boards and other published reports kept the issue at the center of a growing protest movement that has targeted “Yes on 8″ donors including the Mormon church and Cinemark Theaters, whose CEO was a contributor.
On Monday, Raddon submitted a second resignation. Those close to the org described Monday’s conference call with the board of directors as emotional. While Raddon’s contribution had caused some internal angst, he was well liked within the org.
On Tuesday, Film Independent issued a statement saying “With great reluctance, Film Independent has accepted Richard Raddon’s resignation. Rich’s service to the independent film community and to Film Independent has been nothing less than extraordinary. He has always shown complete commitment to our core principles of equality and diversity during his long tenure.”
Raddon, a devout Mormon who took the reins of the fest in 2000, said, “I have always held the belief that all people, no matter race, religion, or sexual orientation are entitled to equal rights. I prefer to keep the details around my contribution through my church a private matter. But I am profoundly sorry for the negative attention that my actions have drawn to Film Independent and for the hurt and pain that is being experienced in the GLBT community.”
Film Independent has not yet picked a replacement for Raddon.
Who will the witch hunters go after next?
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Neolibertarian at large
- Los Angeles Film Festival Director and California Proposition 8 Supporter Richard Raddon Resigns | FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog
- Breitbart Nails Hollywood On Prop. 8 Hypocrisy
- Cheat Seeking Missiles » Gay Bigots’ Harassment Drives Film Exec From Job
- Gay “marriage”: Stop the Madness! « Mark’s Musings
- Steynian 290 « Free Canuckistan!
- Around the Blogosphere « The Pugnacious Irishman
- Gay McCarthyism (Explain the difference of techniques) « Zipline Conservative
- ANTI-PROP 8 BULLIES PRESSURE ANOTHER TO RESIGN « The Salty Pundit
- Same Sex Setback by Rolling Stone
- Moderate Blogger » Anti-Prop. 8 mob watch: L.A. Film Festival director resigns over donations
- The Naked Emperor, Pontificating on Fashion « The Pugnacious Irishman
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Bench Memos
» Sunstein to OIRA
Riehl World View
» An Unnecessary PresidentWeekly Standard
» Beat to the PunchNewsBusters.org
» R.I.P., Rev. Richard John NeuhausHot Air
» Video: Hamas’s greatest hitsHot Air
» Remember when deficits were evil?Right Wing Nut House
» IRAN OPENS SECOND FRONT AGAINST ISRAELNewsBusters.org
» Obama's Proposed Energy Czar Scrubbed From Socialist WebsiteNewsBusters.org
» Newsweek’s Meacham: Don't Expect Obama to Undo 'Awful, Terrible Stuff that Bush and Cheney Did'
txvet, i agree with you. California recognizes civil unions as equal rights to marriage. Honestly, i think, gay people love to live lives full of what they call drama. They seem bored unless their lives are lived like they are on the edge of their seats, like a real life soap opera. I think they want to be able to go to the places they hang out and regale all their friends with how their husband or wife is making their lives complicated and how they are going to have to get a divorce and how much drama it is. The divorce lawyers are going to get a massive windfall.
What?
If the gays really, really, thought it was genetic, they wouldn’t be out there busily trying to propagandize 6-year-olds in the schools.
Question to Red State Skeptic and Omu:
Is there some sort of “gay issue” alert mechanism at the bathhouse that allows you and your ilk to be the first freaks on every anti-normal behavior thread on every blogsite on the web? Do you at least towel off before soiling the keyboard? Just curious.
Gee, maybe a revote?
You couldn’t just get over it?
the more people cave in to these terrorists, the more emboldened they become.
When are people going to actually stand up for their beliefs?
I think it is beyond time for people to take legal actions against the thugs and terrorists illegally using the information provided on those lists to intimidate and coerce this that hold different beliefs than they do.
And boycott gay and lesbian owned businesses until such time as they stop their terrorist activities.
What’s wrong with a revote? Do you have something against voting?
That’s one of the things that make you realize the wrongness of the lifestyle, TxVet. Can you imagine letting a bunch of dirty old men in schools to talk to little girls about having sex? I mean, even if you called the dirty old men “Happies” or some like euphemism?
They won’t because NORMAL people make up 98% of the population.
Not me but some others seem to.
Ahh…but us demented liberals make up much more. And you know we spend every waking moment trying to think of ways to destroy traditional marriage.
Well..when we are not hopped up on weed and/or consuming your children’s souls.
Do you honestly think that Michelle has a problem with the democratic process?
Maybe she meant…Move on…to a revote. Or simply stop the thuggery!
Nah. Weak hyperbole. Omu and Red State did a much better job than you on the last page.
Can’t say, but I can tell you who they WON’T go after: The people that voted for Proposition 8: Blacks and Hispanics. No, they’ll attack the group that supported them the most: Straight white people.
There’s no winning against these immature children. No matter what you say or do you’re a bigot (or my favorite empty headed self aggrandizing insult: ‘neocon’ - like that’s anything but a complement of the highest order).
It’s also so much fun to be ‘instructed’ on a religious sacrament by someone who has turned their back on God and think that because their lives are an empty void they are so much better than us.
And no I’m not a bigot, I have many homosexual friends, the only problem with homosexuals is that they attract liberals like —- attracts flies.
I think I just got it. You want me to say that I oppose polygamy and underage marriage for moral reasons. Is that correct?
If marriage is like having a driver’s license, then why is it so much easier to obtain? I drag queen I know (note, I did not mention we were friends) married a friend, a girl, who is in the military. Why? Financial benefits. She makes extra money and gives him a portion. He’s also covered under her insurance as her spouse. Apparently, this is a regular thing.
I’d also bring up wedding chapels in Las Vegas, but I don’t think it would do any good. If marriage is to be protected, then someone please explain to me why you can get one of these marriage licenses faster than you can say “Britney Spears.”
I’m not saying that marriage should be changed right now. I’m just pointing out the glaring flaw in the argument here.
purplepeep wrote:
Correct. When this question has come up to a public vote, traditional marriage is 30-for-30. Past election days have seen this trend over and over going back eight years. But losing California was somehow a big deal for the Gay-stapo. Why?
I think it has something to do with the fact that the Justice who cut-and-pasted a “right” to same-sex marriage — Ronald George — did so with the clear intent that it be carbon-copied throughout the nation to invalidate other such constitutional amendments.
From a San Jose Mercury News interview of Justice George in May (bold mine):
Connecticut was the first of many intended dominoes, but now that the biggest of deep blue states has held its composite hand high and said “ENOUGH!” who knows what how they will respond in the Constitution State?
I didn’t realize I was making an argument with that throw away post, corkie.
And you didn’t answer MY question.
If a state banned hetero marriage, and not only that, revoked existing hetero marriages, you would think that is totally within their rights because the concept of marriage is entirely dependent on the state, right?
Somehow I really really doubt it. But whatever. I am glad you support the efforts of pro-gay marriage forces to seek a revote on this issue.
I think she meant “Grow up and act like an adult”
I mean, could you imagine what would happen if the next Gay Pride parade was just a parade instead of a liberal worshiping leather/S&M/Scat fetish festival? My God! The public would accept them!
What a shocking concept! Act respectfully and receive respect in return!
Call me crazy but it just might work…
See if you can follow my complex and highly nuanced answer. Yes.
Did you honestly think that I wouldn’t support a citizens’ access to this country’s democratic process?
I’m not trying to propagandize anybody. I don’t agree with the stuff Michelle’s noted in the news about pushing the lifestyle on kids, either. Books like “Heather Has 2 Mommies” and “Am I Blue” just make it more stigmatized, IMHO. Taking kids on a “field trip” to a lesbian wedding? Ridiculous.
What you don’t realize is that the majority of us don’t want any of that crap. You don’t always know who’s gay around you because the majority of us just want to live our lives peacefully. I’ve learned something quite valuable in my lifetime, and it cuts across every known political issue out there: the hysterical minority is ALWAYS the loudest and most obnoxious voice in the room.
Cool. That is all I am asking for.
So there really is nothing inherent in the concept of marriage? It is just how we choose to define it?
Amen, dude. You have no idea how many of us agree with that idea!
BTW, didn’t ask any question for me to answer (that comment has no question and no question mark), but you did state your curiosity regarding “what would happen if…” which I addressed.
pk ammo #215, so true, read my post #189.
So your objections have nothing to do with the merits of their argument but rather how a minority of them choose to present themselves?
Thats nice.
Fair enough, but you did seem to engage me.
And I appreciate your comments.
No. Try to understand this. There is definitely something inherent in the concept of marriage. However, there is really nothing inherent in the way the state is capable of defining it.
No. I don’t care what you oppose or support.
Don’t talk down to me corkie. We are having civil debate I am trying to figure out where you stand and this is annoying.
And nobody wants to touch my argument that marriage is already damaged by the treatment it’s been given so far.
That’s usually how it goes.
If the homosexual community would stop flaunting their sexuality in displays that are disgusting, they would have a better chance of acceptance. Now they appear to be extremely perverted and social deviates to the average person.
Indeed, LN - to their alarm they found out the old chestnut “As CA goes, so goes the nation” is no longer operative. It’s vice versa, CA followed the nation’s lead in refusing to un-define marriage.
Another upcoming battle will be stopping Obama from undoing the “Defense of Marriage Act”, as he has threatened.
The Clintons suffered major long-lasting political damage in their folly of trying to “gay up” the military as their priority upon taking office. I don’t know if Obama’s bright enough to avoid a like immediate crash and burn.
Sorry. I didn’t type it with a condescending tone. I should have stated, “This distinction is important.”
You know that I respect your analysis, honesty, and comedy.
My apologies, then.
Actually, I do realize that, and agree with you. As happens to every group, even conservatives, a few outliers are used by the opposition to define the majority. How many times do you think David Duke or the KKK has been thrown in our faces? But that still doesn’t change the facts in California, and the fact is, that more than a handful of gays are involved in the civil unrest/disobedience/disruption. Based only on what evidence I’ve seen, which admittedly is slight, the majority of California gays appear to be involved, and those of you with cooler head make a very small minority.
Purplepeep, I think Obama will go one of two ways: either he’s popular enough with previous non-voters to do no wrong no matter what happens, and we’re doomed to eight years with him; OR, it’ll be just like Jimmy Carter’s era and he’ll crash and burn well before he ever gets to undoing DOMA.
For the record…most people in the military don’t give a rip if you’re gay (as long as you don’t flaunt it). If you do your job and do it well, they don’t care. I don’t think it’s going to kill us to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly. It hasn’t done Israel any harm.
Again? How many times does it have to be voted down before You People understand, the majority doesn’t want it. (And by You People I mean liberals)
Why do You People keep lying about Gay Marriage in California to begin with? And by lying I mean consciously omitting the fact that the only reason why there was a brief period of gay marriage in California is because some judge overruled the will of the people and invalidated a previous vote.
As for chapoutier’s silly example of doing away with hetrosexual marriage as, that’s a weak and meaningless argument and actually far off the point. This would be more appropriate and to the point:
What if the Electoral College voted for McCaine instead of Obama because a minority of the people wanted McCaine as president and it just wouldn’t be fair to ignore them?
Well, you might want to check my response to one of your last comment on the Gates’ thread. I kinda treated you like a witness I was crossing - all in good fun of course.
Corki -
would you mind telling me why i’m hypocritical?
Well, I was concentrating on the other part of the post, but I think I covered this much earlier, maybe around 190-198 somewhere and I hate to repeat myself. Unless I said something really profound, of course…..
So then, let me repeat my profundity. If you accept the right of the state to recognize and reward marriage, then you must also recognize the state’s right to set the limits on that right.
What’s the contxt? Damaged by what? If you mean by people mindlessly entering into it and then bailing, you are right. If I had my druthers there would be at least a year between thhe marriage license and the marriage itself (exception in the case of a pregnancy). During that time some form of prep/counseling would be mandatory. Divorce should be just as difficult, except in cases of spousal abuse. Divorce should be messy to discourage people from repeating bad choices.
Anywhooo, that’s just my thinkin’.
I’m, what people would conceder a normal heterosexual male. I see the world with my unique perspective. I think our culture would be much better off if they would adopt my social moral views. I know it will never happen so I keep much of what I am, to myself , family and close friends. I would advise the homosexual community do the same.
I’ll take a swing at this too. Marriage has been damaged by a variety of things. on the secular side are no fault divorce laws, vegas style wedding factories and too many folks believing the idea that marriage is just about being in love with someone. on the moral side are the churches that are failing to teach youngsters what marriage really is and why God hates divorce, if they did the divorce rates might be farther apart twixt religious and non-religious folk.
all that to say, it’s folly to assume that because the concept of marriage is currently damaged that we can make things better by changing the definition of it allowing it to stray further from its origins.
Perhaps now is a good time for some introspection.
The libertarian side of me would argue that the best solution would be for the state to just get out of the business altogether, and leave it to the churches where it belonged in the first place. As with everything else, when they stick their noses in they just foul everything up.
In other words, you have no idea.
Do you think that I think it by accident?
Obama may be smart enough to have learned from other’s past, AniMEL, I dunno. As you know, you gotta pick the right hill that you “would be willing to die for”. I’m figuring “Jimmy Carter” with Obama, but time and luck might work on Obama’s side enough to carry him a good ways.
Though, he did put off “don’t ask, don’t tell” it seems for at least a year. He may be savvy enough to know that things like that and SSM just aren’t the biggest worries on most folk’s minds.
I think most everybody doesn’t care what people do in private. I put the need for “homosexual talk” in the same category as high school boy’s “locker-room talk”, both are annoying and tedious to suffer through.
If it’s not by accident then please share.
No, your response there was deserved.
Yeah, maybe they can all sit around a campfire someday soon and the LGBTQ community can apologize for the hurt and pain it has caused him.
Oh wait. That’s not going to happen. Why is he apologizing again?
Careful there, PKAmmoTroop. You’re using logic and you know what that does to the liberals.
The fact is, the people keep voting for traditional marriage and liberal CA courts keep invalidating the will of the people.
Actually, no court has the power to invalidate any section of the constitution because, the courts get their power from the constitution. If they can invalidate the section added by Prop 8, then they can invalidate the section that limits the power of the judiciary.
DUH! No court has the power to amend the constitution!
What does it take to get that simple point across to the moronic liberals?
I would advise them read the Constitution.
This maybe far out but what makes guys go gay?? I used to think they were all mini-endowed and were ashamed to be seen naked with women so they probably would have better luck with other men who are similar built. I know this sounds innane but I just can’t understand what enjoyment anal sex would do for anyone knowing what comes out of an arse daily.
Yup, it’s too far out for me, Gary.
He has only himself to blame. He should not have resigned. He should have had the courage to stand up to bullies. Americans are dying around to world to protect freedom and a few cowards cannot stand up to some hate emails. Shame on you. 40 years ago, American men would have put down these homosexuals. Shame, Shame, Shame.
The most prominent opinion for the cause of male homosexuality, OUTSIDE THE GAY COMMUNITY , is the lack of bonding between the father and the son. When the son reaches sexual maturity he will look for the missing piece in his life, which will then be another sexually mature male.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m getting sick and tired of these riots of one kind or another. The Illegals marching and screeching for rights. Code Pink acting like pink pigs squeeling at everyone. People riot over losing a ball game, they riot because they won. Now homosexuals running amok because they can’t “Marry”. Anyone with a brain can see they are doing it to push Christians, and anyone with morals out of shape. It’s not for their rights. They have the rights with civil unions.
They aren’t helping their cause. They are making people hate them!!!
People are about to the breaking point. Tired of being pushed around by everyone and his brother. These are hard times for everyone, no time for bullies!!!!!
chap - very disingenuous argument. The only way that would equate was if:
Homosexual marriage had been the norm for eons.
A ballot measure had been passed stating the definition of marriage being only two men or two women was to continue to be the only recognizable marriage.
Then the court OVERRULED the will of the people and by judicial FIAT redefined marriage to include heterosexuals.
Then within a few short months the people voted to AMMEND the constitution to return things to homosexual marriage only that was only changed because of judicial fiat.
THEN your lame argument would hold.
Oh, goody!
The Emu’s back!
Owo
V
Red State Skeptic wrote-Ridiculous. None of those rights has been taken away. People have a freedom NOT to associate with those whose of speech, expression and association they disapprove, and that’s all that has happened here.
The sueing of churches to hold commitment ceremonies even when it goes against sincerely held church doctrines and beliefs (hint-freedom of religious expression has been compromised)
The publishing of only supporters of Prop 8 and not being equal in publishing the names of supporters of anti-prop 8 (hint-freedom of speech has been compromised)
Look at eHarmony and those of us that use that service because of its Christian values and sueing a Christian photographer to shoot a commitant ceremony when it goes against her values(hint-freedom of association has been compromised)
These are just a few examples, there are lots more on the ADF and Focus on the Family websites.
There is more physical attacks against Christians coming from the gaynazis in the last 20 years than there has been coming from evangelical Christians. The worse that has happened are Christians speaking out verbally and not as an organized group using violence to achieve change.
The sad thing is that I forsee Christian churches being sued more frequently by gaynazis to accomodate them or the churches will be forced to either compromise their biblical message or shut down.
GSP
“This is Sparta!”
Joy,
This is totally irrelevant if your argument is that marriage is not a right, but rather a construct of the state, which is what has been posited by some here.
As for the rest of your post, I never said one thing about the tactics of the pro-gay marriage crowd or the validity or invalidity of the constitutional amendment. I think gay marriage should be allowed. I also think that the legitimate law of the and right now in Cali is that it is not allowed.
Chap - My post was pointing out that your argument wasn’t valid because you removed all context from the argument.
Coward.
Send_Me - I agree. I have little respect for those who so quickly capitulate to thugs. I can’t get over how many apologize for contributing and voting their conscience and moral principles.
Only if you are existentialist…
This is precisely how America would have to fall to those that would destroy it..to have so little courage that their principles mean nothing.
The side that will win in a debate will be the side that is the most obstinate. You do not want to be the butt-kisser as such if you want your point of view to be heard.
eharmony et al could have stood up for doing the right thing, instead they ran when the queers went nuts. They could have set up legal funds to cover court costs. They deserve to get creamed, just as Smith and Wesson deserved to have their products boycotted when they signed that legal agreement with the 1st Clinton Administration designed to circumvent Congress and the courts on gun control.
I feel no pity
Maybe y’all should join forces with this guy.
If y’all haven’t already.
Point out one post on this website that uses Christianity to justify the murder of gay folks. Just one.
Your link is completely irrelevant to this discussion, just like your comment.
Your smug superiority is really quite charming. No, no, really. It is.
I actually hope and pray that they do find a genetic basis for homosexuality. Because ten minutes later there will be an in-home test kit (similar to the in-home paternity test kit I saw in Walgreen’s recently).
Ten minutes after that, the Right will have to decide if they hate abortion more than homosexuality; I predict a land-office business at abortion clinics. Then the Left will have to decide how much pro-choice it really wants as gay-gene carriers start getting abortions as a eugenics measure.
I’m curious who it is you pray to for an increase in deaths of the unborn?
What the anti-Prop 8 people are thinking….
It’s really a shame the Prop. 8 vote couldn’t have been by Caucus rather than that sneaky “secret ballot”. We could have had 100% voting against it.
The caucus system worked great for Obama!
This is just like some very nice countries I never want to visit. “Vote our way, or else” as said by the scary man with the AK-47.
These rocket scientists just forgot to tell everyone what would happen if they didn’t win!
BRAVO!
That is truly an original thought.
I think he was being ironic.
Research has tried for over forty years to find a genetic link to homosexuality. The longer the period of investigation the less likely the link will be found. YOU ARE STATISTICALLY RUNNING OUT OF TIME BOYS AND GIRLS.
This is why it’s sooooo important to the gay community to discover a constitutional right to marriage now.
IF THERE IS NO GENETIC PROOF THAN THEY HAVE NO SPECIAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
A difference of degree. Not of kind.
Apparently, this is the future of the GOP.
No superiority implied. I didn’t make any sort of judgment on whether this was right or not.
Just pointing out who it is this attitude shares similarities with.
Decide for yourself if that’s who you want to hang out with.
WHAT?
READ THAT LINK AGAIN SPORT
GEEEESSS!!!
Apparently? It is early in the morning. Wake up first.
Why are the opponents of Prop 8 not targeting mosques and Muslims? Why only Christians?
http://www.nlapw-sarasota.com/more%20images/chickens-1.jpg
Sixdegrees, that link is one of the reasons most of us OPPOSE shiria law, because of its treatment of gays. “Death is to good for them they should be publicly flogged and tortured??” That kind of backward hate is why I oppose the religon of peices. Let gays do whatever they want, just don’t shove thier beliefs in my face and try to FORCE me to change things so they can play husband and wife.
MERMI Tv has some real gems. Rape as a justified resistance tactic?
Well, that’s a new idea. Rape as a social modifier.
animel, your analysis of israel allowing gays not harming their military needs a rethink. they just lost their first skirmish with arabs since their inception in 2006, and ohlmert is being run out on a rail. bb will instill military discipline, and israel will again dominate the area.
SDN wrote:
How interesting you should mention that, because when false alarms went off in the mid-nineties saying that a gay gene discovery was around the corner, Hollywood stepped in to throw cold water on the idea of aborting gay fetuses. The Twilight of the Golds, a 1997 made-for-cable movie starring Garry Marshall (producer of Happy Days and sister of Laverne & Shirley’s Penny Marshall), Faye Dunaway, Jennifer Beals (Flashdance, The L Word) and Brendan Fraser, is described by a IMDB member thusly:
I haven’t seen the movie, but I know how it ended. The screenplay was written by Jonathan Tolins, who has written seven episodes of HBO’s Queer as Folk series and whose sole acting credit is “Gay Quarterback” in a 2003 movie called Totally Sexy Loser. If the gay fetus had been sucked into a sink, Tolins would never have worked again.
I would put a link to the Democrat future, but there’s two problems 1) The Democrats are already pretty much there right now and 2) it would be inappropriate to link to NAMBLA from here.