Theater Director Quits Amid Gay-Rights Anger

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The artistic director at California's largest nonprofit musical theater company resigned Wednesday amid protests over his donation to a campaign to ban gay marriage in the state.

Scott Eckern stepped down from his job at the California Musical Theater in Sacramento after some gay activists called for a theater boycott.

He said he is leaving "after prayerful consideration to protect the organization and to help the healing in the local theatergoing and creative community."

Eckern said he "chose to act upon my belief that the traditional definition of marriage should be preserved" but had no idea his contribution would generate such controversy. He said his sister is a lesbian in a domestic partnership, which he understands to carry the same legal rights as marriage.

The boycott calls _ led by artists including "Hairspray" composer Marc Shaiman _ began after activists learned Eckern contributed $1,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign. Last week, voters approved Proposition 8, which changes the constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

Lisa West, regional spokeswoman for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said Eckern is a member "in very good standing" and the Mormon church supports his decision to resign.

Fred Karger, the founder of Californians Against Hate, which was created to publicize donors to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign, said he was not involved in the theater boycott effort and was saddened that Eckern resigned.

"That's not good news, but there's going to be a lot of fallout from this (gay marriage ban)," Karger said. "Of course, a lot of lives were ruined on the other side."

He said his Web site has received thousands of visits from those tracking Yes on 8 contributors.

Ron Prentice, chairman of the Yes on 8 campaign, issued a statement criticizing gay marriage supporters who "cherish tolerance and civil rights (but) are unabashedly trampling on the rights of others."

The theater company, Sacramento's oldest arts organization, said it is not involved in political issues but doesn't interfere with employees' rights to express their views. The company issued a statement thanking Eckern for his 25 years of service.

Eckern was the company's chief operating officer and its artistic director since 2002. The company produces Sacramento's annual Music Circus and plays at Broadway Sacramento and the newly opened Cosmopolitan Cabaret.

Comments

[blowhard]

He deserves to lose his job. How can you direct people whose rights you do not respect?

[Jinxykb]

I completely approve of the gay and lesbian community choosing to boycott businesses run by people who chose to fund Prop 8. In 2008 this his how an equal rights movement takes a stand.

[KevinH]

yeah ... and Gay marriage supporters pushing around an old lady outside of a church (caught on tape) is all in good fun too! A bunch of liberal thugs!

That is the problem with many liberals, you take your boycots too far and you don't care who gets hurt in the process. PINK??

[diablorobotico]

Link, please, or as the kids say: it didn't happen.

[Eric8869]

She walked into the middle of the gay protest spouting homophobia. She ASKED for a response.

It didn't hear all this hand wringing when the McCain Palin rallies had people screaming "Kill him!" and "terrorist"! about Obama.

The rallies were full of racism and nastiness.

You can't have rules for us you don't have for your own people....­.period.

One old lady being harassed is not the same as thousands losing their civil rights.

Don't try to play the victim

[diablorobotico]

On top of your other inaccuracies, the protest was outside PALM SPRINGS CITY HALL, not a church!

If it's possible to fight Prop 8 or its opponents without lies, I'd like to see that happen!

[bjulian]

If you think that we are going to take any more crap lying down, then you are very mistaken. Enough is enough...i­ts time that we FIGHT for our rights! Just who do you think you are to trample on our rights???
We are here, We are queer and we are not about to run away, Pink or any other color!!!!

[Eric8869]

If this man had been giving money to a white supremicist orgnanization there would not be this level of sympathy for him.

It is ironic that this theatre company was producing HAIRSPRAY the musical. A theatre piece against discrimination by composer and lyricist who are openly gay. Based on a movie by an openly gay man and this dude has the NERVE to vote against gay rights.

He still doesn't get it. He keeps saying he's sorry he offended. Never once mentioning that he helped put discriminatory policy in place. AND he has a lesbian sister.

Shame on him - he earned this.

[johnnynyc]

Actually he was giving money in support of a proposition being voted on by the citizens of California. It's a proposition I opposed.

You really believe he should be fired for expressing his political opinion?

What next?

Employment based on political affiliation?

[GG1983]

He was not fired for what he said. He was fired (or resigned whatever) because of his financial support of a legislative agenda designed specifically to eliminate the civil and constitutional rights of the people who supported his business. Those people, whose rights he believed it was ok to trample on, therefore exercised their rights to take their business elsewhere. Boycotts work.

[ZenBastard]

He wasn't fired johnny, he resigned of his own free will.

Eckern has worked in theater for many years, plus he says he has a sister that is a lesbian. How did he think people were going to react to his support for Prop 8?

It's called don't bite the hand that feeds you.......

[diablorobotico]

He wasn't fired. He resigned because of the shame he brought upon himself and his employers. If he had not chosen to publicly support stripping civil rights away from his own sister and from countless others with whom he works and who support his theatre, he would have had nothing to be ashamed of.

What's next? Don't make the choice to be a bigot. Then everybody's happy and there is no next.

[Eric8869]

I have read all your posts on here. You are either a gay republican or pretending to be gay.

If you're a gay republican - you should know better.

[Agnim]

The sexually confused lunatics have been unwittingly spared the asylum; and now they run wild to disrupt law and order in the society.
What we have are situations where some unfortunate individuals have a birth/behavioral defect. They are then deluded into thinking that the defect is a legitimate lifestyle, when even the most cursory scientific look at the long history of mankind clearly shows an unnatural and abnormal tendency/behavior.

[Eric8869]

Being gay or lesbian is not behavioral. Even if I'm paralyzed from the wasit down - i will still be gay. Even if I'm put in a position where I don't interact with someone of the same sex. I am still gay... period. It is not a choice.

Being gay is genetic.

The only thin unnatural or abnormal is the religious and right wing obsession with denying gay rights.

[Jinxykb]

Eric is right. I'm straight and I totally think men suck and women are by far superior. By choice I would be a lesbian, but alas, no luck. My heart belongs to men, like it or not.

[PartyPartyParty]

Wow: you're being a little harsh on the Mormon Church, aren't you?

[PartyPartyParty]

NEWS FLASH!!!!

The traditional definition of marriage is two people standing together, before their community, to announce that they are committed to each other for life.

It wasn't until the Council of Trent declared that the ceremony had to be performed in a church by a church official that religion or civil law had anything to do with marriage.

[ZellaBee]

I think it's ridiculous that this guy had to resign. Although I was against Prop 8, I feel people have a right to their opinions and to vote whatever way they want and support whatever they want without it affecting their work. He isn't running for an elected office or anything.

[PartyPartyParty]

I think being a musical theater manager who doesn't support gay rights is a very precarious position to put one's self in.

[diablorobotico]

He did not have to resign, he chose to. He seems to have chosen to, at least in part, because his public support of bigotry was hurting his employer's business and negatively impacting his own career.

Nobody would think twice about how insanely wrong it would be for a man to support Nazism when his customers and vendors were Jewish. Or another man to support the KKK when his business is all about African-Americans. Mr. Eckern's prosperity came about entirely because of the money generated by the people he betrayed.

This man's own sister had her civil rights stripped away by the hatred this man supported. I can't begin to explain what makes a person do something as horrible as that, but losing his customer base -- and, thus, his career -- is a completely logical outcome of his completely irrational choice.

[Eric8869]

He made his statement and the community made theirs. It is all freedom of speech.

[johnnynyc]

This is another good argument for government to get out of the marriage business.

Leave it to the religions where it belongs.

How many competent people, on both sides of the issue, losing their jobs because of a political or religious belief is it going to take?

[diablorobotico]

Marriage is the government's business. It's a civil contract and a fundamental civil right.

Weddings are the religions' business. It is their choice of whether or not to recognize a civil contract with a religious ceremony.

Marriage will always be a civil issue. Religions are always free to not wed people based on their divorce status, their religious status, or even their gender status. But they don't get to dictate fundamental civil rights. They don't get to decide who gets married.

No matter how much some religious leaders lie, how much they whine, and how much they scream to the contrary, our civil rights are not dictated by any church. They can continue to ignore the marriages they don't like and everyone else can continue to have weddings -- or not, since you can be married without a wedding -- as they see fit.

[johnnynyc]

Marriage is a sacrament to the religious.

Most, if not all, people who are anti-gay marriage are because of religious beliefs. They'll even quote the Bible at you.

Consequently they are trying to codify their religious beliefs into law.

The government would do better to get it's nose out of religion and allow any two adults to make a contract between themselves.

[harriettubman]

I wouldn't have resigned. Is anyone else sick and tired of the gay marriage issue? They're picketing churches, theaters and anyone who will listen. What is that going to solve?

Last week, the public was given the wrong stats for who voted against it. More white evangelicals voted against it than black folks. Blacks, Latinos, Mormons, you name it, voted against it. That's the fabric of CA!!!!

No one can tell me there isn't a distinction between a man and woman vs a same sex couple. We're different. Change it to "domestic partnership" and get this law passed. We have other issues to concentrate on as a nation.

[goodgravy]

interesting how a person with the handle "harrietttubman" would be against the rights of others. i'm just saying.

also, they guy wasn't forced to resign. the theatre company made it perfectly clear that a person's political position would in no way preclude them from working. it was his choice to give the $ and, presumably, he was knowledgeable enough to know that his actions may have consequences.

[Eric8869]

She lists homophobic things on all the gay stories on the Huffington post.

She dishonors the memory of harriett tubman.

Coretta Scott King was for the civil rights of gay people.

[Eric8869]

Just so you know - this harriettubman person also was posting things about quarantining all gay people who have AIDS. So you know the level of sympathy and intelligence she has.

[harriettubman]

Why is it that when someone doesn't agree with gays taking the word "Marriage" hostage they're called a homophobe or considered against gay rights?

You're talking to the wrong person when it comes to civil rights for other people. My only problem with gay anything is the word "marriage". I've supported domestic partnership since gay people said they wanted it back in the 80s, when it wasn't popular to do so and still do. It affords the gay community legally binding rights as a married heterosexual couple.

My handle could've been George Washington and I would feel the same way.

[diablorobotico]

There isn't a distinction between a same-sex and a discordant-sex couple. Not one. Why are you convinced they're different?

What will the free and open expression of dissent and protest solve? Hang around for a little bit and you'll find out.

I do agree with one point, however: let's move on. As soon as the bigots grow up, stop hating and mind their own business, we'll finally have the equality that's going to come anyway and this issue can go away. The sooner we have marriage equality, the happier everyone will be.

Until then, we have absolutely nothing more important to concentrate on as a nation than making sure that all of our citizens are equal. Not one thing. Without that, the rest is meaningless.

[florestanchi]

No one would tell you there's no distinction between same and opposite sex couples, but that's not the point. No one would tell you there's no distinction between Caucasians and non-Caucasians, either. I believe everyone agrees that withholding rights from certain individuals based upon racial distinctions is capricious and immoral. Your gut tells you the same judgment does not apply to discrimination in this case, but the fact that his particular issue doesn't matter to you is hardly satisfactory evidence that it doesn't matter.

A majority of voters California and several other states decided to force the gay marriage issue when they altered their Constitutions to forbid it. I do not begrudge gay men and women the right to fight for their rights now that they have been rescinded. You're right that "we have other issues to concentrate on as a nation," but to suggest that gay men and women should accept being targets of discrimination for the greater glory of the nation seems nothing short of selfish to me.

[harriettubman]

Look, you're picking at apples and oranges now. Everybody involved are human beings. However, a relationship between a man and woman are different than a relationship between same sex couples and many of us do not want the word "marriage" taken away. Can you think of another distinctive word? Domestic partnership is what gay couples have. I have no problem making it legal and binding.

A heterosexual couple living together are considered boyfriend/­girlfriend­. If they live together a certain number of years, it's called common law marriage, which is still not a popular arrangement.

I never suggested gay people should be targets of discrimination. What discrimination do they face? Dogs? Hoses? Jim Crow? Lynchings? Can't eat at the lunch counter? Can't sit in the front of the bus? Living in a country where they have the freedom to live with their partner without being stoned?

I'm all for gay partners having legal rights but don't infringe on heterosexual couples who consider the word "marriage" sacred.

[Eric8869]

Domestic partnerships don't have the same rights as marriage so that point is moot - no matter how many times you post it on this or any other gay marriage story.

[LiberalBuzz]

Good riddance. Hope he stays unemployed for the rest of his life.

[Riker]

A theatre's artistic director who gives money to keep people from pursuing their right to happiness should resign. He has no authority as a presenter of works that celebrates our right to freedom of expression (which is what all good theatre is) if he wants to deny those very rights to his fellow citizens. But this goes beyond Prop. 8; this is Stonewall 2, Prop 8 is just a catalyst. Gay people are fed up with religious/right wing heterosexual fascism when it comes to who should have equal rights in this country. For those calling on gay people to be nice and just accept whatever little "tolerances" are tossed our way, you're in for a shocking awakening. Welcome to the revolution.

[phredralf]

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.­"

[drzoon]

this whole thing is getting stupid....

[diablorobotico]

Nope, this whole thing is getting started.

It's a shame that anybody has to suffer because of the Mormon Church's hate. I wish nobody had to, but I especially wish that the LGBT community didn't have to. The Mormon Church could have stayed in Utah and left the California Constitution alone, but they didn't.

Next time, maybe, they'll have learned the cost of sowing hatred and keep their hate to themselves.

[FOM]

I think losing on Prop 8 might turn out to be a good thing. Look at how people nationwide are mobilizing. Boycotts are happening all over the country. Gays are EVERYWHERE and in every walk of life. When they finally get coordinated on this, it's going to be huge. This is going to turn into a tidal wave and it's going to be bigger than anyone ever imagined. When this is over, same sex marriage will be legal everywhere. Good.

[quadman]

Apparently you have no clue that there are over 770,000 LDS in California.

[Eric8869]

When you lose your civil rights I'll tell you that you're stupid. Until then - shut up.

[sdskelton03]

Nobody is forcing anyone's religion onto anyone else. There are no crazy mormons forcing anyone to go to temple, make donations, pray a certain way ect..

There is also a biblical prohibition against marrying one's child. Is it then a "religious imposition" that society forbids marrying one's child?

People voting based off of their values is not an impostition of religion. The logical extension would then be that any position taken by a particular religion could never be implemented by society. No prohibition of murder could be allowed, no resting one day a week could be allowed, the state could not prohibit stealing or testifying falsely.

I am terribly sorry that so many people are so upset about this. The answer, however, is not mob-like intimidation tactics or running to the courts. The answer is to change the hearts and minds of those who disagree with you.

Btw: Calling them all a bunch of bigots isn't helping any.

[Jsolar]

Wrong. By using their religious (and tax-exempt) funds, they have most certainly imposed their religion onto a civil matter. And your "logical extension" is absurd as well. We have civil laws based on many traditions. Preventing certain groups from pushing to write discrimination into law is absolutely not a "slippery slope" to allowing murder and theft.

As for winning hearts and minds, that's great in a perfect world. But there comes a point when you can't say "please, would you kindly give me my civil rights?" anymore. You have to get angry and make noise and let the world know what's happening. And if you have to call a bigot a bigot, so be it. Sometimes the truth hurts.

[sdskelton03]

We have civil based on many traditions, one of them is religion. Religious people have the same rights you do to express their opinions. Free speech is free speech, and it is for everyone.

I wasn't making a slippery slope argument. I was just using the same logic as the other posters. Is it absurd, yes. But it is equally absurd as what is being used.

Same-sex marriage is not a civil right. If we would like it to be, (and I don't feel strongly one way or the other) we can make it so. The constitution lays out very clearly how we do that.

[timberdoodle]

People don't seem to get the idea of a constitution is to protect the minorities from being discriminated against by the majority. This amendment to the constitution flies in the face of what a constitution is all about. It's a shame as it once again shows the world that America isn't ready to emerge into the 21st Century.

Once again the holier than thou Jesus freaks like Dobson and Perkins get support from the uninformed.

[sdskelton03]

Although the prevention of majority tyranny is a purpose of the constitution, the greater purpose of the constitution is to limit government.

[GG1983]

Where is that in the constitution?

[TimetoIMPEACH]

I've been having an unusual amount of contact with Mormons via blogs lately, and can't help but wonder: How many Mormon men are "protesting too much"? And how many Mormon women are afraid that their "sealed for eternity" husbands are closet homosexuals who might reveal the sham if the negative pressure on gays is reduced? Why else would they be so afraid to live and let live?

Just askin'.

[Eric8869]

Since when are Mormons concerned with marriage being between one man and one woman. They used to be for one may and several women. (some still are)

A religion started by "visions" from some man named Joseph Smith.

insane