Sunday, December 14, 2008

When does Private become Public?

Steve Lopez, Dear Gentle Reader(s), is an excellent columnist for the Los Angeles Times, and today he deals with the ramifications of Prop 8 as felt by a woman caught in the moral conundrum du jour.

It seems Margie Christoffersen, at the behest of her Mormon church, donated $100 to support Proposition 8, which is an attempt to remove the right to marry for “same-sex” couples from the state constitution.  In the aftermath of the passage of the proposition, Christoffersen’s donation became public knowledge.

Mayhem ensued at her workplace, a very popular restaurant within the gay community of L.A.

Christoffersen is distraught.  Business is down.

One of her gay employees defends her on the basis that the check was a personal one and that the restaurant shouldn’t be targeted.  “You can express yourself as a citizen.  Not everyone has to believe the same things.”


On the other hand, Christoffersen has been working at the restaurant for over twenty years; it was founded by her mother.  Money flows into Christoffersen’s checkbook directly from the restaurant, which has a large gay clientele.

Is it then to be understood that we gays must willingly contribute to a checkbook which will, in turn, be used to support policies which discriminate against us? 

No thanks.

Christoffersen’s “private” donation became public knowledge.  She should’ve had the foresight to anticipate that her donation might come back to cause just as much discomfort to herself as it might to her loyal customers.

Christoffersen sheep-like followed the dictates of her religious leaders; no thought, just obedience. 

Perhaps it’s time she did a little soul searching and questioning of certain practices of the Mormon church. 

Perhaps it’s time she thought about the wisdom of learning to

Trust, but verify.

(By the way, when “The Soloist” opens in the spring, remember that the movie was inspired by columns written by Steve Lopez.)

Sphere: Related Content

1 comment:

  1. Basically what Ms. Christoffersen is saying here is that gay Californians don't deserve the right to marry, but they *do* deserve the right to spend money at her restaurant?

    No wonder she's singing a different tune now that SHE's the one who stands to lose something.

    Read more: Tacos, with a side of bigotry


The courage of your conviction virtually demands your name, if we don't know you.