Interesting protest method

[thedeparted]

A Colorado student faced misdemeanor charges on Wednesday for flinging glitter toward Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney in an increasingly frequent protest act some commentators say should be subject to prosecution.

The practice of "glitter bombing" has mainly been the domain of gay rights activists targeting Republican politicians and other public figures who oppose same-sex marriage.

But University of Colorado Boulder student Peter Smith, 20, told Reuters he threw glitter at Romney after the candidate's speech in Colorado on Tuesday to protest against his "general political philosophy," and not only his stance on gay marriage.

A CNN video of the incident shows Romney shaking hands with supporters in an auditorium when the glitter is thrown at him and Secret Service agents usher him away.

Smith was escorted out by other agents and local authorities, Secret Service spokesman George Ogilvie said.

Denver authorities detained Smith for questioning on Tuesday night, and he was cited on misdemeanor charges of creating a disturbance, throwing a missile and an unlawful act on school property, Denver Police spokesman Sonny Jackson said.

Smith, who faces up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine if convicted, said he has no regrets about his protest.

Republican presidential contenders Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have all been targeted with glitter, although authorities could not immediately say if anyone had previously been charged over the glitter-throwing.

When former Republican candidate Tim Pawlenty was struck with glitter in June 2011, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, a Republican, argued in an appearance on cable network Fox Business that "people ought to be arrested" for throwing glitter, which he called "an assault."

Huckabee added, "You've got to draw the line."

Ogilvie would not say if the Secret Service sees glitter bombing as a pressing problem. "We want to make sure everything is a safe and secure environment," he said.

But Smith said agents talked to him about his protest action. "They just mentioned this act was an issue that they've been trying to deal with more and more," he said.


Can't believe he could get possible jail time. I can't believe people in this day and age are against same sex marriage

[CraeSC111]

Getting jail time for that is kinda stupid but why do it in the first place. And I'm not against gay marriage but in response to your comment: I can't believe how many people today are ignorant of the Judeo-Christian roots of our laws and morals which is against homosexuality. Not necessarily you but people in general

[Trunks]

I heard about this a couple weeks ago, it was before Romney was going to give a speech, he actually made jokes about it and said "he liked the new look" but you could tell he was pissed lol.

[Muffincat]

Getting jail time for that is kinda stupid but why do it in the first place. And I'm not against gay marriage but in response to your comment: I can't believe how many people today are ignorant of the Judeo-Christian roots of our laws and morals which is against homosexuality. Not necessarily you but people in general

So? Above all, we're supposed to be a secular nation. And homosexual marriage is becoming more and more accepted, especially among the younger generation. It's the same as when interracial marriage was a big deal... Having "Christian roots" shouldn't, theoretically, mean anything, especially if the belief is oppressing a large segment of the population for pretty much no reason. Besides, Christians are supposed to love and tolerate everyone, aren't they? @_@

[Mizel]

So? Above all, we're supposed to be a secular nation. And homosexual marriage is becoming more and more accepted, especially among the younger generation. It's the same as when interracial marriage was a big deal... Having "Christian roots" shouldn't, theoretically, mean anything, especially if the belief is oppressing a large segment of the population for pretty much no reason. Besides, Christians are supposed to love and tolerate everyone, aren't they? @_@

Lol Supposed to being the key words here. The key words that seem to be used only in convenience.

But, religion is very strange in that sense…. I mean, if “God” put us here surely he knew some people would be homosexual. And if he loves everyone, you’d think that that would literally, include everyone. What I always find amusing about religion is that it was *created* to not only make people healthier (which is why some religions don’t allow certain foods) but to give people a reason to be kind and have good morals and to scare them away from doing bad things. It seems to me that religion has done more bad by spreading closed mindedness, lies and hatred which leads to unfair judgment and above all else, war. It sucks that we can’t take every close minded person, who bases their beliefs off a book or what other people tell them and don’t decide for themselves, and send them somewhere on their own away from everyone else. I think it about it every day, and it makes me really sad, that we all only get to live once and to think that some people can’t live their lives to the fullest because people can’t accept them for who they are. To think that some people are absolutely miserable because of the thoughts and actions of others, that they feel like they cant be themselves or are scared to be or know that they will never have the life they want and deserve, it really does kill me. Being punished and not being able to have the same basic rights as everyone else just because you born gay, which you certainly can’t change, is the equivalent of not letting someone get married (or whatever) because you were born deformed or with a disease…. Apparently humans as a whole have learned absolutely nothing from the incident with the Native Americans, from Hitler, from slavery, from the womens rights movements or anything else…. Which is exactly why (like you said thedeparted) I also can’t believe in this day and age, through everything we have seen happen, that there is closed mindedness towards homosexuality or anything else really.

Anyways! Enough of that :P As for the idiot that “glitter bombed”. First and foremost… I blame Twilight :) But no really, if you’re going to be an idiot and do something like that, then expect to be reprimanded. I mean c’mon people, don’t be fkn idiots. I certainly don’t think he deserves up to six months in jail, but some sort of punishment was obviously expected. You know why protestors occasionally get beat, pepper sprayed, etc…. because of jackasses like that that can’t just do a civil protest… glitter your sign, yourself, hell throw glitter into the air. But not directly at someone. it’s not going to help the cause *and* it just gives you and every other protestor a bad name. >_<

[CraeSC111]

Well in Christian beliefs God created humans with free will, so people are able to do things against gods will or sin as its called. Various sins are layed out in the Bible including homosexuality, murder, stealing and all your basic stuff. And nowhere in the Bible does it actually say God hates homosexuals. In Christian beliefs you should not treat people unfairly, but prevent the sins from being comited, ie same sex marriage. Think of it (I'm using extreme examples here to best outline what I'm talking about) as if it was stopping murder. Just like you shouldn't allow people to kill one another or steal by Christian beliefs homosexual acts should not be allowed. Its not that you are discriminating against people because they are homosexuals its that you are trying to stop them from doing something immoral.

You'll often rind that a lot of acts of discrimination are not really complying with Christian teachings because people will often misunderstand what they are being told. I believe it also points this out in the Bible. And while a good deal of conflict is caused by religion imagine what the world would be like with the moral standards set by the Bible. And that's another thing to argue about is deviation from morals. If we deviate from our base standards where will the deviation stop? With adultery technically not being illegal and acceptance of homosexuality what else could change?
Anyway to clarify I am not against sane sex marriage I just thought I'd throw out some of the opposing view

[Mizel]

Well in Christian beliefs God created humans with free will, so people are able to do things against gods will or sin as its called. Various sins are layed out in the Bible including homosexuality, murder, stealing and all your basic stuff. And nowhere in the Bible does it actually say God hates homosexuals. In Christian beliefs you should not treat people unfairly, but prevent the sins from being comited, ie same sex marriage. Think of it (I'm using extreme examples here to best outline what I'm talking about) as if it was stopping murder. Just like you shouldn't allow people to kill one another or steal by Christian beliefs homosexual acts should not be allowed. Its not that you are discriminating against people because they are homosexuals its that you are trying to stop them from doing something immoral.

You'll often rind that a lot of acts of discrimination are not really complying with Christian teachings because people will often misunderstand what they are being told. I believe it also points this out in the Bible. And while a good deal of conflict is caused by religion imagine what the world would be like with the moral standards set by the Bible. And that's another thing to argue about is deviation from morals. If we deviate from our base standards where will the deviation stop? With adultery technically not being illegal and acceptance of homosexuality what else could change?
Anyway to clarify I am not against sane sex marriage I just thought I'd throw out some of the opposing view

I totally see what your saying. It just sucks that individuals can’t decide for themselves what’s wrong and what’s right. Most of these people believe it’s wrong, because they are *taught and told* through their religion to believe it’s wrong. If you want to believe in some deity… and follow the rules set in some book instead of thinking for yourself, go for it. But don’t infringe on someone else’s happiness because of how you choose to live your life. And if people are ‘reading the bible wrong’ and acts of discrimination are supposedly wrong, then there must be a *whole* lot of people using their religion as an excuse to hide their true feelings or a whole lot of people aware of that fact but still allow it and spread the word to do so because of their personal feelings and nothing else.

And I really do disagree with the religion being necessary to bring about good morals. Myself, and most of my friends are not religious. However, we all do good things. We volunteer, we help others, we don’t discriminate against people based on sexual preferences or anything else. We do good things because it’s what decent people do. It seems to me that only doing good things because you get benefited in the end, makes those acts selfish and defeats the purpose.

Despite religion or anything else, what it comes down to is that religion and state are supposed to be *separate*. Making gay marriage illegal because of religion is just asinine, and really completely goes against what this country was founded on. What’s more asinine to me, is people suffering for someone else’s beliefs. It really just boggles my mind….

[CraeSC111]

If you want to believe in some deity… and follow the rules set in some book instead of thinking for yourself, go for it.
Aren't a lot of your scientific beliefs based on what someone says in a book? :p Just wanted to point it out. And while religion isn't necesarily needed to figure out whats moral our moral system and most morals in the world were set forth by religion at one point in time. You may not be religious but you learned your morals from your parents and they probably learned it from their parents and so on so forth. It would have most likely come from a religious base at one point in time. And that separation of church and state thing was brought forth during a supreme court case. It is not in the constitution nor is it law.

[Muffincat]

Aren't a lot of your scientific beliefs based on what someone says in a book? :p Just wanted to point it out. And while religion isn't necesarily needed to figure out whats moral our moral system and most morals in the world were set forth by religion at one point in time. You may not be religious but you learned your morals from your parents and they probably learned it from their parents and so on so forth. It would have most likely come from a religious base at one point in time. And that separation of church and state thing was brought forth during a supreme court case. It is not in the constitution nor is it law.

Except that scientific beliefs are backed by evidence and repeated study...

Also this is the first amendment to our constitution:



Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


So, yeah, we're not supposed to have a religion associated with our federal government. It is in our constitution. The thing about states was later, but it's always been a national thing.

edit: For clarification, I just don't think that saying "our country has Christian roots" is a good argument, whether you are for gay marriage or not. The declaration of independence says that all men are created equal. Equality is one of the founding principles of our nation. While it has been slow going and not every person is equal now, that is what we strive for. Certain morals have been around long before organized religion, so it's kind of impossible to say that everything comes from religion. Besides, Christianity stole a lot of its teachings from many other sources, and absorbed a lot of myth from many different places.

In any case, homosexuality has not always been seen as wrong in every culture or every religion, and our country is supposed to separate religion from law as much as possible. There are a lot of things in the Bible that are flat out wrong, and they aren't (usually) followed anymore. It's a text that has been modified and changed over thousands of years, and not always by good hands. Anyway... I guess it's a little off topic by now, but whatever.

[CraeSC111]

Scientific beliefs are also proved wrong. Many well known theories are not proven by hard facts. And the first amendment does nor separate religion from politics, it makes it so that the government cannot suppression religion or force it onto others. There is nothing forbidding religion from affecting political thought. And religion is a perfectly good base for an argument against gay marriage because I am sure there are more Christians, Jews and members of other religions that speak out against same sex marriage than there are homosexuals (I could be wrong. I haven't been keeping up with my labor statistics.

[thedeparted]

lol religion, that is all.

[Mizel]

Scientific beliefs are also proved wrong. Many well known theories are not proven by hard facts. And the first amendment does nor separate religion from politics, it makes it so that the government cannot suppression religion or force it onto others. There is nothing forbidding religion from affecting political thought. And religion is a perfectly good base for an argument against gay marriage because I am sure there are more Christians, Jews and members of other religions that speak out against same sex marriage than there are homosexuals (I could be wrong. I haven't been keeping up with my labor statistics.

Really eff'd up that religion and gov't go very much hand in hand in this country. The screwed up part being that the gov't runs the people, meaning that the decisions they make should be based on and affect EVERYONE and not just those that are religious.... And doesn't the fact that there "are more Christians, Jews and members of other religions that speak out against same sex marriage than there are homosexuals"... actually make that *not* a good base for an argument? Seems quite the opposite and very unfair actually. And by the gov't not allowing same sex marriages *because* of religion, then that sort of is forcing religion on someone. Not the religion itself, but the effects of it.... It doesn't seem right that someone that may not even have a religion should be punished by those that do. I honestly can't wrap my head around that, never have been able to, and don't understand how anyone justifies that. It would be like taking a class where 60% of the students fail a test, a vote is held to see if the grades stick or if everyone (even those that passed) has to take another test again. Of course the end vote will be a retake meaning those that passed, yet are being forced through the actions of others to take it again, get screwed undeservingly.

Really, the bottom line has nothing to do with religion but unfortunately is a direct result of it. What the bottom line has to do with is basic human rights. There is no reason that if a man and woman can be married and have children, etc etc, that a man and man or woman and woman shouldn't be able to as well. And really, a lot of people use their religion as a cover because they are just homophobic, which is even sadder.

*in hippie stoner voice* Peace, love and equal rights man. Would really do the world some good. That's all I'm saying :)

[CraeSC111]

I see nothing unfair about majority rule mizel. If you have 15 people in a group is it better to give 10 what they want at the expense of 5 or give 5 what they want at the expense of 10? Its designed to give as many people as possible what they want at the expense of not giving everyone what they want (cause life doesn't work that way)

[Mizel]

Oh, don’t get me wrong. Majority rule isn’t *always* a bad thing. In hindsight, I think I used a really bad example to illustrate my point >_<

I think more or less what I meant was that more often then not it’s used inappropriately or with bias. Kind of like how the rich get a HUGE tax return, but middle-class working man gets none. Well, that’s because the people that vote on that decision happen to be rich. When basing the decision on gay marriage, or anything similar, the decision should be unbiased. It should not be based on the voters beliefs or personal feelings. Which, I know, easier said then done. But it’s the same concept as going to court and having a jury of your peers decide your verdict. There’s a reason that every juror is interviewed- to ensure a fair and unbiased decision. The government deciding that gay marriage should not be legal based on religion is like sending a Jew to trial with a Hitler-filled jury. If you’re biased towards anyone for any reason you should have no right being able to directly make decisions that affect them.

[CraeSC111]

I would argue against your point that voters shouldn't show a bias since voters vote to support their bias. Its kind of like saying you shouldn't vote on something because it makes you happy as opposed to the alternative. If no bias was shown then everyone would agree to everything. And rich people get benefits because they pay politicians and the politicians take the money. If the politicians actually did their jobs or had some sense of honor then things would be different

[Muffincat]

"Majority rule" goes out the window when there's oppression involved. I guess we should have just kept slavery, too. That was popular. But no, there was a war fought over it, because it was wrong. @_@ So, yeah, majority rule can be unfair... Just ask the people actually being oppressed by it. Besides, it's not the majority everywhere - otherwise it wouldn't be getting legalized.

And I didn't say that there's no religious effect on people - I said there shouldn't be, and there isn't supposed to be. Just because there are a lot of religious people and they use their religion as a tool to speak out again homosexual marriage doesn't mean that it's right.

[thedeparted]

Yeah just because something is the majority rule doesn't mean that it makes it right and shouldn't be fought to be overturned. Just because this country is filled with loads of ignorance doesn't mean that gay marriage should continue to be illegal

[GamingWeston]

And gay marriage doesn't really offend anyone. It's not bad for the majority cuz it's not bad for anyone. If killing people was legal then it would be bad because you could get shot any time but who will suffer if two gay people marry? They are just *****in and they talk about being manly, well I say *****in about such things is not a manly thing to do.

[CraeSC111]

I am sure some people find gay marriage offensive. You'd be surprised what people find offensive. And just because legalizing gay marriage is right doesn't mean people want it and thanks to our wonderful political system we gotta give the people what they want (unless more lobbying for gay marriage gets a boost). That's why slavery in the south lasted so long. That's why gay marriage, abortion and weed legalization issues will continue to exist.

[thedeparted]

And gay marriage doesn't really offend anyone. It's not bad for the majority cuz it's not bad for anyone. If killing people was legal then it would be bad because you could get shot any time but who will suffer if two gay people marry? They are just *****in and they talk about being manly, well I say *****in about such things is not a manly thing to do.

It offends homophobes and ignorant people

[Muffincat]

I am sure some people find gay marriage offensive. You'd be surprised what people find offensive. And just because legalizing gay marriage is right doesn't mean people want it and thanks to our wonderful political system we gotta give the people what they want (unless more lobbying for gay marriage gets a boost). That's why slavery in the south lasted so long. That's why gay marriage, abortion and weed legalization issues will continue to exist.

Yeah, but slavery was abolished, women were given rights, and interracial marriage was legalized. Interracial marriage was also considered offensive, there were laws against it, and that is totally laughable to us now (except for some people...)

I'm pretty confident that gay marriage will continue to be legalized in states as time goes on.

[thedeparted]

I'm sure it will as well, speaking of interacial marriage. There is a HBO thing on the struggle of it in Virginia. This one couple in like 1957 got a year a piece for being married.