gay marriage demonstration in boston

[stew]

I was on my way to work yesterday when I heard a live report on NPR from the Capitol building about the gay marriage constitutional ammendment that was being voted on yesterday here in Boston, MA. As I hadn't actually left the city yet, I turned the car around, found a parking spot on the Common, and walked over to grab some shots. It was about 10am and the vote wasn't scheduled until later that afternoon, but there were already hundreds of demonstrators in and around the capitol. Protestors and supporters both were interspersed throughout the crowd. There was lots of shouting but generally the atmosphere was fairly amicable - if that's the right word. I could only spent about 20 min shooting before heading off to work, but I so wanted to stay the entire afternoon to catch more shots and watch the action. I decided to post a fair cross-section of some of the photos from that day; these pics are not designed to advertise for one view or another, but instead are intended to be objective. History in the making! Hope you enjoy...

[adina]

The only thing that I don't like is that one with the kid. I can never understand why people feel the need to take their kids with them when the go protesting.

adina

[stew]

The only thing that I don't like is that one with the kid. I can never understand why people feel the need to take their kids with them when the go protesting.

adina

I have always disagreed with that type of thing as well... which is the reason i posted that pic. To me, same with the last one, as well, except that boy was more like 10 or 12.

[paulnj]

I was on my way to work yesterday when I heard a live report on NPR from the Capitol building about the gay marriage constitutional ammendment that was being voted on yesterday here in Boston, MA. As I hadn't actually left the city yet, I turned the car around, found a parking spot on the Common, and walked over to grab some shots. It was about 10am and the vote wasn't scheduled until later that afternoon, but there were already hundreds of demonstrators in and around the capitol. Protestors and supporters both were interspersed throughout the crowd. There was lots of shouting but generally the atmosphere was fairly amicable - if that's the right word. I could only spent about 20 min shooting before heading off to work, but I so wanted to stay the entire afternoon to catch more shots and watch the action. I decided to post a fair cross-section of some of the photos from that day; these pics are not designed to advertise for one view or another, but instead are intended to be objective. History in the making! Hope you enjoy...

i find your images to be fair and unbalanced . and agree that the child needs to be home!

i just erased 3 anti catholic/anti pope bush( loooser!) paragraphs due to the last lines in your post.i also explained what marriage was 200 years ago and how it's been ruined for years in the sense the "church" believes it to be.... by "straight" people

but i must say 2 things..

i find it DISGUSTING! that congress has tried to block 2 people from marriage based on sexual preference! sounds like the ACLU will be busy DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION

and secondly.. i'm secure enough to know what's not right for me isn't wrong for others

not my deal(and i find it to be like watching my grandparents rolling around on a nude beach) but i do believe that GOD will be the one to judge (and forgive!!!) come the end of one's life.

my words may be taken wrongly, but i'm not trying to affend anyone. i'm just sick of this congress/pres trying to take away rights while they cover up the things they've done that are shady!!!!

just my "humble" opinion

[another view]

Like Paul says, your images are fair - you're not trying to promote one side or the other. And another NPR fan, eh?

And like the rest here, I think that scenes like the third (and fourth) are just plain wrong. Hold a sign and speak your mind, but it needs to be your own opinion. How many 2 year olds have a firm grasp of the situation (he says thinking about a humourous connection between the average two year old and the average politician...)!

Anyway, I've personally never shot in a situation like this but it looks like there's alot of good pictures to be had. One thing, try shooting a little wider on a couple to show the large number of people supporting their cause - just an idea.

[adina]

where ever would one get that idea?


adina

[Photo-John]

Paul-
You've watched your grandparents roll around nekkid, on the beach? How was it?

[paulnj]

GROSSS THOUGHT DUDE!!!!

but if they were still alive it would be their right to!!!!! and i'd take pics to get the house via blackmail
and ..... i've never hid my opinionated self, now have i?

nuff bout my comments..... back to the great images documenting a moment in history

private messages towards me would be fine, but i feel it to be unfair to the poster to gobble up his thread

[stew]

i find your images to be fair and unbalanced . and agree that the child needs to be home!

i just erased 3 anti catholic/anti pope bush( loooser!) paragraphs due to the last lines in your post.i also explained what marriage was 200 years ago and how it's been ruined for years in the sense the "church" believes it to be.... by "straight" people

but i must say 2 things..

i find it DISGUSTING! that congress has tried to block 2 people from marriage based on sexual preference! sounds like the ACLU will be busy DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION

and secondly.. i'm secure enough to know what's not right for me isn't wrong for others

not my deal(and i find it to be like watching my grandparents rolling around on a nude beach) but i do believe that GOD will be the one to judge (and forgive!!!) come the end of one's life.

my words may be taken wrongly, but i'm not trying to affend anyone. i'm just sick of this congress/pres trying to take away rights while they cover up the things they've done that are shady!!!!

just my "humble" opinion

you ARE opinionated!! i figured that this topic and the pics might of course generate a little controversy, which is always good in my opinion, and is one of the great things about this country!! so, let the opinions roll in as far as i'm concerned.... don't mind at all!!

as for feedback on the photos - i posted them in this forum not to necessarily get feedback (though it is appreciated and listened to if given) but more to document what was happening....

having said that, i will refrain from posting my particular feelings on this issue, except that to say that i generally have pretty liberal views ;) and they hold here as well.

thanks for replying, Paul!!!!

[stew]

Like Paul says, your images are fair - you're not trying to promote one side or the other. And another NPR fan, eh?

And like the rest here, I think that scenes like the third (and fourth) are just plain wrong. Hold a sign and speak your mind, but it needs to be your own opinion. How many 2 year olds have a firm grasp of the situation (he says thinking about a humourous connection between the average two year old and the average politician...)!

Anyway, I've personally never shot in a situation like this but it looks like there's alot of good pictures to be had. One thing, try shooting a little wider on a couple to show the large number of people supporting their cause - just an idea.

i LOVE NPR! one of the reasons i leave for work later in the morning, to hear the great all things considered. and boston has one of the best public radio stations i've heard in my extensive travels around this country....

so this was my first time in this situation too which was half of why i went. i have a lot more pics (took something like 76 total!). i'll parse thru and see if there's a wider shot worth posting....

cheers!

[daiv07]

I have always disagreed with that type of thing as well... which is the reason i posted that pic. To me, same with the last one, as well, except that boy was more like 10 or 12.

They think that by bringing kids who don't even know whats going on will make people go "awww, look at that cute innocent kid.. guess we should do what they say"

[megan]

Great catch! It's good that you could stop on the way to work. Sometimes it's worth being a couple minutes late.

It's certainly a hot issue, so I'm going to hold my fingers and type only about the photographs!

Thanks for posting them.

Megan

[schrackman]

i also explained what marriage was 200 years ago and how it's been ruined for years in the sense the "church" believes it to be.... by "straight" people

I'm glad opinions can fly in here, because I'm about to launch mine. Marriage has never been anything else other than the union of a man and woman. What the modern homosexual movement is trying to do, however, is simply intrude upon a unique institution in order to give their lifestyle the appearance of normality, which really is not there. If it were normal, or natural, they would be able to procreate with each other, but they can't. Thus, even nature itself dictates against it.

i find it DISGUSTING! that congress has tried to block 2 people from marriage based on sexual preference! sounds like the ACLU will be busy DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION

And I find it disgusting that people would bend and twist our constitution to suit a small percentage of people who involve themselves in abnormal and unnatural relationships. The constitution does not guarantee these people the right to marry anymore than it guarantees the right to be polygamous.

but i do believe that GOD will be the one to judge (and forgive!!!) come the end of one's life.

Well, I'm not sure what "god" you're speaking of, Paul, but my God requires repentance from sin and faith in Christ before he will forgive. What does your "god" require?

my words may be taken wrongly, but i'm not trying to affend anyone. i'm just sick of this congress/pres trying to take away rights while they cover up the things they've done that are shady!!!!

hey, we all have opinions. some are just more logical than others. it's great that we can discuss them so openly without getting bitter about it.

Ray

[schrackman]

By the way, Stew, I failed to tell you that you did a great job in photographing the event. My apologies for not mentioning it before.

Ray

[stew]

By the way, Stew, I failed to tell you that you did a great job in photographing the event. My apologies for not mentioning it before.

Ray

Thanks for looking! -Stew

[stew]

Great catch! It's good that you could stop on the way to work. Sometimes it's worth being a couple minutes late.

It's certainly a hot issue, so I'm going to hold my fingers and type only about the photographs!

Thanks for posting them.

Megan

It can be hard to keep fingers off the keyboard, eh? Thanks for looking! -Stew

[stew]

enjoy! -Stew

[walterick]

1.) Nature doesn't make laws against love. Religion does.

2.) Priests who rape little boys shouldn't speak out agianst gay marriage.

Oops, there I go again...

Rick

[natatbeach]

Although I tend to want to be a people pleaser and don't often speak up (publicly regarding my views) I had to step out of my comfort zone.

First saying that I really thought Stew did a stellar job capturing a very difficult and fueled subject for many people.

Second by saying that I feel the difficulty in this subject doesn't lie in wrongs or rights, although I am way opposed to any marriage that isn't founded on a platform that was designated by God based on my spiritual beliefs.

And the beliefs of most of the founders of this country,actually.

Marriage was designed to be a union between man, woman, and God. Sealed by a covenant (promise). The difficulty for a lot of people I find, falls on what your system of belief is...

some feel that God is a very forgiving--- love filled--- and merciful God---a God of second chances. Well, He is all of those things but He is also VERY clear and concise on what He teaches us that He believes a mariage is to be. The moral debate falls on interpretation more so than on facts. God designed/commanded us ALL to love one another...I think we can all agree on that. It is o.k. for two women to love each other-- it is o.k. for two men to love each other...I don't think that's the issue.

...He didn't however say we could sleep with and engage in conduct outside of that marriage. I get that they are trying to get the same rights as anyone else and I get that everyone is entitled to fair treatment. But the law of God has been around A LOT longer than all the men who wrote the constitution. It always has been the same, always will be the same...God doesn't ammend His laws for personal whims or personal fulfillment. He is the same beginning to end.

the laws in most states are against adultery and sodomy and everyone seems to find those two offensive/detestable enough acts to be o.k. with them to be illegal...but others find other "sexual acts" to be offensive and a lot of people scream "discrimination" and we need to legalize and enable those acts to come to full pass and allow them to become a standard?

This is a debate that can go on forever with everyone calling it a moral debate and a rights debate... there's no debate

You have a right to love whomever you want
You have a right to have healthcare
You have a right to show the world thru a public ceremony who you love

Here's a twist for ya... I've been in a homosexual relationship, I've even thought it was o.k. for homosexuals to be together..I have family members and friends that I adore....shoot I've even been more attracted to women than men in the past...

but God says what He says about marriage and that was a law I didn't want to fight. I don't want to be waiting to be judged, and take the chance that becuase I could or because it "feels" right--- that I would be going against some of the greatest and most rewarding laws ever set before the dawn of man.

just because something is permissable---does not make it beneficial for that person or persons.

just my two cents....coming from my corner of the world...I think God gave us one of the most awesome gifts and that's our ability to choose right or wrong...I guess it just depends what right or wrong is for you...and what God you serve.

[natatbeach]

God does forgive you from your sins and He does forgive mistakes...BUT

Sometimes though--at least for myself--- I wonder

if I'll need to be forgiven for something at some point or another ---I wonder if I was really going about it the right way to begin with....

why do you need to be forgiven if it was o.k. to begin with?

[adina]

And it's nice to see that it can be debated without people getting angry and huffy and attacking individuals.

adina

[megan]

The colors in the rainbow really popped! I think my favorite of these three is the first [top] one. The mass of signs is really a strong element.

Megan

[schrackman]

I thought I would comment on this before I leave for the weekend, and will check any responses when I return.

1.) Nature doesn't make laws against love.

No, but what the laws of nature teach us is what is natural to love. It is natural for a man and woman to unite together in marriage and procreate. The entire history of mankind is a testament to this design. This cannot be said with homosexuality, however, precisely because it is against nature. When we are talking about constitutional rights, let us be sure that we are speaking about NATURAL rights, as the founding fathers did, and not "special rights" for those who choose to live contrary to nature.

Religion does.

No, religion does not make laws on love. Rather, God makes the laws on who we are to love and how. Nature simply agrees with those laws instituted by its Creator. The duty of religion, on the other hand, is simply to inculcate the precepts of God in order that men might choose to live obediently within the parameters which God has established for man. To live contary to religion, which, consequently, is to live contrary to the divine laws of God, is construed by God as rebellion against Him and is therefore worthy of his judgment.

Fortunately for men, however, God provides an escape from his judgment, provided men repent of their sins and place their trust in the Son of God for salvation and forgiveness of sins and go on to follow Him and his ways.

2.) Priests who rape little boys shouldn't speak out agianst gay marriage.

I wholeheartedly agree. But lest anyone get the wrong idea, that is not the fault of religion but of those who falsely profess to have it, and that is why they abuse their positions. Thomas Jefferson once wrote:

"What institution is insusceptible of abuse in wicked hands?" -- Jefferson to L. H. Girardin, 1815

See ya'll on Monday, Lord willing.

Ray