Prop. 8 donor Scott Eckern explains his resignation from California Musical Theatre

Here is an excerpt from a statement from Scott Eckern, e-mailed to Culture Monster by Randle Communications, a Sacramento public relations firm. Clay Merrill, a media relations manager at Randle, said the firm was sending the statement on Eckern's behalf, although not officially representing him.

"I am leaving California Musical Theatre after prayerful consideration to protect the organization and to help the healing in the local theatre-going and creative community. California Musical Theatre will continue to welcome with open arms all staff, artists and audiences who collaborate in the experience that live theatre does best –- to lift the human spirit. I will continue to be in the audience to cheer on all the good work. It has been an honor to serve alongside those I love and respect in this noble profession. I am disappointed that my personal convictions have cost me the opportunity to do what I love the most which is to continue enriching the Sacramento arts and theatre community.”

In announcing Eckern’s resignation today, the nonprofit theater company reiterated that Eckern’s support for Prop. 8 was independent of his job at CMT, where he had been promoted to artistic director in 2003. “At no time does [CMT] involve itself in political issues or ever impinge on the rights of its employees to engage in political activities of their choice,” the theater’s statement said.

-- Mike Boehm

Comments

[Transplanted Lawyer]

Why should these two things be related at all? I don't understand -- are dancers and the people involved in getting dancers to perform somehow supposed to have a monolithic set of political opinions? I thought the arts were about the free expression of ideas.

I was against Prop. 8 and I wish that Mr. Eckern had been, too. But he is entitled to his opinion and it would be a great shame if a political difference of opinion had hounded him out of the arts community.

[LAnow4live]

This was a bigoted, hateful proposition. We don't need people who support such ideas as community leaders of any kind. If he had contributed to a racist campaign, he would receive similar treatment.

[Danielle Brazell]

This is a very very dangerous precedent to set and it could happen to any one of us working in the arts. I contributed to No on 8 as an individual and to think that I could be subjected to such backlash is horrifying.

Unjust, illegal and misguided as Prop 8 is - making legal contributions to political candidates as well as in support of or against legislation should not be criminalized.

[bennyinsf]

To Transplanted Lawyer: Unfortunately, for Mr. Eckern his effectiveness in his position was at stake, and as a result, he chose to step down from his position and protect the organization rather than risk having it fall victim to the fallout from his support of Prop 8. Clearly, he is entitled to his political positions; however, we all take a risk when we take a political position or a moral position.

Think about it this way, how often do you think that LGBT people in leadership roles in certain industries remain in the closet about their political or personal positions because they worry about how the truth could affect their ability to lead? Do you think that a lesbian or gay officer in the military would have the same respect of his subordinates or even peers and wield the same effectiveness as his or her heterosexual counterparts? Again, unfortunately, LGBT people have to consider their career choices not just on individual ability and what we find interesting, but often, in terms of our professions, we have to consider where we can fit in . . . how much of our identities are we willing to sacrifice for our professional goals? Do I really want to apply for a position with the Police Department or a firefighter when I believe that I will have to remain in the closet or do I choose a profession where I believe I can feel more open about my identity?

Mr. Eckern held a position of leadership in a field where LGBT people and their supporters are very visible. He chose to "come out of the closet" with his beliefs, and you can say it's like "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", he broke the rules.

I wish we could all accept each other for our differences and treat each other with equality so that each person can work in his/her profession of choice.

[Camille Schenkkan]

Anyone treating this as a Prop 8 Yes-Vs.-No issue is missing the point.

This man made a political contribution and lost his job because of it.

This is dangerous for all advocates, no matter your views.

[LAnow4live]

He RESIGNED. He was not fired. He lost the support of the community he was serving due to the fact that he did not support them -- he supported bigoted legislation that targeted them.

He could have fought for his job -- or stayed out of the fight to take civil rights away from gays and lesbians. He chose not to.

[Lugene Whitley]

We all must be able to express our views and advocate for them in respectful ways without concern for losing our jobs. This is a very important discussion about advocacy and its potential repercussions that needs....advocates!

[Alex]

Civil Rights cannot be determined by popular vote!! Remember slavery and the 1960s???

If this were a racial issue he'd have been fired. He made his own choice to fund unprecedented discriminatory legislation and his own choice to resign as a result of public outcry. That simple.

[Stephanie Schuetz]

Shame on you, No on 8 crowd. Holding companies hostage? If these actions were turned against you and your places of employment, you would call it persecution.

[a_real_neat_guy]

I think the thing people need to remember here is that, according to what has transpired publicly, with regard to Mr. Eckern and his decision to "come out of the closet" in his support of the religious right and their misguided Proposition, he resigned due to his inability to perform the duties of his job effectively without hurting the company (here CMT) and the others whose livelihood's he failed to take into consideration when he took that risk. Someone in a leadership position such as the one formerly held by Scott Eckern, should have weighed the fallout before taking such a risky public stance on such a volitile issue.

[Stephen]

Another reminder how biased and discriminating the gay community is against heterosexuals. While working as a waiter at an upscale restaurant in college, I was CONTINUOUSLY subjected to sexual harassment by male homosexuals - both staff and management.

The gays claim they want 'equality'; I urge anyone to go undercover and work for a month in any of the upscale restaurants/hotels here in LA - and then let the Times know how many times you were sexually harassed and asked out on a date from your same sex manager each time you had a work schedule conflict, and needed time off.

[Brian Andre]

Why can't people see this issue clearly! This is not an equality issue! Prop 8 will not take away ANY rights for passing and it will NOT add any rights if it is overturned! Civil unions have the same EQUAL RIGHTS as marriages! Elton John gets it—why can't other same-sex supporterrs? Here's what Elton said... "I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership," said John. "The word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships." USA Today, 11/12/08

[lisa]

Ok, Brian, where exactly would a person in California get a civil partnership? We don't have that. We have marriage. And Prop 8 DID take away the right of gay people to marry, which they had since the California Sup. Ct. gave them that right earlier this year.

[dtrain]

brian.. check your facts, civil unions do not offer the same rights as marriage! there are 1,160 rights that are not offered under civil unions that are afforded to married couples. feel free to get a civil union with elton john then.

[Billy Conrad]

I find this whole discussion fascinating.

Full disclosure, I'm a gay, white man, and it seems to me that when the Prop 8 vote is compared to the civil rights movement for people of color, we inevitably fall into a trap. By the mere fact, that we voted on taking away already established rights, this became a political issue, when, it seems to me, it never should have been. It's a social issue, much as the civil rights movement of the '60's was. That was never seen as a political movement. The fact that black folks were finally granted the right to vote as a result of the movement was a happy by-product, but I contend the movement itself was social in nature. From the very start, Prop 8 was political, and it should never have been. It, too, is social, but was made political by the fact that we had to vote one way or the other.

If Scott Eckern had made a racist comment, he would have been forced to resign and no one would have thought he deserved any less because that would have been viewed in a social context. Our right to marry should also be so viewed, but now that's not possible because of the vote. It's been politicized. How do we change that? I don't know if we can now because the die has been cast.

[Jenny Walker]

My question is this: When does it become a hate crime the other way around??

[Liz]

A person is entitled to their beliefs this is McCarthism at its best. Black listing someone due to their personal beliefs. This is a a tradgedy. I also would like to know why you need to list your employer's name when you are donating to a political cause as it has nothing to do with your employer its personal. Now that this has been abused and used against Mr. Eckern what is to stop abuse from those who contributated to No on 8. We as a people are entitled to our opionins. What happened to freedom of speech

[Pops]

What a shame. Yes, he did resign. However, he resigned because the No on 8 crowd publicized his support of 8 and urged people to shun him. I have yet to hear of pro-8 people calling for the shunning of people who contributed to no on 8. This is hateful, bigoted behavior. I was on the fence about prop 8. After seeing how the Mormons, Catholics and anyone with a dissenting opinion has been treated, I could care less what happens to the gay movement. Congratulations gay rights advocates. You have managed to alienate many people who supported you. I used to teach my kids to love their gay friends. Now I have to teach them to love people even if they are Mormon. I am disgusted.

Pops wrote: "I hve yet to hear of pro-8 people calling for the shunning of people who contributed to no on 8." In fact, the Yes on Proposition 8 committee tried to extort money from the businesses that donated to No on Proposition 8. They threatened them with boycotts.

Now boycotts are perfectly legal. The Southern Baptist Convention boycotted Disney when the company offered domestic partner benefits to its employees. Focus on the Family is always announcing some boycott of some company for supporting gay rights. Boycotts are an expression of free speech.

A lot of us are disgusted that people can so easily vote to deprive others of equal rights. Ekern resigned because his colleagues no longer wanted to work with him and the patrons of his theater no longer wanted to buy his product. It is his right to donate his money to any group he wants to, but it is the right of others not to patronize his business. We have free speech as well.

[Concerned]

This is a sorry "victory" for the" Activist-terrorist bigots" as I've heard them called. This "mob mentality" of the neg8ors needs to be put in its place. Prop 8 legitimately passed by a vote of the people. The neg8ors may not like that fact, but that is the political process in action. Investigations are going as to who sent envelopes of a "white powder" to churches in 2 states, an elderly woman was assaulted and her personal property, a cross, was stomped on, and now we see honest working people forced from their jobs because of an intolerant mob. It is NOT a crime to participate in the democratic process. The neg8ors need to get that straight and press forward for their cause using legal means. "Terrorist" style tactics are NOT "okay" just because they think it is "only fair".