Ranked one of the “Top 5 Trainers in Los Angeles," Sam Page is the force behind PeaceLoveLunges.com. He quickly identifies problem behaviors through motivational interviewing, and uses science, exercise physiology and 11+ years experience as a coach to produce red carpet results. Try his free mobile fitness app: Pocket-SAM.com.


  1. Restaurant Owner Regrets Prop 8 Contribution : Gay News from Gay Agenda - GayAgenda.com
    November 12, 2008 @ 4:53 pm

    […] 12, 2008 by James Hipps  From PeaceLoveLunges.com: In a dramatic, closed door lunch meeting, a visibly shaken owner of El Coyote restaurant in […]

  2. Luke
    November 12, 2008 @ 5:09 pm

    Marjorie Christofferson’s comments only cement my resolve to do everything in my power to eliminate all LGBT/LGBT friendly business at El Coyote.

    Visibly shaken AND apparently steadfast in her right wing thinking. I’m sure she didn’t expect anyone to find out about her disgusting insult to our community. And for being “in tears”; wouldn’t you be when your business was falling apart in front of your face from your own arrogant actions. SHAME ON YOU Marjorie Christofferson!!!

    Hope you have a BIG nest egg!

  3. Tim
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:01 pm

    Uh… Why would you include that crap comparing Marjorie to singled out Jews in Nazi Germany?

    That is completely ridiculous.

    She singled out herself when she made that PUBLIC donation to strip gays and lesbians of their rights.


    The fact that people like you even showed up to give her the time to explain herself, shows that we were willing to hear her out. Give her an option to redeem herself, to apologize to the community that has supported her and her family for years and years and years.

    Instead, she says “my religion made me do it”. That’s not an argument or an apology… that’s an excuse for ignorance.

  4. Brenda
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:06 pm

    I really wish people like Ms. Christofferson could appreciate the difference between her religious beliefs (which are perfectly valid & she has every right to have them, even if I personally disagree), and the larger civil rights issue at stake. She doesn’t have to LIKE what gay people do in their bedroom in order to appreciate that they should have the right to make their unions legal.

    I will never get why this is such a hard concept.

  5. Sam Page, CFT
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:15 pm

    The quote about Nazi Germany was meant to provide an alternate view of what happened in the meeting. Since the group seemed rather conflicted about whether or not to boycott the restaurant, I specifically wanted to provide differing viewpoints in my story.

    I can tell you that I was personally struck by the physical nature of Ms. Christofferson, and the outbursts by the group gathered there. I think she really had no idea what she was getting into when she decided to make a public contribution to Prop. 8.

    As for my participation in the meeting, I stand by my choice, precisely because I wanted to take personal ownership in my own decision whether or not to boycott El Coyote and not leave it up to “hearsay.” To your point, Tim, I think *that* would have been truly ignorant.

  6. Mark at the Beach
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:35 pm

    Clearly a very biased perspective of what happened at the event. I was there and I didn’t notice how frail she was, nor many of the other comments here, which are designed to soften us (the readers up) and make us feel sorry for her.

    Shame on Margie and shame on her entire family. I feel sorry for the 89 people and their families that work at the restaurant, but they will find other jobs. I feel much more sorry for the more than 18000 families that have had their marriage stripped from them – and I feel sorry for the other gay couples that won’t have the chance to marry.

    BTW – this woman also donated money from the gay community to the relection of George W Bush to the tune of $1000. Do a google search on her name.

    And the shame that she still supports the rape of gays by keeping us from having marriage.

  7. Sam Page, CFT
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:44 pm

    Mark, to your comment that she did not appear frail: I have two separate sources who confirm that Ms. Christofferson twice lost consciousness this morning in advance of the meeting.

  8. Sam Page, CFT
    November 12, 2008 @ 6:49 pm

  9. loyal seattle (formerly) reader
    November 12, 2008 @ 7:02 pm

    I do not live in CA but I know actions in that state affect the country. I say boycott this business. If she is willing to donate to strip me of my rights she doesn’t need my food, or any gay, food dollars. To ever action there is a reaction, (a paraphrase of Sir Isaac Newton). She took her action, it is up to us to provide a reaction. Boycott!! Lets see how her faith pays the bills.

  10. Todd
    November 12, 2008 @ 7:14 pm

    Ms. Christofferson says “I’ve been a member of the Mormon Church all my life.” “This was a personal donation.” The Mormons are a controlling cult that put pressure on all their members to support this proposition. If she is a “good Mormon” then she also tithes at least 10% of her income to the Church. Her $100 contribution to Prop 8 pales in comparison to a lifetime of tithing to the church.

    We now know (as reported in the SLC newspaper) that for more than 10 years, the Mormon Church as been behind defeating gender neutral/same sex marriage in California. They were behind Prop 22, but wanted to be in “partnership” with the Catholic Church and let the Catholics take the lead because they didn’t want to take the heat. Shame.

    When we support Mormon businesses, we support the Mormon Church because the owners, in turn support the church – even if they didn’t directly support Prop 8.

    She also says that “I cannot change a lifetime of faith.” Being Mormon or any other religion IS a matter or choice. You can change your faith. I cannot change being gay.

  11. matthew thompson
    November 12, 2008 @ 7:48 pm

    The reason she is being singled out is because she gave money to a cause dedicated to take away right from gays… I am sure she never considered that all contributions were public record and it would come back to bite her in the ass. She could have held her beliefs and nothing would have happened, but she chose to contribute and crossed a line. She has no right to complain when the gay community shows their unhappiness with her decision and reacts. She deserves no pity from anyone.

  12. Even a Mormon Makes Mistakes | PEACE. LOVE. LUNGES.
    November 12, 2008 @ 8:41 pm

    […] personally was moved to tears in the meeting with Christofferson because I understand the deep conflict that her religious convictions can […]

  13. Darin W
    November 12, 2008 @ 11:00 pm

    Well, the news is out about her donation, so I don’t think wrestling with the question “should we boycott or not” is worthwhile. Formal boycott or not, knowing about the donation is enough for me to find other places to eat, and I think it’s safe to say that most gays and friends will feel the same. I certainly don’t have some sort of investment/relationship with them where I feel an obligation to give them another chance.

  14. Dan Pallotta
    November 13, 2008 @ 12:37 am

    I think this is all kind of hilarious. Unfortunately, me boycotting El Coyote will have no incremental impact. If only their food weren’t so God-awful. I started boycotting that place after the first time I ate there. All the food had the strange flavor of…well…turpentine. Really. Is there a way to double-boycott something?

  15. Eric
    November 13, 2008 @ 1:28 am

    Something that came out later in the day, after most people were gone. Marjorie Christofferson is apparently not actually the owner of El Coyote. She is a manager and a part of the family that owns the restaurant, but she is not the owner. Her mother is.

    As to the “shame on her entire family” comment. She is the only mormon in the family. Her husband is not mormon either. The staff and the family apparently does not share her personal stance associated with Christofferson’s religious views. She alone made that contribution.
    She didn’t ask them about it first. They found out about it when we did. The employees are just as devastated as we are.

    I was there. She was obviously visibly shaken, physically frail and pale. This was not an easy thing for her to do, facing the community. And at that, there were people there who had never been to the restaurant and who were only there to attack. She had the guts to walk into a room of people hurt by her actions.

    We all hurt from what happened with prop 8, but I submit that at some point we must realize that employing tactics that inspire fear of the gay community do not help us, they harm us. We must look for ways to make these people our advocates in the long run. For Marjorie, she’s caught between her faith and her feelings and faith won out this time, but her interaction with us today will change her for life. She told one of the employees that she would never do it again.

    How would your views change if you knew one of those very same gay couples who got married, actually works there at El Coyote? Well they do. So boycotting that restaurant would also harm one of those couples. Not to mention the large number of gay people who actually work there.

    Marjorie’s donation is unacceptable, unfathomable and ignorant, individually. If they wanted to save the restaurant, they could easily appeal to the mormon community and the latino community and the restaurant would be full again shortly. This isn’t just about the money. It’s about people.

  16. Mormons Make Mistakes Too : Gay News from Gay Agenda - GayAgenda.com
    November 13, 2008 @ 9:06 am

    […] personally was moved to tears in the meeting with Christofferson because I understand the deep conflict that her religious convictions can […]

  17. Sam Page, CFT
    November 13, 2008 @ 1:39 pm

    Darin, I agree with you that whether or not the gay community should formally boycott El Coyote is not the issue.

    To Dan: I mostly frequented El Coyote for the ostrich tacos (yes, they’re really made from ostrich) and the super strong, cheap margaritas.

    Eric and Todd, you guys both really nailed it. [BTW everyone: Eric has started a social network on Ning.com called “A Bigger Change” (correct me if I’m wrong, Eric) dedicated to the broader overall cause at stake here].

  18. Michelle Malkin » The rabid anti-Prop. 8 mob demands total submission
    November 14, 2008 @ 10:49 am

    […] ordeal that supporters of Prop 8 may now be subject to–something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far […]

  19. Takekaze
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:20 am

    It’s amazing how little you folks care about democracy. The people have spoken and they have said “no” to gay marriage. It was a democratic vote, you have to accept it. Rioting and boycotting the opponent into submission, that’s typical fascist behavior.

    So, after wannabe feminists (feminism is dead, it’s a joke these days) and socialists you’re going to join their group of neo-fascists now? Your behavior definitely proves that.

  20. Granna
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:25 am

    My brother is gay. I love him and his partner. But if I were in CA I would have voted against Prop 8. When did the gay community decide if an individual believes that marriage is for one man and one woman, that person is fair game for any kind of vicious attack? This is unconscionable. You cannon silence those who disagree with you. We are all free; you are free to disagree with those whose opinions you dislike. You are not free to harrass and intimidate them. Your tactics do you more harm than good.

  21. Dan Pallotta
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:31 am


    What you don’t understand is that this IS democracy. Democracy doesn’t end at the voting booth. Just as you have a right to vote for Proposition 8, we have a right not to support our own jailers. It’s a simple, peaceful act of expression and democracy, and, believe it or not, the free market – we won”t eat at this restaurant anymore. If your local supermarket started hosting gay marriage ceremonies, and you decided to stop going there because of it, would you call yourself a fascist? Would you call the Colonists fascists for dumping British tea into Boston Harbor?

    You may not like what we are doing, and that’s perfectly normal, but be careful not to mislabel it. If you call us fascists for expressing our preferences, you give people the right to call you one for expressing yours as well.

  22. Granna
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:33 am

    Correction – I mean I would have voted FOR Prop 8.

  23. John
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:38 am

    Amazing how the anti-prop8 forces are willing to pick on someone who donated a measely $100.00 out of personal, religious beliefs – and try to run her out of business.

    You now want the will of the majority of voters to be overturned by the courts?

    You now villify and threaten other citizens after they simply exercised their right to vote their conscience?

    Your actions do nothing but offend that majority. Your actions will do nothing but strenghten their resolve and prove that you’re nothing but a mob-mentality group who, when you don’t get your way, will scream, threaten and sue your way through your tantrums.

    You had your day at the polls. Deal with it like the adults you claim to be.

  24. warrior
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:39 am

    If the homosexual and lesbian community wants to boycott, then so be it. I would vote for proposition 8 every time because I know just how much damage is done by homosexual and lesbian practices. The Netherlands was one of the first countries to legalize any and all sexual practices, and even their own studies show that damage has been done. The homosexual and lesbian community loves to claim that the resistance to gay marriage is all about religion – it is not. It is about the destruction of social norms and the decline of nations.

  25. Piss Off
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:50 am

    I believe it’s perfectly valid to describe the attacks against her as Nazi-like. What’s next for you kind loving folks… reeducation camps for people who refuse to toe your line?

    Here’s a clue. You didn’t have any rights stripped away from you. You have the exact same rights the heteros have, you just don’t care to exercise them.

    Grow up and STOP this narcissistic hissy fit!

  26. Richard
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:59 am

    This woman is a free American,regardless of how little that may mean to those who would subject her opinions and political affiliations to the whims of your soviets.

    Should any of you feel that the wishes of the vocal majority outweigh the ability of the individual to support those of like opinion; there are still regimes that will agree with your thuggish tactics.

    The common good before the private good, was a favorite NAZI slogan. You apparently share their tenets. Ironic considering their treatment of LGBTs.

  27. Brett
    November 14, 2008 @ 11:59 am

    So this is an example of tolerance? The gay community threatening to burn down churches, verbally assaulting Ms. Christofferson for having an alternative opinion. Forcing a theater manager out of his job? Sending envelopes full of white powder to mormon temples. Spitting on an elderly woman in Palm Springs who dares to exercise her first amendment rights to free speech.

    It is the gay community that is full of hate! Yes, and they are acting like fascists by threat and intimidation.

    For every business the gay community tries to damage I will support them. I think its time I tried those Ostrich tacos at El Coyote althought I’ve never before been there.

    November 14, 2008 @ 12:04 pm

    […] of Prop 8 may now be subject to – something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far from where I grew […]

  29. You People Are a Joke
    November 14, 2008 @ 12:28 pm

    First you tried intimidating people if you found out they would vote against your opinion. Now you find out who voted against your opinion and publicly threaten them.

    Have you ever heard of democracy?

    The comparison to Nazi Germany is apt. Your type are going out and spraypainting swastikas on cars, publicly revealing the names of people who contributed to a fund or voted against your opinion, attacking them in public verbally and physically, publishing their addresses so they can be attacked, appearing at their homes and businesses, and engaging in the most ridiculous hate-mongering I’ve yet to see in a political campaign. You’re engaging in Gestapo intimidation tactics because you don’t like how a vote went.

    Please, do boycott. Boycott the US. Find yourself a nice little island in the middle of the ocean and go there and leave the rest of society alone. You’re obviously not equipped with the mental faculties to deal with a Democracy.

  30. Swibbie
    November 14, 2008 @ 12:59 pm

    You people are truly disgusting. You’re just a bunch of spoiled cry babies who turn to violence when you don’t get your way. Trust me, your childish and violent reaction to a democratic election result is going to bring a lot of people out to fight against your abhorrent lifestyle. But I don’t think there is a single person among you that is smart enough to realize that. Morons.

  31. Dan Pallotta
    November 14, 2008 @ 1:35 pm

    People, we’re just not eating at her restaurant. It’s nothing more than that.

  32. mary
    November 14, 2008 @ 1:40 pm

    Are gay/lesbian people just plain STOOPID or what?? Let me help… we live in AMERICA, a vote was taken… you LOST, get over it and get on with your lives… what a bunch of crybabies… oh that’s right you are gay which used to mean “happy”… now you are just “unhappy” and nazis… go after the people in CA that REALLY voted again gays… the blacks…. wait, they would FIGHT back and that is just soooooo scary… remember that being gay is not a sin, just having gay sex is a SIN

  33. Mark Tillar
    November 14, 2008 @ 2:01 pm

    The Gay Community continues to turn people against their policy goals by their behavior towards people who hold religious beliefs contrary to those policy goals.

    Gays are not being persecuted in this country. (Persecution is the systematic mistreatment of an individual/group by another group).

    There is no governmental institutional bias other than the military Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Civil Unions are allowed.

    If Prop 8 passes or fails it was due to a majority of fellow citizens. If you want to get a majority, intellectual discussions are the only way.

    The actions described aren’t “Letter from Brimingham Jail”, but that of intimidation of fellow citizens who happen to disagree for religious reasons.

  34. JABbering Stooge :: Consistency FAIL :: November :: 2008
    November 14, 2008 @ 2:06 pm

    […] ordeal that supporters of Prop 8 may now be subject to—something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far […]

  35. DMann
    November 14, 2008 @ 2:14 pm

    So in essence you are all saying that she has every right to believe what she wants to believe, but no right to actually live it. So much for freedom…but freedom only applies to you, not to anyone else who does not agree with your bogus claims that marriage is a right.

  36. Gay Mafia Demands America Bend Over To Their Demands « The Chronicles Of A Rogue Jew
    November 14, 2008 @ 2:34 pm

    […] the ordeal that supporters of Prop 8 may now be subject to–something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far […]

  37. To Swibbie
    November 14, 2008 @ 2:59 pm

    Thanks! Next time, have the balls to post your name and address. Why don’t you go ban interracial marriage next or something?

  38. Bronson Page
    November 14, 2008 @ 3:04 pm

    What you’re all forgetting here is that the founding fathers did not intend for a simple majority to determine the civil rights of an entire population. I am glad to see all of your comments on this blog, as you’re just revealing yourselves as monstrous as could be imagined. Interesting how so-called Christians are the first to start the name calling and judgment. Keep it up. You’re making a fine example.

  39. Bronson Page
    November 14, 2008 @ 3:06 pm

    BTW: Psychoanalytic theory holds that homophobia — the fear, anxiety, anger, discomfort and aversion that some ostensibly heterosexual people hold for gay individuals — is the result of repressed homosexual urges that the person is either unaware of or denies.

  40. DMann
    November 14, 2008 @ 3:09 pm

    Speaking of the Founding Fathers, they didn’t support gay marriage either. We’ll have to stop teaching American history in school.

  41. Shane
    November 14, 2008 @ 3:13 pm

    What a disgrace. If anything has been learned from the success of proposition 8 it’s that fascists live among us – and the over-due unveiling of hysterical pink fascism. I’ll be in Burbank this Sunday, and on that day I’ll be eating at El Coyote to support not just Marjorie Christofferson, but to support the right on all Americans to hold an opinion without having to stand scared shitless in front of ideological thugs threatening their welfare and the welfare of everyone employed there.

    Now’s the time to support El Coyote – down with fascism!

  42. Swibbie
    November 14, 2008 @ 3:23 pm

    What we’re all forgetting here is that the founding fathers did not intend for civil rights to apply to a behavior. So please no lectures about “monstrous name calling” and “judging”. The examples that you people have already set disqualify you from telling other people how they should behave. And your sophomoric “psychoanalytic theory” is a feeble attempt to justify your own moral degeneracy.

  43. Luke
    November 14, 2008 @ 4:01 pm


    “What we’re all forgetting here is that the founding fathers did not intend for civil rights to apply to a behavior.”

    “All men are created equal and all are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

    Simply from a sentence structure standpoint it clearly shows that “behavior” would be included.

    This is all a moot point. The prior gap in public polling (prop 22) was 22.8 points.. this times it was reduced to 4. Even if overturning (H)8 doesn’t succeed, the next time this goes to the voters will be over and everyone will be afforded the same rights under the law as our founding fathers intended. And yes, some of them were even gay.. SHOCKER!

  44. Barbara Yunker
    November 14, 2008 @ 4:18 pm

    First, my credentials. I am lesbian & married my partner of 17 years in August. The reaction of many protesters to the outcome of the Prop. 8 vote has been horrifying. I am deeply ashamed of my community. This is NOT the way to win hearts and minds. In addition, the double standard applied to white Christians is breathtaking, when Black, Latino & Muslim voters overwhelmingly supported Prop. 8. This nasty group enjoying their margaritas & nachos really make me sick. Now gays are the new Nazis.

  45. Billy
    November 14, 2008 @ 4:41 pm

    Wow, Swibbie’s got it baaaaad. I’ll bet he’s pounding it while he’s typing.

  46. Bronson Page
    November 14, 2008 @ 4:44 pm

    Sorry, Swib, that’s not armchair psych, it’s the real thing.

    ‘Is Homophobia Associated With Homosexual Arousal?’ by Henry E. Adams, Ph.D., Lester W. Wright, Jr., Ph.D. and Bethany A. Lohr, University of Georgia, in Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol. 105, No. 3, pp 440-445.

  47. Todd
    November 14, 2008 @ 5:18 pm

    Perhaps a short civics lesson is in order. In our representative democracy, we are governed by a constitution which is the ultimate expression of the will of the people. Like the US Constitution, the California constitution can only be “revised” by super majority votes (2/3) in the legislative branch of government. The it goes to a vote – a super majority – of the people.

    Prop 8 was disguised an amendment, usually reserved for things like taxes, term limits, etc. – something that doesn’t need a super majority of the people. Prop 8 is, in fact, a revision of the constitution and therefore should never have been on the ballot. In the US, we do not put civil rights to a popular vote. The entire purpose of a constitution is to protect the rights of minorities from the tyranny of the majority.

    We also have 3 co-equal branches of government. The elected representatives, executive (Pres or governor) and the judiciary. Judges hold long or life tenure in order to temper fluctuating times. They look at the constitution to see if people are protected equally. They look to see if people were denied due process of the law. They look to see if disliked minorities – blacks, Chinese, Japanese, Jews and gays to name a few – are being excluded from full citizenship and equal rights and protections under the laws and the constitution.

    The California Supreme Court held that to deny basic CIVIL marriage to a certain class of people (yes, that’s us, the gay community) is unconstitutional. Plain and simple. And a simple majority vote isn’t sufficient to take away those rights.

    The sexy argument here is the violation of equal protection and due process; however, the real issue at separation of powers issue and the fact that the legislative branch, charged with deliberating and passing any sort of REVISION to the constitution, were bypassed by Prop 8. In addition, Prop 8 takes away the power of the judicial branch which is charged with its duty to interpret the constitution.

    Plain and simple, Prop 8 will very likely be invalidated. It is wrong and should be overturned.

  48. Bronson Page
    November 14, 2008 @ 5:35 pm

    Amen, brother.

  49. Eyes Wide Open
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:04 pm

    Wow – you folks in the Gay community really do not understand the true meaning of “freedom!” You seek it while denying it to others because it doesn’t meet your criteria – hypocrisy in the finest! However, one can make the case that freedom is not the ability to do whatever one wants – but be accountable to some moral code. In the case of “Gays” the moral code is not compatible with traditional religious beliefs. Mormons believe that the practice of being Gay is wrong and immoral and that it should be shunned. Being Mormon myself, I do not hate Gay people, nor is it Church doctrine to hate Gay people. I do however believe that I have a moral obligation to stand up and fight it as a Christian! Christ loves everyone, that is true, however, Christ also does not condone the action. That is a fact of doctrine. What your community of like thinkers is doing to this lady and others who support Proposition 8 is beyond sensible and not only mean spirited but hostile and should be denounced. I pity the Gay community for it’s despicable acts of this last week. Your true “colors” have come out – what a party.

    Moreover, Mark at the Beach and others who state that the “law” allows you to be married flat out do not understand the law nor the process of making law. The decision by the California Court to nullify the first proposition that was passed “by the people” was not in any way making it a law! Judges can’t make law – nor, they should not be allowed to assume that they can make laws. What should have happened is that the verdict by the court should have then been taken up by the CA legislature again to meet the requirements to be in compliance with the verdict and bring it to the people again. Only the legislature can make law folks! That’s how government works. That’s how the proposition got on the ballot in the first place. Since it did not go back to the legislature – the marriages are invalid and illegal! Period! It should be said – just and honest government cannot work if you pick and choose which mechanism fits your agenda best.

    This whole notion of judicial laws and calls to stop the racism, fascism, etc., will in the end come back to haunt you as a Gay community and the people of this nation!

  50. Molly
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:10 pm

    Well said Todd.

    As for the rest of you who have discovered this blog through whatever link – I would agree that Marjorie Christofferson is a great victim in all of this. Even members of our community “feel bad” for the boycott and her tears. But in all honesty shit has the potential to hit the fan when the closet opens *trust us, we know!* I think what the main point in regards to her, is her audacity to capitalize on the GLBT community and at the same time vote against them.

    If you want to start preaching ethics and morals one only has to look at Ms. Christofferson to see the lack of both. If this boycott lasts longer than a few weeks I would be shocked, but what is worse is that you all have taken this one women, who has used our community in order to achieve her own success and turned HER in to the victim here.

    Lets not get stuck on the itsy details here and forget that we are a society based on equality and liberties… What prop 8 was planed to do and did was take rights away from fellow citizens. Its unfair. Its wrong and its … unAmerican.

  51. Bill M
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:14 pm

    She donates a hundred bucks and you get 10,000 in “reparations”? Sounds more like shakedown money. You’re taking a lesson right out of Jesse Jackson’s playbook. I don’t care if gays can marry but equating your struggle to the plight of blacks in the Jim Crow south, as some gay activists have, is too much. Todd seems to have a better handle on the correct argument. I’ll tell you, you won’t win any friends with boycotts and attacks on churches.

  52. Karima Taylor
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:14 pm

    Todd, very good argument. If Christians, Mormons and other religious groups had their basic right (of being able to practice their beliefs freely) taken away, you can bet that they would be upset too.

  53. Swibbie
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:15 pm

    Wow, Luke, please tell me you are not that stupid.

    First, thank you for admitting that homosexuality is a behavior and not an ethnic group. At least we got that part cleared up.

    Now, let’s take your argument to the logical conclusion. Does “behavior” include blowing up abortion clinics? What if that is somebody’s “pursuit of happiness”? What about stealing? That seems to make a lot of people happy. Is that protected. What about kidnapping? How about terrorizing people? All those are “behaviors”. Are they protected by the constitution?

    Billie, you really should expand your mind a little…of course that may require you to get beyond the 3rd grade.

    Luke, Prop 8 was done to overturn the judicial activism of your beloved 9th circuit. Since you seem to think you know so much about the constitution, you may want to read the part about separation of powers. If there are too many big words for you, you could probably get your mommy to help you.

  54. Bronson Page
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:28 pm

    Funny how none of us would be upset and arguing, and Marjorie would be serving scratch margaritas by the gallon, if SOMEBODY would have recognized and fostered EQUALITY in the first place by voting NO on Prop 8.

  55. Kevin A. Barry
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:33 pm

    As someone who almost joined the Catholic Church’s priesthood, I emphasize with her. I do. However, I can’t pity her for it would be wasted. America was founded on the principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness with the caveat that happiness be pursued so long as your pursuit does not infringe on the rights of another to pursue their own happiness. She earned a living on LGBT dollars and has no regrets about using those profits to strip us of our civil rights. She made a conscious choice to betray those who supported her and defended herself by hiding behind her blind faith.

    She claims to be a woman of faith and I respect that. However, blind faith is dangerous for it adversely affects our rational thinking. I can accept someone with different ideologies than me, especially when they own their decisions, but will refuse to accept it when someone uses “faith” as a way to excuse behaviors they regret. It is insulting to her clientele and to the religious community as a whole.

    My activism is out of necessity, not purely choice. I am looking at this issue through a purely legal context and it is against the ideals that America was founded on. While I don’t agree on the protests that have occured at the churches, I also don’t agree that Churches should be preaching politics from the pulpit and those that do should have their 501(c)3 status stripped. I’m feeling so many emotions right now, its hard to comprehend let alone to explain. If all men were created equal and we value the pursuit of happiness as long as it doesn’t infringe on the pursuit of another, why are we being legally persecuted? This is unacceptable. This is why I fight.

  56. Molly
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:35 pm

    It is amazing how MOST (NOT ALL) Yes on 8 are so willing to reduce a major civil rights issue in to one so ridden with fallacy in order to further their agenda.

    I am an open minded individual, I can see how many of you would not agree with my lifestyle. I can respect your POV and maybe that is the problem! Maybe my lack of seething hate and intolerance is working against me and our community … Maybe we should go the route of Karl Rove and just throw shit against the wall until it sticks, it worked for the YES folks…. In fact, all of this propaganda about how gays have turned against blacks and want to burn churches down is a silly attempt to make us look bad. I have been at these marches and the most disrespect I have seen is a “shame on you” … that is another blog all together…

    I keep coming back to the reality – most of our community is not like MOST of the YES group. We know what intolerance looks like, we can see it in our own families faces. We came from your towns and homes and churches and families and we chose a better option, happiness and the respect of all people – regardless of their beliefs. Truth is, I feel sorry for most of the Yes folks. Full of anger, hate, intolerance, repression….

    Its a shame that our love and understanding has come to bite us in the ass. But, times are changing my friends and I think that Ms. Coyote ugly is a glimpse of that change. To quote one of my favorite signs “No more Mr. Nice Gay”

  57. Sam Page, CFT
    November 14, 2008 @ 6:48 pm

    Well said, Todd!!!
    Peace, Love, Lunges,

  58. The Plumber
    November 14, 2008 @ 7:05 pm

    Easy now!

    It’s just a little “community activism”. If this old bitty can’t handle a bunch of homosexual thugs, then she’s obviously in the wrong community.

    “Get in their faces!”, that’s what The One says. And apparently it’s the only way to overturn a 2,000 year old tradition that billions of people consider sacred.

    Fascist thugs. In the courts and in the streets.

    Tolerance? Yeah. Right.

  59. Ira Rosembaum
    November 14, 2008 @ 7:22 pm

    Wow. So much hate from those that desire tolerance. And I am talking about those against prop 8. Really we speak about tolerance, but we can’t practice it ourselves? Since when has marriage been a civil right? And if it is? Can’t we try and educate, appeal to people’s sensitivities? Love them even when they are hateful in our eyes?

    Where is this tolerance you so desire? You want people to tolerate your wants and needs, yet you cannot tolerate them if they disagree? I’m not sure the people that want to keep marriage man woman are so hateful, just seeing the issue from a different stance. and if they are hateful is the best response to hate them back and do hateful things to them? Hate begets hate.

  60. Jungle Jil
    November 14, 2008 @ 7:28 pm

    Religious right supporters boycott Ford, Disney, and other businesses that support gay marriage? Yay! We’re wonderful Christian warriors! We’re moral and holy!

    Religious right supporters get boycotted because they are against gay marriage? Waah! We’re religiously persecuted! You’re [expletive deleted].

  61. Ira Rosembaum
    November 14, 2008 @ 7:55 pm

    I’m sorry I don’t see any difference between this and McCarthism.

    Why give the right a reason to hate us?

    I am gay. I don’t believe in gay marriage. Are you going to hate me as well? I want the same civil liberties as everyone, and I want to love and live with the one I love and have sex with whom ever I chose. And you know what I can. People have the right to not except my life style, as I have the right to not except theirs.

    Lets be honest? Since when can gay men ever truly commit anyways? I know I can’t! haha.

    Ok all kidding aside. We hate when the right wingers hate on us, persecute us, condemn us. Why are we returning fire with that same hate? Isn’t there a better way?

  62. Molly
    November 14, 2008 @ 7:56 pm

    Ira. We tried to appeal to the sensitivities before the election through our ads. Truth is, people have been tolerating us and not accepting us. Using us for our great style, and to get a laugh off of :) We no longer want to be tolerated, what an awful concept! We want to be accepted, respected full members of society with the same rights as everyone else.

    The line in the sand has been drawn and this issue is not going to just go away. We do not want to be relegated to separate and almost equal aka “domestic partnerships”.

    You are on track with the education – we do need to educate people about this situation. Problem is, most people are sheep and do as they are told from the pulpit (see above article) without critical thought. Out on the streets “educating people”, I had been told time and time again that a yes vote was about RELIGION nothing else. I was also told time and time again that they were going to vote yes, but they loved our community and had a gay(fill in the blank)…

    You know what? We are done with allowing our rights to be dictated by the religious establishment or distorted ad campaign and it will take a combined effort of education, public relations, marching, media, celebrity, love and money to get us there.

    Joining church and state to create our laws is not what America is about, if you want that type of country move to Iran, Iraq or whatever else country its vogue to invade for the the purpose of instituting freedom. Oh in the great words of Alanis, “Isn’t it ironic?”

  63. Jesse
    November 14, 2008 @ 8:53 pm

    So, should all 52 percent of Californians who voted yes lose there jobs and businesses? That would be awesome for the economy. This is stupid. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and you are on your way!!!

  64. Gay Political Extortion Crushes LDS Prop 8 Supporter « The Black Cordelias
    November 14, 2008 @ 10:11 pm

    […] of Prop 8 may now be subject to–something I realized on coming across this extraordinary blog account of a meeting at the legendary restaurant El Coyote in Hollywood, not far from where I grew […]

  65. Tim
    November 14, 2008 @ 10:36 pm

    Talk about HATE, BIGOTRY and HYPOCRISY! Last time I checked we all have the right to worship and vote as we please. We don’t have to agree, we don’t have to like it but the more I read, the more sympathetic I become toward Ms. Christofferson, in fact I will gather as many friends as I can to eat in her restaurant. She voted her conscience and has that right. The more people single out people such as her, the more harm they do to their own cause. There are FAR more Catholics and evangelical Christians in this state than Mormons. Oh I get it, prey and the smallest of minorities. Let’s see 7 in 10 blacks who voted, voted YES on 8, as did most Catholics and many other Christian groups. Would you go after them?? Of course not, prey on the 1% who exercised their constitutional right. HOW BRAVE!

  66. elmo
    November 14, 2008 @ 10:39 pm

    White middle-class Californians are being scapegoated for the passage of Proposition 8, which was overwhelmingly approved by blacks and hispanics turned out in record numbers to vote for Obama.

    I’d like to see the fascists who are terrorizing Mormons take the same tactics to the black and hispanic churches and neighborhoods. Of couse we know these bullies would be slapped into next week if they tried.

  67. The death of tolerance - I Call BS!
    November 14, 2008 @ 10:40 pm

    […] Anti-gay bigots have even targeted individual businesses for demonstrations and boycotts because they supported the gay marriage amendment. […]

  68. Patrick
    November 15, 2008 @ 1:59 am

    If someone gives money to a cause they believe in that is their right. If they speak out against or for something that is their right. If they vote for something that is their right. If you disagree you can choose not to patronize that business that is your right. You can protest, that is your right. You see how democracy works? But be mindful, if people disagree with your treatment of those with whom you disagree others may excercise their rights against you and others of your like mind. The fire with which you use for your torches may burn you as well.

  69. Brett
    November 15, 2008 @ 2:05 am

    Elton John is against gay marriage. So is he a hateful bigot? Why don’t you attack and boycott Elton John?


    And what about the 3 judges on the California supreme court that voted against legalizing gay marriage. Are they just bigots and hate mongers? Then why aren’t those judges being forced out? Where is the outrage against those 3 judges? Or is it possible they have expertise in the law and know that gay marriage is not a civil right?

    This new “law” barely passed 4 against 3. That doesn’t mean it is suddenly correct.

  70. Joe
    November 15, 2008 @ 4:57 am

    From Stonewall to the present, when have homosexuals been anything but an unhinged extortionate mob? And notice that the only people they chose to pick on are a smaller minority than themselves. If the California Supreme Court overturns Prop 8 expect proponents, who number in the tens of millions, to systematically work toward relieving four justices of their jobs before passing yet another man/woman marriage proposition. The Gay rights movement in CA has reached its zenith, and its only going to recede in influence from now on due to (da, da-da, daaa) non-whites (NOT the LDS), whose numbers are only increasing. California’s future is very traditional heterosexual — and also much tackier and poorer. Also, expect Prop 8 supporters to begin patronizing businesses being boycotted by gays.

  71. PJ
    November 15, 2008 @ 6:26 am

    Please, by all means, continue the boycotts and other fascist behavior.

    You lost by 4% this time. Continue to turn people off by putting people out of work during a recession and you will lose by a greater margin next time.

    You might scare people, extort them into making donations to you, cause them to not donate to the pro marriage side, but when they vote again, they will all vote against your hate.

  72. Dale
    November 15, 2008 @ 6:46 am

    Elton must be a self loathing fag.

  73. Will
    November 15, 2008 @ 8:26 am

    I’m uneasy with the LBGT community singling out mormons, when clearly the majority of californians agree that the definition of marriage should not be changed.
    Honestly, this smacks of religious bigotry. Where are the boycotts of the thousands of black and latino and catholic restaurant owners who support traditional marriage?

    Those whose style themselves as oppressed and victims of bigotry become oppressors and religous bigots … sad. and ironic.

  74. joeballz
    November 15, 2008 @ 9:22 am

    The majority rules. Get over it feminucci’s. I’ll say it like it is, most people are disgusted with your perverted way of life. You cupcakes expect people to be tolerant of your way of life? Learn to respect how MOST people feel about your way of life. Pathetic! Every single one of you are pathetic.

  75. SGT Ted
    November 15, 2008 @ 10:37 am

    Do gays really want to go down the “rule by the mob” road? Your self assumed moral authority is not supported by the law. Your next step is the Courts, not mau-mauing and intimidating your opponents. Your violence tinged and intimidate by the mob “Mormom bashing” could very well bring a backlash of violent gay bashing. “Tolerance” is a two way street. You might start practicing what you preach.

  76. Jacq.
    November 15, 2008 @ 11:00 am

    I am very much in line with what Eric posted early on. And I feel, after reading many of the other posts, needs to be revisited…
    Eric writes:
    “…Marjorie Christofferson is apparently not actually the owner of El Coyote. She is a manager and a part of the family that owns the restaurant, but she is not the owner. Her mother is. She is the only mormon in the family. Her husband is not mormon either. The staff and the family apparently does not share her personal stance associated with Christofferson’s religious views. She alone made that contribution. She didn’t ask them about it first. They found out about it when we did. The employees are just as devastated as we are.”

    If that is true, if Christofferson in not the owner, then where do we go from here? This woman’s donation, albeit ignorant, is her right – just as it is our right to disagree. But what are we boycotting here – a lone woman? Or the establishement she works for but does not own? Yes, I understand it may be a family owned business but would you want your father/mother/sister/brother’s establishment boycotted simply because you worked there and made a donation to, say, Obama’s campaign?

    Eric continues: “How would your views change if you knew one of those very same gay couples who got married, actually works there at El Coyote? Well they do. So boycotting that restaurant would also harm one of those couples. Not to mention the large number of gay people who actually work there.”

    As I was reading one of the many posts that followed, I was particularly offended by a comment Mark at the Beach posted: “I feel sorry for the 89 people and their families that work at the restaurant, but they will find other jobs.”

    Mark! COME ON!! They will find other jobs??! Really, in this recession?! You honestly believe that? – Sounds like to me you don’t feel sorry for them or their families at all. You sound deluded and want to make yourself feel better for wishing El Coyote to go down in flames. And also, Mark at the Beach, does it bother you at all that some fo those 89 people working there are married gay couples trying to make a living?

  77. Male-Erotika.com » Sexual Politics » Porn star confronts Prop H8-er
    November 16, 2008 @ 6:20 pm

    […] during a question and answer session freelance journalist Sam Page — an “ex-Mormon, reformed porn star and Hollywood fitness trainer” — asked […]

  78. See, protesting works! » A Couple Things » A couple things about politics, sports, travel, and other stuff.
    November 17, 2008 @ 9:45 am

    […] More info here: Peace Love Lunges. […]

  79. Marie
    November 18, 2008 @ 6:11 pm

    Shame on you hypocrites. You took her money, love and support. You claim to want peace and justice. Where is her right to do as she feels is right? She gave far more to you and your community than she gave to Prop. 8. I say let all you immoral fools go and boycott her and her restaurant. The right always comes out and the wrong will continue to fail.

  80. lee
    November 18, 2008 @ 9:50 pm


    i don’t know what rallies you’ve been to, but have you seen the signs and video footage of the LA temple protest/riot?
    did you see the graffiti on the temple wall?

    did you see what happened the the christian group in san francisco?

    go margie. good for her. if i had been there i would have helped her stand up a little straighter.

    there is nothing wrong with boycotting businesses that have made statements or donated to causes you disagree– but it’s just mean and vindictive to go after a whole business because of one person’s donation. and not very smart for the cause. it just exposes the mob mentality.

  81. Molly
    November 18, 2008 @ 11:27 pm


    I was at the Mormon temple rally. I have been documenting the events and have video and photos of the events and a lot of the signs.

    It would seem that the folks calling the GLBT community out on intolerance, in my opinion as a form of red herring, have not and have never even been to a rally. They would rather preach, blame and name-call from behind the anonymity of their computer. Leaders of the ‘Yes’ campaign go on TV and throw out this nonsense about the “N” word being used and us turning on the Black community and it is becoming absurd.

    You know Lee, mob mentality goes both ways. Just as there are extremes on the Yes side, there are also some on the No side, it is just a fact of life. I can only speak from my experience and considering I have gone many of the protests since the passage of 8 – I think I have a very good idea of the atmosphere and I am not aware of any riots, graffiti, or signage that would draw concern.

    Further, lets not forget that it is the GLBT community that has been stripped of rights, and yes there is anger and frustration. I think on the whole our community has shown restraint and grace in a time of confusion and much emotion.

    Last, I am just wondering, and I hope that some of you “yes” folks can chime in on this, but why are you so concerned with how I live my life? No matter what you do OR how you vote OR what you think, you can not erase us.

  82. tryongoldengate
    November 19, 2008 @ 10:00 am

    I’m not a supporter or an opponent, but a Christian observer wondering what position I would take if I was back in California.

    At this point in my spiritual walk (I have a lot of growing to do), I know this:
    – As a Christian, I’m called to care how everyone lives, not in a nosy sense, but in an “on guard in case you need my help” way. To be a true friend and fellow traveler on my Christian journey. To love one another.
    – I don’t want to deny a person his or her right to happiness. Happiness is often broadly defined with conflicting notions — spiritual v. temporal forms of joy.
    – With that said, I crack open the Bible and Christ says that narrow is the gate (Matthew 7 13-14). If that’s the case, then most of us are done for. Often I hear that when we sin, and I mean Christians as well, of course, that it’s a matter of not walking with God. It’s a matter of discipleship. It can take the form of hating one another, tearing one another down, but it can also take the form of cowardice on my part for not speaking up when I witness sin. Anyway, it’s an enormously complex issue for me, and I hope to reach a point where I can better understand God, His will, and how I can love others. That will come from my walk with God and not dictates by others with their own agendas — be they pastors or activists.

    I know I didn’t reach any real conclusions. I’m just trying to illustrate how it’s a real internal struggle for many of us.

  83. manaen
    November 19, 2008 @ 3:33 pm

    My fiancee and I ate at El Coyote for the first time Monday night. The place was busy but we were able to talk with several of the staff members. They’re united in supporting Marjorie’s rights. Marjorie sat and talked with us for about 20 minutes — turns out that she and my fiancee are members of the same LDS ward.
    Some of the things that she told us are:
    > SHE HAS NO OWNERSHIP OF THE RESTAURANT; SHE IS AN EMPLOYEE. She seemed surprised that people said she’s part-owner — didn’t anyone ask her before creating this brouhaha? I don’t see how this has anything to do with her rights to believe, think, vote, and donate as she chooses but some of her opponents seemed to believe that her supposed ownership mattered.
    > The business has not and will not make any politically-oriented donations. It has/does/will make non-political charitable and community donations for counseling, welfare, etc. that include help to the homosexual community – similar to help from LDS Relief Services that comes without questions about recipients’ political/gender orientation. The contribution mentioned by the male employee in the video of last Thursday’s meeting comprised personal donations from some of the employees; none of the funds came from the business. Talking with her convinced me that this co-worker was in error when he said she’d retract her donation if she could.
    > One of their managers has been with the restaurant for 50 years. Other employees have been there 20-30 years. The staff, like the neighborhood, is a mixture of homosexuals and heterosexuals. All are attentive, polite, and rallying around Marjorie. Nearly 100 people depend upon El Coyote for their paychecks.
    After talking with Marjorie, we decided to make El Coyote one of our regular stops. I would that all of us outsiders follow the example of El Coyote’s staff and come together there in peace.

  84. Julia
    November 20, 2008 @ 2:44 pm

    As a straight person in California who thinks its appalling that there could even be a vote to take away people’s rights, I thank people for pointing out where to boycott. I would support boycotting all businesses and individuals who supported prop 8. They have the right to donate their money as they want, and I have the right to spend my money only on businesses I want to succeed, lead by people I can respect.

  85. Rory
    November 21, 2008 @ 3:00 pm

    I for one feel I should make an extra large donation to those who support prop 8. From the images, both still and video which show exactly who is intolerant and the facist rantings [sic] from the GLTB confirm it. You see it’s ok for them to protest, beat people up, vandalize and terrorize people who happen to think prop 8 is good because those folks are all racists, bigots anyway. The GLTB community can’t stand it when someone doesn’t accept the sexual behaviour they practice and they practice there own form of bigotry and facism against those who promote prop 8 and yet if we went out into the streets and did to them what they do they would be screaming bloody murder. I support prop 8 just because of the actions of the GLTB community after the MAJORITY of the populace [sic] decided what they wanted marrige [sic] to be.

  86. mananen
    November 22, 2008 @ 1:23 am

    Let me get this straight. Marjorie is one of 89 employees. This was enough to demonstrate, boycott, harass customers and that one employee. So the standard is that if 1/89 of a business’s employees voted for Prop 8, you will do these things to that business.
    Given this 1/89 standard you set with El Coyote, and more than half the state voted for Prop 8, are there any businesses that you can patronize? Looking at you from the other side, your stand appears to have removed you from our economy.

  87. Anonymous
    November 28, 2008 @ 1:42 pm

    Actually It may work out well if can get the court to overturn the election then we can have them overturn one more and install John Mccain as president

  88. Fred
    December 4, 2008 @ 5:35 pm

    So this means that I being for Prop 8 should now investigate any business that has an employee that made a contribution against the proposition, I should boycott it. I never thought of that kind of hatred before.

  89. Jonny Boy
    December 8, 2008 @ 10:25 pm

    The gay activists are so insanely hypocritical it’s hilarious. They scream out in hate (AGAINST HATE!!) and bigotry towards those that don’t support their views and way of life. Boy, there is no way they’ll be getting any support from me or my family. Try to bully people into voting your way will guarantee I’ll vote for the opposition.

  90. an american
    December 31, 2008 @ 11:37 pm

    i’ve been boycotting since november, and it feels AMAZING.

    it’s my right as an american to spend my money anywhere i please.

    if anyone has a problem with me NOT spending my “gay” cash el coyote, or el pollo in silver lake …. THAT’S JUST TOO DAMN BAD. GET OVER IT.

    let these words of wisdom cook in your brain for a while:

    “religious zombies harbor the fears and insecurities of the UNEDUCATED”.

  91. Sam Page, CFT
    January 1, 2009 @ 8:03 pm

    @an american: what exactly “feels AMAZING” about boycotting, can you help me understand that?

  92. Why I Switched to a Vegetarian Diet | PEACE. LOVE. LUNGES.
    November 20, 2009 @ 3:59 pm

    […] the first time the reflux beast had gripped me. Five years ago, (on my 30th) we gathered at El Coyote with the same gruesome result. Back then, I didn’t know tacos and tequila were GERD’s […]

  93. DMann
    March 23, 2010 @ 11:17 am

    Sam, I have boycotted businesses before because they provided horrible service or sold really crappy products. There is a sense of self-satisfaction, but it’s really nothing more than that. Basically it’s a way to make oneself feel superior or like some victory has been achieved, even when the exact opposite might be true.

  94. Scorched Earth
    May 8, 2010 @ 11:49 am

    […] to media figures. Margie Christofferson, a co-owner of the El Coyote Café in California was reduced to tears by a mob of gay rights activists angry for giving $100 to help passed Prop 8. She apologized if she offended the gay community, but failed […]

  95. Why Is What Is A “Right” For The Left, Is “Bigotry & Hate” From The Right? | Sinclair News – LS News Group
    February 16, 2012 @ 12:46 pm

    […] El Coyote Owner Apologizes For Prop. 8 Contribution; Boycott Looms […]

  96. The Fanatic Disciples of Equality : The Other McCain
    March 27, 2013 @ 5:35 am

    […] The elderly co-owner of a Mexican restaurant, who had given $100  to support the referendum, was  driven to tears as she confronted “60 members of Los Angeles’ LGBT community” who demanded an apology and an […]

  97. Wisconsin Progressives Pivot From Koch Attacks To Small Donor Lists
    October 4, 2013 @ 12:11 am

    […] already has very liberal access to small donor lists, and the left brutally exploits this. A restaurateur who donated $100 to a pro Prop 8 group was crushed by a boycott onslaught. The […]

  98. How Does ‘Agree To Disagree` Work For Brendan Eich?
    April 7, 2014 @ 9:49 am

    […] the money.  But understand GLAAD and its proxies have targeted big and small, shaking down small restaurant owners who can barely pay their help.  The price you pay for your political free speech is to be on the […]

  99. Disclosure, hypocrisy, and hyperbole in campaign finance
    April 23, 2014 @ 7:34 am

    […] allies to harass, boycott, bully, and all too often destroy the lives of individuals, both rich and not so rich,  powerful and not so powerful,  who hold unpopular political positions. This concern was also on […]