Prop 8 Supporters Threatened

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Dmac77, Feb 7, 2009.

  1. Dmac77 macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #1
    This is just going to far IMO. People are entitled to their beliefs, and they shouldn't be threatened and harassed because of them.

    Don
     
  2. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #2
    Anyone who plays politics, especially dirty politics like the Mormon church did, should expect to pay the price. Politics is a dirty business.
     
  3. Dmac77 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #3
    So in your opinion it's okay for these people to be harassed, and for their addresses to be listed online, so people can threaten them?

    Don
     
  4. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #4
    I think it is wrong to do any act like what these people are getting done to them and they should be left well enough alone. It is a clearly going against what the intent of the law was about showing where donors come from.

    This to me is an example of harassment and the owners of the site should be prosecuted. I also feel google should step in and shut it down. At the very least it can cut off the access to google maps.

    Now any one who does any harassment to these people need to have the book thrown at them and have the maximum punishment by law. They need to have an example set.

    It high time minorities stop getting away with stuff because they are the minority. People scream when these things are done to the minority

    The crime being done to these people (supporters of prop 8) are nothing less than hate crimes and need to be treated as such.
     
  5. Dmac77 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #5
    You took the words right out of my mouth, and I'm gay.

    Don
     
  6. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #6
    I say what goes around comes around. Karma's a bitch. 2 wrongs don't make a right, but I can't have much sympathy for a group who worked to take away someone else's civil rights.
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    I do not exect much support here. A lot of people here have no problem with hate crimes be put against the majority yet scream bloody murder when it is against the minority.

    in the example here it is the gays that are the minority.

    My personal view is there is no excuse for ANY hate crime and all hate crimes should be treated harshly and swiftly and here I see it as nothing less than hate crimes.

    Hate crimes should and do have very harsh punishments.

    I would like to point out that I do not support prop 8 nor agree with the people who do politically. I just feel very strongly about the harassment and I though the state should of kept hte supporters private because this BS would happen. The laws need to be rewritten maybe expectantly banning them from being published on the web and clearly stated using any of that information to attach some one has some insanely huge fine and punishment.
     
  8. FreeState macrumors 68000

    FreeState

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #8
    This is very sloppy journalism. The website listed had nothing to do with the acts and letters. The white powder was sent in Nov. The website was not even live then. This whole article is based on a press release from the Prop 8 supporters and fails to point out many of the facts.
     
  9. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #9

    Not to mention that website is merely going off of what is considered public data.

    Political campaign contributions are public record. I'm not sure exactly how it is with ballot initiatives, but with candidates, if you donate more than, I think it's $250, during an election cycle, the candidate must submit that to the FEC who would in turn make that public record for the world to see. I was a bit short of $250 in donations to the Obama campagin, but if I donated at least that amount, I would be in the FEC's searchable database and anyone who typed in my name would see my address, my employer and how much I contributed.
     
  10. EricNau Moderator emeritus

    EricNau

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #10
    It is not Google's obligation nor duty to take such action; doing so would undermine their place as an objective internet search engine.

    Do you want neutral results, or do you want a search engine that provides biased results based on what the company finds favorable?
     
  11. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #11
    Don- do you have any idea what people like me and others who came before have endured so that you would feel comfortable coming out at your age? Do you even have a clue? People have died so that this society could get to that point. People have lost their jobs and their families. I've received death threats and been threatened repeatedly with physical violence because I spoke out. Do you think that when I called the police in rural Ohio to report these things that they gave a crap? You have no idea what others have been through so that you could be comfortable with yourself at such an early age.

    Freedom of speech does not come free. You pay a price for your opinions. If someone is going to fight to take away others' rights, there will be a backlash, and people should understand that. Now, while I don't agree with death threats and such, BOYCOTTS ARE ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE. We absolutely have a right to know which businesses support or oppose us and buy or not buy products accordingly. Why in the hell would I buy something from a company that supported this? WHY? Why would you?

    Absolutely f***in NO! If you're going to throw money at something to take away the rights of your fellow citizens, then you should have the balls to stand up and say so. Actions have consequences.
     
  12. Dmac77 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #12
    I would buy something from one of those companies if I liked the product.

    My main point is that this website, could cause harm to come to people. And thats the last thing that I want. How would it look, if someone went on that site, found someone's address, and then went to their house and started a fire? It would make gays, and supporters of gay rights look bad. These people are entitled to their views, and they shouldn't have their addresses plastered on the internet for all to see. It would be like someone putting my address on the internet, because I contributed $25 to McCain's campaign (which I did). People have a right to their privacy. I'm not trying to defend their views, but they are entitled to them.

    Don
     
  13. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
    Then you shoot yourself in the foot.

    Don- you cannot control what others do. But we have a damn good reputation for being a peaceful movement. I wouldn't worry about gay people doing such things.

    As for privacy, your vote is private. But when you contribute to a campaign monetarily, that is and should be public record for many reasons. That is for everyone's protection.
     
  14. mogzieee macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #14
    Forgive me, as I do not live in California... or even America infact... but this sort of things happen all the time in the UK:

    Animal testing, fox hunting, euthanasia... all getting so messy like this and the government usually doesn't give a sh_t... not wanting to get involved, just eventually voting with the majority, not actually what's right.
     
  15. Dmac77 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Dmac77

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Location:
    Michigan
    #15
    For the most part that's true, but there are always a few rogues. There is no need for this website to exist, and you have to admit that this could cause some problems.

    Don
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    As I said before- free speech isn't free. In other words, if you say something that is unpopular, there can be repercussions. I've experienced that. Since this is a free country, we need to accept this fact. Not everything we say is protected from consequences.
     
  17. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #17
    It's public information! Like I said earlier, if you donated more than $250 to the McCain campaign, your address would be plastered on the internet for all to see. Those are the rules and regulations of the Federal Election Commission. This website is completely legal and are doing nothing wrong. If you want that changed, go tell the FEC. Good luck with that.
     
  18. és: macrumors 6502a

    és:

    #18
    Are they? Ironic, giving what prop 8 is all about.
     
  19. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    Obviously I'm not supporting death threats or mailing white powder to people. Those tactics are quite simply abhorrent.

    However, it is hardly a secret that if you choose to engage in your right of free speech, that people will take notice of you. They may even take legitimate actions against you, such as a boycott or protest. Such is life.

    Free speech does not mean speech free of consequences.
     
  20. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816

    XnavxeMiyyep

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Washington
    #20
    I was going to say the same thing.

    Death threats are something that should be dealt with, but other than that, I see no problem with ostracizing those who are opposed to civil liberties.
     
  21. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #21
    Facts on the ground are, this alleged harassment isn't happening in any measurable quantity. There were very few such incidents even during the campaign. Given the sick propaganda every Californian was receiving every day at the time, I'm actually surprised how few.

    It was a little funny to watch national news in the weeks following. You'd have thought the state was in anarchy. I wondered what California they were reporting on, because it certainly wasn't this one. After the election, opponents turned immediately to legal challenges and peaceful demonstration.

    Essentially, Prop 8 supporters have been continuing their propaganda campaign after the election. They see this as an opportunity to maximize nationwide anti-gay sentiment by feeding lazy journalists stories that suggest Ordinary Decent People are being assaulted in the streets by Those Awful, Awful Homosexuals. Only it just isn't happening. Good thing it hasn't occurred to them they can scratch an "H" in their own cheeks and it looks the same backwards or forwards.

    As far as a boycott, though, I have had this discussion IRL as well, and to me asking whether it's "appropriate" or "acceptable" to boycott businesses is the wrong approach. It's more like, if I had found the name of a friend or family member on that list, we'd have a problem, one that would very likely result in severed contact between myself and that person. Boycotting a business is the same principle. The question is not whether it's kosher for me to take some positive action (as subtly implied by "a boycott"), it's why in the world I should force myself to continue any interaction with people whom I cannot respect. What twisted notion of "fairness" would require that?
     
  22. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #22
    Actually, that was the entire point behind California's disclosure law.

    Why? They haven't done anything criminal or even negligent. Would you sue the phone company because their phonebook allowed a stalker to follow someone around?
    Again, why? Google Maps isn't being used illegally or in some way that subverts the intent of the law. It is, in fact, taking the law's purpose to its highest possible level of execution.

    Indeed. If you break the law by harming someone or their possessions, then you should be treated like any other criminal (and if you're caught, you will be).
    I don't really understand this statement. What exactly do minorities "get away with?" And, while we're at it, which minorities? Racial ones? Blacks and hispanics are more likely to be in prison relative to whites, so they certainly aren't "getting away" any more than white people are.

    If we're talking about gay people, they have a history of being fairly law abiding, so what exactly are they "getting away" with?
    No, they are not hate crimes. A hate crime is dependent on the victim having a trait that others despise for no other reason than previous prejudice. In this case, someone who commits a crime against a Prop 8 supporter is committing a traditional crime complete with means, opportunity, and motive.

    We might say the same about the local phonebook or Facebook, or any other type of publication that puts people's information into the public domain.

    This website (and the others like it) make it possible for gay people and their supporters to know who exactly took their rights away, and consequently stop supporting them economically.

    In the case of individuals who donated, it can be a useful tool for canvassing in future campaigns on the issue.

    Indeed it is. There have been relatively few incidents of violence in regards to Prop 8 in California. This "article" (and I use that term loosely) is really painting a one-sided picture.

    Edit: And everything that Gelfin wrote above. :p
     
  23. plinden macrumors 68040

    plinden

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2004
    #23
    A couple of weeks ago friends of ours, a same-sex married couple, had their house and car egged, with special attention paid to the anti-Prop 8 sticker on their car.

    This wasn't in the heat of the campaign, rather more than two months later.

    Egging may seem harmless, but it's pure harassment, just because they are a gay couple living together, and was directly related to Prop 8.
     
  24. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #24
    Problem is, from a media standpoint, that's a "Dog Bites Man" story. I should be clear, I in no way meant to imply that the traditional harassment of gay people by straight bigots isn't alive and well, but merely that reports suggesting an epidemic of the inverse are beyond exaggerated.
     
  25. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #25
    As I understand it this is publicly available information. All the website does is collate it in one place. The website does not control what people do with that information, so why shoot the messenger?

    I agree with Lee. Boycotts yes, harassment no. If someone thinks you should have less rights than they do, you should be aware who they are so you don't fund their "lifestyle".
     

Share This Page