John Diaz, my counterpart at the San Francisco Chronicle, tells a story of the treatment that a supporter of Proposition 8 received after writing a letter to the Chron. (Here's Diaz's column on the issue.) The reaction to the letter writer was to squash his free speech. That doesn't help the cause of of those supporting same-sex marriage.
Diaz wrote; "Opponents of Proposition 8 used Internet search engines to find the letter writer's small business, his Web site (which included the names of his children and dog), his phone number and his clients. And they posted that information in the "Comments" section of SFGate.com."
Diaz disagrees with the letter writer's position on Proposition 8, but vigorously supports his right to state his position publicly without retribution.
Here's more from Diaz's column, which we reprinted this morning on the Other Opinions page of The Bee:
"Certain advocates of the cause are alienating people -- and this approach needs to be called out. Remember, the No on 8 campaign was shouting "blackmail!" at the top of its lungs when the Yes side sent certified letters to major donors threatening to "out" them in a press release unless they also contributed to the marriage ban. Of course, that "threat" had a tinge of absurdity. Corporations such as PG&E, McDonald's and Levi Strauss were not afraid of being "outed" for their association with the marriage-equality cause. They were well aware that their major donations amounted to a public statement that might cause them to lose -- and gain -- customer goodwill.
"Opponents of same-sex marriage should not be let off the hook for their post-election tactics. There is already talk of a recall campaign against California Supreme Court justices if they overturn Proposition 8. The judiciary must not be intimidated in this nation of laws."
This is Diaz's final paragraph:
"Intimidation, through attempts to chill free speech or an independent judiciary, should have no part in this debate. The leaders on both sides should have the honesty to recognize it within their camps -- and the courage to condemn it."
Why on earth do the folks on both sides of this issue not fess up to the main sources of the battle. It is the 'marriage' word.....plain and simple. That word is sure to rail most, what ever side is taken.
MOI truly believes that no one wants to deny any one 'rights' but so long as 'marriage' is THE word used to mark 'same sex unions' the fires will continue to burn.
To be true and MOI will go to grave believing this, that is why the NO on 8 crowd use 'marriage' and will settle for no other. Sad really, as there s so much more to fight about that is so very important.
All of which leads MOI to believe that it has not been 'their finest hour' the NO on 8 crowd or the YES on 8 crowd. To my mind, homosexuals in California have shown that they are as mean, nasty and blinkered as the folks they attack, only making the situation more ugly.
What is so very sad is that the media makes much about homosexuals who feel cheated by not being able to 'marry', what about the countless homosexuals in California who do not feel the need to 'marry', does their voice not matter?
Less any not know, let MOI be very clear, MOI is a HOMOSEXUAL and a Roman Catholic and loads of other things thrown into the mix. MOI was partnered with another man for 20 years. MOI knows a thing or tow about the homosexual mindset, and there is much that is not to like. Calling folks 'homophobes' due to lack of support on this issue is one one the traits not admired. MOI has received much hate posts due to his lack of support on the 'marriage' issue, and will not back down from his beliefs.
If the good folks of California truly want 'gay marriage' it will come to pass, and MOI will live with that, not be a part of but will accept the wishes of the people.
The sdad truth is that some homosexuals believe that you can gain acceptance through the ballot box, and not earn it the old fashion way, earn it through respect and actions. More's the pity.
I would hope many would not use the acts of a few unlawfull people to overshadow the issue.
Unfortunatly with any issue you have individuals that take things to extreme to the point of unlawfulness.
For example civil rights activists like the Black Panthers, they did not speak for the masses. Unfortunatly people used the Black Panther show of force to justify opposing civil rights for blacks.
I swear. People are so stupid.
Since when does posting someone's personal information without their permission pass for reasonable discourse?
I'm so tired of the finger pointing about which side did which idiotic tactic. There are morons on boths sides of the issue who aren't confident enough in what they stand for to let their words and logic stand alone, and they're wrong. As an opponent of Prop. 8 and a supporter of same-sex marriage, I don't condone these treacherous activities.
Shove off with your death threats and other questionable tactics.
I do believe, that we as a species cannot overcome what we are. So why don't we leave the matter to impersonal jurisprudence, based on constitutionalty, the supreme law of the land.
On Wednesday night (after election night Nov 5th) I spoke with my brother, who lives in West Hollywood in the heart of "Boys Town" and has for over 25 years. He told me he had woke up in a cold sweat at 4:00 in the morning thinking that Prop 8 was going to pass. He said he felt sick from the anxiety. As we talked about the marches going on I tried to convince him that marching and protesting and the law suits are making them look bad. He reminded me of something. He said, "You have to understand, people are incredibly furious. We've just been put in front of the public and our validity as people has been voted on by others. How dare they! How DARE they!" He also said one of the signs he saw someone carrying made clear sense. It said: "When do we get to vote on YOUR marriage?"
This would explain their outrage but doesn't condone their actions. I'll admit, I can't say as I blame them because I would probably feel the same outrage if I were in their shoes.
Rob, I used to say the same sort of thing you're saying. What if they called it something else? Not marriage. Would it, could it be made totally equal then? I've seen that as a possible compromise. Again my brother reminded me that if they do that, then it's like saying separate but equal. You can't have the same rights as me but we'll let you have something similar to show you no hard feelings. Sort of like, you can go to school but not mine. You can ride the bus but you have to sit in the back.
Here's what I think of all this and I told him. It's not over yet. First, quit with the rowdy behavior, it hurts your cause, and focus on convincing everyone that sexual orientation is not a choice, it's born in. It can not be controlled, taught or changed, anymore than you can change a straight person. That's your battle and that's what you need to prove to get your equality. Second, the Supreme Court doesn't want to touch this issue because the majority of Americans don't agree with same sex marriage, BUT they know they can't ban it because that would be unconstitutional.
"Scot" That the Supreme Court won't touch same sex marriage; is that based on fact or supposition. If it is fact; can the Supreme Court just say we don't feel like ruling on it? I thought matters of constitutionality were their delegated duty in this 3 part government set up of Checks and Balances.
They aren't volunteering, I'll put it that way. I'm not really sure actually if they HAVE to rule on every case presented to them. I don't know if they can turn down a case. Perhaps someone else knows.
I have heard they don't really want to rule on this one and that they and many others prefer states make their own decisions. So my comment is based on that. Personally I think eventually they will have to rule on it. I just think it will come to that and they won't be able to avoid it.
Will it seem that important when the terrorists start lighting things up over here like they did in India today?Right now we have the luxury to wring our hands and furrow our brows over these matters but how long will that last.These may be the"Good Old Days"....talk about "Change".
Nice little demonstration of "tolerance" by those "Homosexual Activists" in Michigan.Maybe Adam has an opinion on this display.
I assume you're referencing this Brian?
Although, I'm not sure what you're attempting to draw out of me from your comment. I thought it was pretty clear where I stood on this issue already. Do you think my stance has changed since November 25th?
Or do I have to make a personal statement to the public every time someone does something stupid in the name of a cause I support?
No Adam...it's just nice to hear from you in regards to the only thing you comment on.I haven't seen anything of this sort coming fom the proponents of Prop.8.Have you.. and do you plan on seeing "Milk".Sean Penn is trying to turn this guy into some kind of God and the media is already trying to convince us that this movie is some kind of life changing event for us.Maybe it will do well in SF and with homosexuals but I don't think it will with the general public because it's too depressing.With the election and the state of our state we have enough to be depressed about already.
Yeah, I'll probably see Milk.
I'm curious Brian. I've seen twice now in recent times that you've made oblique references to those who only comment on specific topics.
Does that bother you?