Prop 8 and too much information

Dumb move by whoever created that. If any of those people are harmed the creator is going to be at the top of the list of people the police will want to speak with.

Hey, maps for the homes of Jews? Mormons? Metropolitan Community Church members? Imams? You can go on and on.

Wasn't the Nuremburg Files posting of the home addresses of abortion providers an early instance of this tactic?

Re: And given the attacks made on Prop 8 supporters

What "attacks"? I've read about people being treated quite rudely, but that hardly is a synonym for assault AND battery.

Wow, that was cunning, hattio - if Rod hasn't denounced $RANDOM_OTHER_ATROCITY, clearly his outrage at this is nothing but a cyncial ploy. Your is a sharp mind at work, clearly.

Oh, wait, I think I know what the Nuremberg Files were. Or at least I can guess from context. I think it's very wrong and very dangerous to go to anyone's house and protest, even peacefully. Dangerous, because everyone's safety and peace depends on one's home being inviolate. To cross that boundary, even if the homeowner is a villain, is to breach the social peace in a fundamental way, one that invites and legitimizes one's opponents doing the same thing. I see no good that can come of that.

Do you think you could try to discuss the morality of the thing in question without having to resort to "I know you are, but what am I"? It's so fourth grade.

There is a legitimate case to be made that requiring the publication of names of political donors is an infringement on free speech. Forbidding anonymous advocacy is an invitation to harrassment and intimidation.

Well, that's scary. A bunch of my neighbors are listed, with the amounts they contributed. (Some seem to be missing, including me.)

Anyway, in a general sense, I agree that this is a rotten intimidation tactic. Regardless of what issue we're speaking of, it's thuggish (and, as an anonymous maneuver, evidently cowardly as well). Very much against American ideals of civic public discourse.

I was very happy to see that my neighborhood was almost unmarked. It would have been a real problem to see some of my close neighbors donating.

If Group X acts in an uncivil way, they damage their right to expect others to treat them civilly.

I think we can all agree on that, at least.

What this person/group has done is really regrettable. Weird, creepy foes of abortion have provided endless ammunition for those who want to caricature all of us who oppose promiscuous abortion as being fanatics. If I were a public opponent of Prop 8 who generally lived as a decent, civil person, I would fear being lumped in with people who aren't.

This is going to be just a GIFT to the worst elements in talk radio, etc. How very clever a move that was.

Sure that's scary but can you imagine right wing religious nuts breaking up your marriage and making your kids bastards? I can.

"Sure that's scary but can you imagine right wing religious nuts breaking up your marriage and making your kids bastards?"

No. Nor could I imagine a comment more idiotic than that one.

Apparently not so much, John, considering the outcome of the vote.

My 2 cents: this is the logical outcome of several forces that have gained considerable force in recent years, and I see no counter-vailing forces pushing back. Among the forces that left unchecked tend to go to extremes: (1) the ends justify the means; (2) the crumbling of shared values and norms regarding boundaries of public and private "out of bounds" aspects of life; and (3) identity politics that translate disagreements about principles or aspects of public policy into threats to one's very identity.

Rinse and repeat for several more years and we will find ourselves in a very un-civil and nasty culture. And it is minorities (including homosexuals) who will be most damaged and threatened by un-civil culture. Civil society protects the weakest groups the most, so it is really counter-productive for minorities to undermine the very conditions that protect them.

Hope I don't get put on a google map for saying so.

"What is so wrong with working within the legitimate political process to change laws ? "

The California legislature twice approved gay marriage through a legitimate political process, and the governor refused to sign the bills because he said he wanted to wait until the Supreme Court ruled on the Constitutionality. The Supreme Court found the current law was unconstitutional. Then the voters--in an election funded largely by out-of-state donors--reversed the court. Now, we are back to court to see if the election was appropriate.

IOW, there's been lots of legitimate political process that has been undone by the governor and then voters in an election largely funded by non-Californians.

As for the Google map, I think technology has dangerous potential and clearly this is one of the moral hazards of technology. Rod is being much to melodramatic about the actual threat to those listed on the site and LGBT people in California are much more likely to be victimes of violence than those who supported Prop 8, but this is clearly a morall hazard of technology.

>>> If I were any of these people, I'd be scared right now -- especially if I lived in San Francisco. And given the attacks made on Prop 8 supporters, I doubt very much I would ever give another dime to any campaign that would get me on some gay activist hate map.

There are multitudes of Christian website that publish the names and home address’ of abortion providers. There are multitudes of websites that publish the names and home address’ of registered sex offenders.

And yes, there are websites that track people who promote anti-gay bigotry and support codifying prejudice into the Secular Civil Law.

You call it a “hate map” – I call it vital information to the community who is actually affected by these individuals.

Consider this, Rod:

Would you want to move into a neighbourhood teeming with registered sex offenders? Maybe the website www.familywatchdog.us could help you protect your kids.

Likewise, the website www.knowthyneighbor.org helps GLBT people know who our neighbours are; where they live, what business’ they own.

You see a map like this and immediately think of violence or some perceived threat. I think that speaks much more about your opinion of the GLBT community, than the community itself. I see that same map as offering protection and a sense of control to a very small and (as evidenced by recent events) vulnerable community.

However, if it does indeed challenge some individuals to examine their roll in impacting the families and lives of so many people, than all the better.

Finally, I find it amazing how you describe anti-prop 8 graffiti as “attacks”, when it was your brethren who effectively annihilated the marriages of 18,000 couples. Graffiti washes off, Rod. The type of attack suffered by these people is far more lasting.

"attacks made on Prop 8 supporters"?? THESE are atttacks:

Queens, New York "A family spokesman says an Ecuadorean immigrant has DIED nearly a week after being viciously beaten in Brooklyn by attackers yelling anti-Hispanic and anti-gay slurs. Police say three men attacked the 31-year-old real estate broker as he walked arm-in-arm with his 38-year-old brother early Dec. 7. Witnesses told police they heard the assailants shouting anti-gay and anti-Hispanic slurs at the brothers."

Oxnard, California "Oxnard teenager accused of first-degree MURDER and a hate crime in connection with the shooting of a classmate." The defendant is fourteen years old. He is charged with shooting Larry King, 15, with a handgun in a classroom. The dead boy "dressed in a feminine manner and told friends that he was gay."

Steve K: Perhaps I did not write that last line correctly. I was not referencing Sandy's comment regarding Rod. I was using it to butress my point about those anti prop 8 activists now using the far right's play book to gain far left advantage. I was using her very good point to make my own.

My own thoughts: It is a lot more dangerous to post a doctor or other who performs abortion's adress than an pro prop 8 donor. As yet this is not spurning Eric Rudolph copycats. I pray it does not. I am appalled at the far right and left. As I told Rod onec; the far left is crazy and can be mean. The far right is mean and can be crazy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph

Welcome to the global village, folks.

It's actually quite "Crunchy" in this sense: we now all have the privacy one has in a small town where everyone knows your name, and your church, and your politics, and your kids, and your business, and who you had lunch with, and what time you got home last night, and etc.

So what's so very different about the information in this map and what you get at a small-town barbershop? The face-to-face aspect? Gossip is gossip, after all....

"Given the attacks made on Prop 8 supporters..."??? Come on! What a load of crock. I've followed the entire Prop 8 disputes rather closely and there are few verifiable "attacks" on Prop 8 supporters -- very few. What the Prop 8 supporters are whining about is that people are boycotting their businesses. That is not an attack -- none of us are obligated to buy from someone else.

There was some graffiti at a church in San Francisco but nothing violent or close to it. Some Mormon churches received "white powder" that was harmless and NO ONE has any idea who sent it or why. Mormons have made a lot of enemies including fundamentalist Christians and other Mormon breakaway sects (notoriously violent by the way).

So far the "attacks" have been primarily criticism, protests and boycotts. All are legitimate, all are consistent with a free society, none violate the rights of anyone. Of course when Prop 9 was on the ballot in Oregon we had gay people who were killed, vandalism that was severe (not some graffiti) such as burning down a house, destroying offices, stealing files, etc. We had death threats made against gay people and we had assaults. Prop 8 was very civil compared to that. And it was all attacks on gays by the religious coalition pushing Prop 9.

What is interesting from the map was how many donations from Utah flowed in California. Why are Mormons in Utah trying to influence out of state legislation? I be they would whine loudly if Californians started bankrolling Utah elections.

" He is charged with shooting Larry King, 15, with a handgun in a classroom."

I didn't know Larry King could ever die.

An interesting tidbit. I have a friend who is on the list and the house the website points to is not his, it's his neighbor's down the street. He checked a few other names and similar results. So look out if you're a neighbor of someone who donated to Yes on Prop 8. :-)

Here's a list of verifiable attacks for those who don't believe they exist:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Latter-day_Saints_and_California_Proposition_8/Post-Election_Events

Honestly, I wouldn't care if someone revoked my marriage. I know I still have the relationship and what other people call it doesn't matter to me. When Mormons practiced polygamy, we didn't want "official" recognition for it, we just wanted to be left alone.

Mormons are standing up for the definition of a marriage as between a man and a woman. It's not an attack on anyone.

And if the situation were reversed and Mormons were doing the things listed on that website, there would for sure be an outcry and I would denounce the behavior, not try to justify it.

Reganite, it's not a listing of all the donors, as anyone with the reasoning skills of a five year old should be able to deduce just by looking at the map.

And my point about "legitimate political process" was that there has been no state which has seen a politically-focused battle over same-sex marriage and this canard that it was created just by judges is incorrect.

"We have already seen it with people losing their jobs, churches being harassed, etc."

No one was fired for giving money to Prop 8 efforts. The isolated cases of people quitting their jobs involved people who held prominent positions in organizations and businesses who resigned because of the negative publicity related to the political donation.

Now maybe that's harassment to have your donations publicized in an election involving the revokation of legal rights, but the First Amendment protects boycotts and the consequences of boycotts or threatened boycotts. The First Amendment principle of responding to controversial speech with more speech instead of censorship is at play here.

DeeAnn

>>> “Honestly, I wouldn't care if someone revoked my marriage. I know I still have the relationship and what other people call it doesn't matter to me.”

Do you understand the nature of the rights and civil liberties that your federally recognized marriage grants you? I’m being serious, not sarcastic.

I’m sorry, but I simply cannot believe that you’d be so cavalier about having those rights stripped from you, if you did.

I'm talking about Secular, Civil Marriage, DeeAnn; and you have one. Whatever religious ceremony you participated in at the altar of your church, it meant nothing in the eyes of the law until you sat down and signed your State Issues Marriage Certificate (and it was witnessed). It was that same certificate that 18,000 couples signed in court houses, without religious trappings. It is the same piece of paper Atheists sign, and people from all walks of faith or no faith.

But now, 18,000 couples, some of whom may have been together long than you and your spouse, heck, perhaps even longer than you’ve been alive, are treated like complete strangers under the law.

And you support that.

I can’t understand.

And to add to my last comment, I'm not interested in whether people should or shouldn't have the right to do this type of stuff - of course they should (assuming violence and intimidation don't result from it). What I want to know is whether this is something that our society should condone. Is this how we should live in community with each other - publishing lists of political causes your neighbors donate to in order to denigrate them?

"I think one way to get around actions like this is to make all political donations over a certain monetary limit public, but not all donations. For example, donations over $2000 (or pick your own number) would be made public, but donations under wouldn't. That way, Jane Doe can give $75 to her cause without her name being blasted all over the internet, but you'd still know if an operation was being bankrolled by a few powerful interests."

A very realistic compromise. I'd make it lower than $2.000, but this is definitely a move in the right direction.

pfs,
The supporters of Prop. 8 were the first to publish lists of people and businesses who had contributed to the movement to defeat the proposition.

The blackmail letters they sent to various firms are a matter of public record.

The intention was clear.

The right can drag out all the examples of bad behavior (and it is bad behavior) they like on the part of some few gay activists (assuming it wasn't fundamentalist Christians waging Agit-prop.) Fortunately, we have not been beating, torturing, raping and murdering those who oppress us.

The conservative 'Christians', on the other hand, have been physically violent towards us and are continuing to be so.

That, to me is the real danger here.

Of course, I am slightly prejudiced. My American family spent Christmas apart because of the threats against my partner by my brother's "Christian" side of the family. Showing up with body guards is just so not done, and, based on past physical attacks against us, that was the alternative to not joining the Christmas feast. My nose has been broken, two ribs crushed in, my right eye had to be operated on to restore sight (sort of), there is a reason my teeth look so perfect...and all this was done to me in the name of Christian 'love the sinner, hate the sin' by my own blood relations.

Yes, I have a dog in this fight.

Sally Rogers' comments are on the mark. She gets it. This type of behavior isn't specific to gay groups. Lots of people of all political persuasions have brought us to this point. This is just the latest manifestation of it. While it's fine to condemn this specific instance, we also need to address the broader cultural issues here.

I'll reiterate a point I've made on Rod's other Prop 8 posts in the past. That is, a gay person has a much greater likelihood of being attacked (physically, verbally or spiritually) then anti-gay activists, including Prop 8 donors. All sorts of intimidation tactics (legal and illegal) have been used against gays for several thousands of years. I think some of that gets lost when we here about the Pink-Coat Fascists and Rainbow Thugs. Illegal attacks against Prop 8 supports is wrong. Period. Lets just lose sight of the big picture here with regards to which group finds itself on the short end of the stick 999999 times out of 1000000.

Secondly, I've argued that there's nothing illegal in boycotting the businesses of Prop 8 supports. I believe it is right and just for gay rights supporters to use their First Amendment rights to protect and/or fight for equal protection. That said, there's something about this that makes me uncomfortable. I guess I draw a line between protesting a business and posting their address. There's too many crazy people out there. What if the address is wrong? What if its a family of 7 and 1 person donated? I'm not suggesting that even if the address was right and the "right" person was outed it'd be moral. If something does happen it'll make the whole gay rights movement look bad. Rod, for example, is already pretty sure the movement is filled with violent thugs based on the anecdotal stories involved very few individuals.

"The Googla maps thing is a clear case of abetting and encouraging intimidation. We have already seen it with people losing their jobs, churches being harassed, etc. This is a no-brainer. One of Rod's main points here is that this kind of harassment only invites equally vitriolic intimidation and harassment ... and where does that lead us?"

Welcome to the world many gays face daily, Reaganite.

I wonder if Rod tacitly approves of, or is amused by GLBT people getting "what they deserve."

I never am sure how to respond to something like this. I know lots of people who are against same-sex marriage, but I would be shocked, and saddened, to learn that anybody I knew thought gay people deserved to be harrassed or beaten up, or any such thing. I know that there are quite a few deplorable people who do believe those things, and shame on them. I could be wrong, but I wonder sometimes if it's necessary for some of y'all to believe that all social conservatives want to see violence done to gays, because it's easier then to dismiss our concerns.

This Prop 8 map is the first I've seen of activist groups using technology in this way. Even if I 100 percent agreed with the cause, I would still despise this sort of thing. Maybe it's because I've had credible death threats made against me before, in connection with political opinions I've made public -- death threats that were so serious that my employer offered to hire security for me (I chose instead to hide out in my apartment for a while) -- but I think it is a terrible thing to expose people to this kind of danger in their own homes.

I'm not saying it should be illegal; I don't know if it would even be possible to make it illegal. All the information is publicly available. I do think it should be socially sanctioned, though.

>>> I know lots of people who are against same-sex marriage, but I would be shocked, and saddened, to learn that anybody I knew thought gay people deserved to be harrassed or beaten up, or any such thing.

Rod, you are describing the same thing. You don’t have to physically throw a stone to do damage to another person. You can shatter their sense of security, dignity, liberty and freedom by casting a vote – no fuss, no muss, no blood on your hands. The people you know who are against same-sex marriage, in a very real and literal sense, harmed 18,000 couples in one of the deepest and most personal forms of attack we as a society are capable of; they stripped them of an inherent civil [secular] right. A right hard fought for and won.

It does not get any more personal.

Please, expand your interpretation of ‘harm’ from just the physical.

>>> This Prop 8 map is the first I've seen of activist groups using technology in this way.

Rod, I know you cannot read every single reply to your blogs, but I did source Anti-Abortion Groups who use the same thing to list names and address’ of abortion doctors, as well as websites that track registered sex offenders. A previous poster mentioned Christian websites that track gay-supporters.

Is this really the first time you’ve seen this used, or just the first time it was a GLBT group using it to fight back?

Scary, I’m sure.

>>> Maybe it's because I've had credible death threats made against me before, in connection with political opinions I've made public

That certainly is scary. I can’t imagine what that might be like. Hiding in your apartment, that is. GLBT people often face death-threats on a daily basis. While you make your living hanging your personal beliefs on a clotheslines for the world to see and judge, my brethren often receive similar – and quite credible – threats for doing nothing more than walking down the street.

I’m not comparing the two. I think they are equally horrible, and I wish for the day when neither will exist in our world. But as it stands, most of us GLBT people don’t have the luxury of hiding out at home to escape the hate, and even those who make the attempt are not immune to the political stones that shatter lives, not just windows.

The information is public.

There's too much fear in this post. Far as I know, no one has taken the time to hunt anybody down.

Let's not speculate about terrorism.

It's counterproductive.

And if you're so concerned, Rod, why post the map on your blog and give it more exposure as well as give some nutcase a violent idea?

Shaking my head.

That anyone would be harrassed or attacked because he donated to a political campaign or cause in inexcusable. Nevertheless, it is my understanding that such donations are a matter of the public record under our campaign finance laws. If the donors to Prop. 8 are allowed to hide, then donors to all other campaigns and causes will have to be allowed to hide as well, and accountability goes out the window.

Rod, YEARS before people saw this map you could find list upon list of campaign donations online by individual donor's name (and that's why I get endless solicitations from politicians in the mail). That, alone, is enough to people from donating, but not from voting. Just because you can see it on a map doesn't make it any more creepy.

So the real "creeps" will be the organizations who will now use the lists to nag you for money for every conceivable "cause" on earth.

What Ray said. Worry about all the social conservative groups, and the scam artists who just want you to think they're social conservatives, bugging you for money now. Oh...and probably bugging you for it with a lot of dire warnings about what the homos are up to these days because now they know that'll push your buttons.

I'm on the anti-8 list, and for a not very trivial amount of money either. But I've been getting hit for money from various gay and progressive groups for a long, long time now and I just accept that as part of the background noise. Something else I accept as part of the background noise, as a gay man, are threats of violence. I knew when I donated that my name and address would be made public. But if I wanted to live my life afraid of what the folks who think homosexuals are an abomination to god might do to me then I would have stayed in the closet.

Its typical that the proposition 8 supporters are busy now voicing concerns about what having their names publicly associated with 8 might mean for them, as opposed to what telling everyone in California that the gays were going to go after their children in their schools and have their church leaders arrested for not marrying them might mean for their gay neighbors. Be nice if we could all just...you know...get along...

Peter Dixon said:

"This is Zimbabwe style politics. When Robert Mugabe was beaten at the polls, his response was to send out the thugs to harass the opposition supporters. The identical response is happening here in the 'bastion of democracy' The result is that the democratic process is completely hijacked and a ruthless dictator can continue."

And here we see the melodramatic hysteria and hyperbole when social conservatives are forced to recognize that their political beliefs really aren't all that popular with lots of people. (Who would have thought that so many on the right were such drama queens?) How many Prop. 8 supporters have been physically attacked? How many have been beaten? How many have been killed?

Here's a hint: it's far, far, FAR fewer than the number of gay people physically attacked every single year.

Comparing the pro-marriage people with Mugabe is not just dishonest and disingenuous, it's rude and insulting.

I'll bet you don't have any problems with the police posting the addresses of so-called "sex criminals" on the Internet for all to see.

What goes around comes around.

I'm sorry, but this is public information and the donors knew -- or should have known -- that when they chose to fund scurrilous attacks on their fellow citizens. The Google Map treatment offers no information that is not readily available from many other sources, it just renders it visually.

This is a point that demagogues always want to avoid; freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of that speech. Freedom of speech is freedom from prior restraint by the government.

If you yell "fire" in a crowded theater, you still go to jail. If you write "Captain sober today" in the log, you still get sued.

And if you libel your neighbors in order to take away their civil rights, you don't get to use anonymity as a shield to protect you from the consequences of those actions. Allowing you to do *that* would be undemocratic. Real men, in real democracies, face the consequences of their actions without whining about "chilling effects".

"If Group X acts in an uncivil way, they damage their right to expect others to treat them civilly.

I think we can all agree on that, at least."

Sorry, Major Wooten, but I, for one, do not agree. I cannot, for I have not witnessed it here.

First, what passes for "civility" on conservative blogs (Crunchy or otherwise) is more than passing strange. Why, I've heard of comparisons of homosexuality to cannabalism, marrying a child, marrying a plant, marrying an animal, rape, necrophilia - etc. I, personally, have received actual death threats from comboxers on conservative threads.

What goes around comes around after all.

(Though why so many "Christians" ignore the wisdom in doing to others as you would have done to yourself truly is difficult to understand. And the 'what you do to the least of these you do to Me' dictum too.)

And not a single conservative agrees that their "right to expect others to treat them civilly" has been "damaged" - they still demand it even after their vile treatment of others. Go figure.

Mel,

"What is "civilized" about two men committing sodomy with each other?"

The same thing that is "civilized" when a heterosexual couple commit sodomy.

"And why does a union based on this sort of sexual behavior deserve the status of marriage?"

Gay marriages are no more "based on" any particular sex act than heterosexual marriages are. We are deserving of equal treatment before the law because the Constitution guarantees it.

But thanx 4 askin'.

Jason,

"Is it really surprising that those who can't get their way by judicial coup ..."

The Judges onthe CASC did the bery job they're supposed to do, namely protecting minorites from the tyrranous majority who passed clearly un-Constitutional measures. They also protected the Connstitutional guarantee of equal treatment before the law.

"The only reason Prop8 even existed was because a collection of judicial tyrants decided the stated will of the people was something that could be casually over turned at the behest of a collection of activists."

The 'will of the people' was (and remains) clearly un-Constitutional in this instance. (Those "judicial tyrants", apart from doing their job - hardly "casual" - were largely Republican appointees, btw.) And in what way are the pro-Prop 8 not "a collection of activists"?

"What is so wrong with working within the legitimate political process to change laws ?"

Nothing whatsoever. In fact, we did that. An fyi, the CA Legislature voted - TWICE! - in favor of equal marriage. Seems you forgot (or didn't know - aka refused to acknowledge as fact) that.

Nice try, but ya gotta do better.

Reaganite,

"a clear case of abetting and encouraging intimidation. We have already seen it with people losing their jobs, churches being harassed, etc."

Like those things don't happen to gay people? My (gay) pastor has had to wear a bullet-proof vest on numerous occasions. My Church denomination (Metropolitan Community Church) has had 17 buildings arsoned. The New Orleans Fire Chief suggested the ashes of the bodies of the gay people killed in a fire should be put in "fruit jars". Yeah, that old Compassionate Christianism we've heard so much about.

"One of Rod's main points here is that this kind of harassment only invites equally vitriolic intimidation and harassment ... and where does that lead us?"

And my main point here has always and only been: treat us equally and the issue goes away. (It has everywhere gay marriage has passed.) The problem for your side is, this means stopping anti-gay violence ("vitriolic intimidation and harassment") first.

DeeAnn
January 13, 2009 7:54 AM

"Honestly, I wouldn't care if someone revoked my marriage."

Sorry, but I simply do not believe you. Or, if you are serious, I pity the kind of marriage you must have to value it so little.

Not that your marriage is now or ever will be subjected to a popularity vote or subject to unnulment by the State anyway.

There are at least 2 reasons to create and use this map that have nothing to do with intimidation.

1. Like exit poll data, this helps show that the support for prop 8 was concentrated in places where gays are less likely to live and opposition to prop 8 was more likely to come from neighborhoods where gay people are more likely to live. Outside of SF itself, homosexuals are

2. I checked the map to see if any of my neighbors had contributed. I don't know many of my neighbors well, but perhaps meeting me and my partner (and a plate of brownies) might cause them to reassess their fears. See #1.

No doubt this map could be used to retaliate, and without text encouraging people to use it responsibly I question the motives of the person who created it. However, the information itself is not the problem, and could be used constructively, and I hope it is.

If the GLBT community really stood by their beliefs that this was alright to do, I would like to see the map for the anti-Prop 8 supporters. Until they do this so I can stop supporting their businesses, I consider the GLBT community nothing more than an unruly mob of molesting Seals (by the way nature shows that molestation, murder, rape, and other diseases of society do exist in the wild...boy that destroys the nature argument). If you want to have rights similar to traditional marriage, be sure to not do so at the expense of everyone elses rights (ie freedom of speech, religion, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, etc). If you think these aren't happening already, just take a look at the riots caused by the GLBT mob (boycotting people who supported it--at least the organizations that do not hurt the GLBT community, terrorizing churches, assaulting peaceful protestors, sending terrorist "white powder", attacking churches freedom of speech right to declare homosexuality is a sin by attacking the tax status, etc.) It really is not difficult to see the GLBT community in this light. I used to feel more for their ideas. Not anymore.

Ever canvassed for a political campaign? Having some information about what addresses not to spend your time and energy on is very useful in that situation.

While liberals scream & screech in their high-pitched, no-gonad voices about the alleged privacy violations inherent in the Patriot Act, they have no problem themselves violating the privacy of those with whom they disagree with on political or social issues. The need by liberals to create such map proves that liberals, being the loathsome vermin that they are, are sore losers and absolutely everything that they pretend to despise. They are perfect hypocrites, and while they wantonly accuse their opponents of being "Fascists", it is they who have adopted thuggish & Fascistic tactics in their mad crusade to destroy the moral fabric of this once great nation of ours.

Rest assured, if one donor pegged on this ridiculous, hate-conceived map is harmed, the abomination euphemistically referred to as "Gay Marriage" will NEVER be legalized in CA. Do your worst, and continue to show the world what vicious, virulent hatemongers you liberals really are.

"think about how this same technology can be used against gay folks"

This "technology" you're referring to ... meaning, maps? Addresses?

gays loss.

now gays lok like sorry little fools, crying to momma.

gays are the 'losers'.

dont worry though, you'll get over it,

..and you'll get over yourselves.

wake up -

str8 - 8

Sucks for those folks. I think they're safe, though. For one thing, our gay population here in the US lacks the critical mass of sociopaths that the fundie Christanist movement seems to attract. I recall back in the early days of the Intertubes that a bunch of psycho-Christian anti-abortion lunatics led by one Neil Horsely began publishing an online hit-list of abortion providers. Guess what. They're still at it. They've just been enjoined against putting a strike-through on the one's their psychotic brethren have murdered. They lack the nice GUI of a Google map, but it's the same phenomenon.

Sorry, but I don't understand the problem here. If you are a proud defender of traditional marriage who contributed to the pro-Prop 8 campaign, then certainly, you're happy to have your friends, neighbors and co-workers know about it. You and your fellow-minded citizens have nothing to be ashamed of and nothing to fear; rather, it is the pro-gay marriage people who are in the wrong. You might lose a little business, and you might have to answer some questions about why you think it's important to write discrimination into California's Constitution. Stand up and be proud Prop 8 supporters! You are win!

Rod Dreher said:

"Do you really think gay folks who live in small towns in "Red America" are going to be comforted by the prospect that some anti-gay radical group might think to post a map to their home if they gave $50 to the Human Rights Campaign? Frankly, that prospect scares the hell out of me. It should you too. You've got to think beyond your own anger for five minutes, and think about the rules and customs that make it possible for us all to live together civilly."

Why exactly does that prospect scare you? Why shouldn't everyone know where the money comes from? And anyway, who said that everyone sending money to HRC or against Prop. 8 or whatever is gay?

Besides, weren't conservatives the ones suggesting that all political donations should be open to public view when McCain-Feingold was being considered? Oh that's right...you never thought you might actually get a backlash for your beliefs.

The fact remains that to you, "living together civilly" means that we should shut up and be invisible. To you, it means that you should be able to divorce people by majority vote and suffer no consequences whatsoever for that.

Gay people know all too well the consequences for coming out. We're done with being frightened of being exposed by people like you. Sorry, that whole "wouldn't you feel safer in the closet" argument doesn't hold water with us any more. Go ahead and expose us if you like. You'll only get me to double and redouble the money I donate.

The owners of this map's domain hid their identity by using Domains by Proxy, Inc. Nor is their identity listed on their website. This is hypocritical and disingenuous behavior.

How do they expect others to debate the issue if they hide their identity and the identity of those who oppose Prop 8. Or as I suspect is this just a hit list for those who didn't get what they wanted.

Why would anyone be asking for trouble?

Try to understand that many supporters of Proposition 8 did so to defend traditional marriage, not to attack the GLBT community."

Sorry pal, the "defend traditional marriage" line is pure doublespeak for attacking gay and lesbian married couples. No one intelligent is falling for that.

you want rights as a gay couple, fight for them without destroying marriage in the sense that 52% of California voters understand.

How can same-sex marriage destroy marriage if it only increases in the number of marriages and social stability? That simply doesn't make sense. BTW proposition 22 passed with a larger margin, now you're stating there's a 2% difference only. In 8 years from now the majority will be for same-sex marriage.

If people want to give money for political campaigns to deny equal rights to other people, then we have a right to know who supports those campaigns. We have the right to know if our money will be spent in businesses and individuals who want our business but then stab us in the back. You vote with your dollars and homphobes will not get a cent from me. In political campaigns the citizenry has the absolute right to know and that means FULL DISCLOSURE of who is funding initiatives, referendums and various political candidates.

Jay:

"i guess i was wrong, apparently they're just a bunch of opportunistic a**holes.
still i think it's lame that there was a prop 8 in the first place.."

I think you are pointing out many of the same fears the supporters of Proposition 8 had. I am not asking you to change your views. Many of the people who supported Prop 8 simply did so, not to deny gays rights, but to prevent the lynch mob from taking away other's rights, like speech. I really feel for your grandmother and every other victim from this fall out. It really is getting annoying that the gay's community is trying to label every Prop 8 vote as simply gay hate. I am grateful that many people are now seeing their attitudes towards this. However, this is not going to go out to say that gays have not been harrassed in the past. Harrassing gays is just as wrong.

As for the government control, the real problem is that they have been involved before this whole thing started. They need to stay out of the issue as much as possible.

Tom, Full disclosure just simply should go to both parties if you want to make your claim. Overall, the map is not for anything beneficial with the attack that have occurred.

"Try to understand that many supporters of Proposition 8 did so to defend traditional marriage, not to attack the GLBT community."

How is taking away the legitimate marriages of 18,000+ California couples not an attack on them?

How is it "defending traditional marriage"?

Why didn't they vote to stop Mickey Rooney from havinng his 9th marriage? Or why didn't they vote to annul Britney Spears's 55 hour marriage? Or why didn't they vote to annul Darva Conger & Rick Rockwell's TV game show prize that masqueraded as a (legitimate and perfectly legal) marriage? Or why didn't they vote to outlaw divorce? All of these travesties are actual attacks on "traditional" marriage.

Oh wait, they didn't involve queers. Nevermind.

Further to your post, YN, the family in question were not "attacked". Theres zero evidence in the article to support that claim. None. Zilch. Nada. Rien. Nichts. Zip.

"please provide some "obvious" reasoning for us poor unintelligent creatures."

Okay. How about the Constitutional guarantee of equal treatment before the law for starters. Then, how about the right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Or, how about the right to freedom of religion? (An increasing number of faiths do perform same-sex marriages.) These all seem pretty "obvious" to me.

And ...

"If you don't, Proposition 8 defenders could easily make the argument that GLBT people are also supporting child porn, incest, polygamy, beastiality, or even rape."

But they already do that. You did it yourself in your post. And myriad other comboxers here do likewise. Speaking of unintelligent arguments. There isn't an iota of legitimacy in that outrageous, untrue (and hateful, imo) claim.

Reality,

"Many of the people who supported Prop 8 simply did so, not to deny gays rights, but to prevent the lynch mob from taking away other's rights"

I'm at a loss to understand how taking away rights from gay citizens is justified by an irrational fear that yet others' rights will be taken away.

Your sympathy for Jay's "grandmotherr" is misplaced,since he's already admitted it wasn't his grandmother at all, a "co-worker's" mom. Hearsay and 3rd hand anecdotal evidence of a (likely non-existant) "attack" (by shoes??? - a copycat Bush attacker?) is pretty flimsy 'argument' to vote to take away rights and a Constitutional guarantee of equal treatment before the law from some citizens.

hey, where are all the conservative voices!!??

why do only the supporters of equal rights for gays post here? are the supporters of prop 8 ashamed of what they did!? they should be!! what a hateful and paranoid thing people did, to alter the state constitution to prohibit gay marriage... imho, the law should be changed so that amendments to the state constitution cannot be made by referendum, it only encourages misinformation and a rush to judgement.

i have at least one friend in the sf area who is sorry he voted for prop 8... he feels he was subject to a campaign of misinformation by the supporters, and he regrets his vote. and now the supportes of this horrible deed want their identities to remain secret - well, i'm sorry, but that is not the way democracy works. ever hear the phrase, stand up and be counted? well prop 8 supporters, what are you so ashamed of?

"i have at least one friend in the sf area who is sorry he voted for prop 8... he feels he was subject to a campaign of misinformation by the supporters, and he regrets his vote."

Your friend is not alone, Joe. Over on the Mormon blog, there are similar tales of disappointment over the "misinformation" (lovely polite euphemism for 'campaign of lies') perpetrated by their own Church.

Sad. But take heart in remembering, if they have to resort to lies to 'win' the battle, they've already lost the war.

Since when is it anyone's "civil right" to redefine marriage? Prop 8 did not change anyone's civil rights or take them away. Read Calironia civil code section 297.5. (domestic partners are afforded the same rights as married couples) Prop 8 did not change this.

Also to equate this homosexual rights thing as similar as rights of African Americans does a disservice to African Americans. African Americans did not choose their race or ethnicity. They were discrimated against because of their race-an unchangeable characteristic.

Homosexuals try to equate their cause with the same as African Americans. However, there is one huge difference between the two.

Discrimination again African Americans was based upon race--an unchangeable characteristic.

Supposed discrimination against homosexuals--which prop 8 is not about anyway (prop 8 seeks to define marriage as one man and one woman), is about a changeable characteristic--sexual behavior.

The two are certainly not the same so no one should think that discrimination against African Americans is akin to disagreeing with homosexuals.

Secondly, why should 4 activist judges be allowed to overturn the will of the people? Are we a people governed by judges in Sacramento or are "we the people" the government?

It is mathmatically impossible to discuss 2 sided arguments with zealots.

The only difference between a gun toting hick with a 9 headed baby and a prancing latte drinker is how they say tomato.

This information was available to the public LONG BEFORE the google map was created. The information for who donated to support "no" on proposition 8 is also available. Does that open the door for hate crimes against homosexuals and their supporters?

If you're going to dig in your pockets for what you believe in, you should have the back bone to stand up for it. If people were really interested in harassing you for your beliefs, they would find you. Again, the lists are PUBLIC as per California law, and anyone slightly familiar with the internet could have your address in about 5 minutes.

On a more personal note, it is shocking, devastating, and ABSURD to see how much money was donated in support of Prop 8. Is it really more important to ban gay marriage than it is to, say, feed starving children, find cancer research, or fight domestic abuse? People listed as "homemakers" donated more than $100,000!!! If you've got that much extra money, why don't you do something good for the world instead of trying to ruin the lives of others? Get a grip.

""Prop 8 supporter" is a clear example of what we are dealing with here: small minded, insecure, ignorant, homophobic people who have a view of the world provided from approximately 2 AD"

This is the gay activist's stereotypical description of anyone who disagrees with them on the same-sex marriage issue. It is hateful, stupid AND ignorant. Most people are opposed to same-sex marriage because it is an absurd idea. WHY has marriage been between a man and a woman since its origin? Was this a random selection? No. It was a BIOLOGICAL one. The design behind marriage was for couples to get together and have their union sanctioned by the government and/or religious group and create a family. I'm not aware of any two men or two women who are capable of pulling this off. The most popular form of gay sex is clearly against nature and we have several diseases that have resulted because of it. Come out of your little fantasy world and smell the reality. 97.7% of the world's population lives under the definition of marriage which is between one man and one woman. If you don't like it, the 2.3% that allow it are Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, or Spain. Have a nice trip.

========================================
=
= SEW AN "8" ON ALL PROP 8 SUPPORTS
= JUST LIKE THE ANTI-SEMITIC NAZIS
=
=========================================
The anti-Prop 8 crowd are getting to the point where the will require that all Prop 8 supports have an "8" sewed on their clothing so that everyone can identify the Prop 8 Supports. Then, businesses can reject them, citizens can harrass them, employers can fire them and on and on.

This anti-Prop 8 movement is just like the Nazi labeling of the Jews so the anti-semitic culture can easily spot the supports and exercise their hate against their Prop 8 supporter targets.

Kevin,

"WHY has marriage been between a man and a woman since its origin?"

Um, you seem to have forgotten the frequent 1 man + several women model that is found throughout the Buybull.

You also forgot the 1 white man + 1 white woman model.

"The design behind marriage was for couples to get together and have their union sanctioned by the government and/or religious group and create a family."

which explains why non-procreative heterosexuals are allowed to marry.

"I'm not aware of any two men or two women who are capable of pulling this off."

Procreation is not a requirement of marriage. Never has been either, to my knowledge.

"The most popular form of gay sex is clearly against nature"

Let me assure you that gay sex is entirely natural - if you're homosexual. Hey, maybe that's what the Buybull meant when it warned against turning from the natural to the unnatural - heterosexuals tryin' out somethin' that wasn't natural - for them. (aka "lieing with a man as with a woman" - homosexual men don't lie with women in any manner. QED.)

"If you don't like it, the 2.3% that allow it are Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, or Spain. Have a nice trip. [And] South Africa. You can marry your same-sex partner there as well. When you leave the U.S., don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out."

Nice "chirstian" sentiments there. But you also forgot the U.S. Gay marriage is legal in 2 States, and will be re-instated in both California and Iowa (yes, Iowa - look it up). And soon to be New York, New Jersey, Maryland and likely New Hampshire and Vermont.

Hey, anyone out there remember the old Full Faith & Credit clause? Gay marriage is coming to America in toto. Get used to it.