This is good.
If you want to try and overturn our state's recent decision to grant overdue civil rights to gay couples, it's going to cost you something. Your anonymity, to be exact.
Let's imagine that you put your name on Referendum 71, the petition to overturn Senate Bill 5688; the petition then gathers enough signatures to qualify for the fall ballot; your name gets published on WhoSigned.org. Excellent strategy. Expose the haters for what they are. I love it.
Predictably, these very haters are dismayed. Larry Stickney, of Protect Marriage Washington, the organization driving the Referendum 71 petitions, said in today's Seattle Times: "This seems to be a typical pattern developing around the country where the homosexual lobby employs hostile, undemocratic, intimidating tactics wherever their interests or intent are challenged."
Ah, but signatures on petitions are a matter of public record. What could be more democratic than open records? (Free hint: Do not pose that query to Dick Cheney.) And what exactly is "intimidating" or "hostile" about posting a list of names? Unless you don't want anyone to know you signed the petition... in which case you might want to re-examine your reasons for signing it.
I was accosted last year by an organizer seeking signatures for an initiative to repeal the estate tax. I didn't sign; I happen to enjoy the estate tax's existence. But had I signed, I would have been happy for my name to be listed online.
And it's not really good form, Larry, to call civil rights "interests" or "intents."
As I might have mentioned, I like this development. WhoSigned.org, put together by gay-rights activists, is following the example of other organizations using the same strategy. Here's hoping it works. (I'll track whether Protect Marriage Washington gathers the necessary 120,000-plus signatures in time. If they do, I'll link to the list.)
For bonus points, go to the Decline to Sign 71 Facebook page in the meantime to show your support for civil rights.
Just to throw something out there: I is, in fact, possible to not hate gays and yet oppose gay marriage or civil unions or whatever the label du jour happens to be. You can stand for something and even fight for it without devolving into a hater of those who disagree with you.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, though, if you have an opinion about something that matters enough to you to fight for it, there's no sense trying to hide it.
It's also possible to be a vegetarian and eat a Jumbo Jack. With bacon.
ReplyDeleteI just believe, Pimple, based on nothing but my life experience and my artifically high opinion of my own opinion, that to be against same-sex marriage as sanctioned by the government is to relegate gays to second-class citizens. I think that it takes a certain amount of hate inside a person to come to that conclusion.
Now, if you want to belong to a church that refuses to marry gays, I say, more power to you. There's some pretty strong language in the Pauline writings denouncing homosexual behavior. (Although it's possible Paul meant pedophilia instead, but that's a biblical interpretation argument best left for a faraway date. And every church still marries adulterers and fornicators without a second thought.)
Plus, there is no big push going on from the gay community, nor from the people like me who are repulsed by gay-bashing, to force churches to perform same-sex marriages. What this is about is that I get severely aggravated when people suggest that certain civil rights are reserved for certain people, based on sexual orientation. That's despicable, on its face. Doubly so if you seek anonymity in the process.