You sign a petition to curb gay rights. Should your name be public?

[_NH]

How should the USSC vote, and why?

What do you mean by 'curbing' gay rights?

Gays have the right to whatever they please.

I am opposed to using sexuality to create bigger government and more entitlements and redistribution of the wealth, as I am opposed to that across the board.

Gays have nothing to do with it. If they insist on using their sexuality to promote socialism, we'll be against it.

 

[Shogun]

They have the same right as any of us to marry someone of the SAME RACE. or to remain single. Same as anyone else.

Again, your qualifiers are pretty fucking stupid given where this nation has been in the marriage authorization game. Maybe it's time that you let your version of cultural ****** enjoy whatever bus seat they choose to sit on, tex.

Don't edit my quotes dumbass,

eat shit, motherfucker. MAKE me stop editing your posts. Especially when such illustrates the sever retardation of your selective qualifiers in relation to the exact same argument once used to keep blacks from hooking up with white women.

enjoy feeling powerless, fuck bunny.

 

[Luissa]

How should the USSC vote, and why?

What do you mean by 'curbing' gay rights?

Gays have the right to whatever they please.

I am opposed to using sexuality to create bigger government and more entitlements and redistribution of the wealth, as I am opposed to that across the board.

Gays have nothing to do with it. If they insist on using their sexuality to promote socialism, we'll be against it.

What are you even talking about?

 

[Shogun]

All this from the loony left who shit themselves thinking Bush and Cheney were reading mail from Aunt Martha? Apparantly national security pales in comparison to gay marriage. Oh, we already knew that.

petitions are not government entities. The stupidity rife in this post pretty much conveys why you are more court jester than scholar.

 

[Shogun]

The Democrats... the party of taxes, homosexuality, transgenders, welfare, unions, drugs, euthenasia, big government and silencing the opposition. Ah...

Don't forget EQUALITY on this day, Martin Luther King Day, you silly farcical bastard.

 

[Immanuel]

I am not for rocks being thrown through windows or crosses being burned on lawns... but, signing a public petition and then hiding behind anonymity is disingenuous as hell. Gays should be informed of who their detractors are in order to avoid these types of people. If you own a business in gaytown, california and you have the balls to shit on your consumer base then you have no reason to cry when gays boycott your business or avoid your presence altogether. Signing a petition is not a state vote on anything other than conveying a collective will of specific people who, by virtue of SIGNING A PETITION, make their wills public.

I garentfuckingtee that if this were a petition by Acorn affiliates to convey ANYTHING we'd already have the list of names public and scoured by fox news.

Votes should remain secret... but signing a petition is a very public action.

If it were a petition by ACORN affiliates, I would still oppose the release of their names. There is only one reason people are asking to have these names released and that is intimidation.

The outcome of something like this is that it will keep people from signing petitions and silence their voices. People will be afraid of signing a petition because of the possibility of their names being released and their kids being attacked in school.

Immie

YOU may oppose on the basis of trying to be consistent here but you know damn well how quickly we'd have those names.

and, you'll have to forgive me for not considering boycotts an equivalent to cross burning in the front yard.

You do realize that petitions are NOT VOTES, right? that there will always be a secret ballot regardless of public petition, yes? If you can't make public the very act of signing a public petition then maybe you should ask yourself why you are afraid to be socially lampooned over your opinions. It's not like gays are some A-Team out to blow up your driveway in 30 minutes. The mellow drama is a bit laughable. How many fucking hetero bashings like Matt Shepherd can YOU name before you start crying about big, nefarious fags hiding in the bushes?

Except we are not talking about boycotts.

The radicals in the movement have already proven that they are more than willing to go to the next step of vandalism of private property when they began destroying church property in California. The next thing will be violence and possibly even someone (on one side or the other) ending up dead. This is a heated debate. People are angry over this issue and violence is going to happen sooner or later.

This is not about boycotts or debate. This is a clear threat of violence.

Immie

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

How should the USSC vote, and why?

Thats a good question Wry.

If it was a vote on a ballot I would say 100% privacy....but if you sign a petition I'm not so sure.

 

[Immanuel]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

 

[Shogun]

If it were a petition by ACORN affiliates, I would still oppose the release of their names. There is only one reason people are asking to have these names released and that is intimidation.

The outcome of something like this is that it will keep people from signing petitions and silence their voices. People will be afraid of signing a petition because of the possibility of their names being released and their kids being attacked in school.

Immie

YOU may oppose on the basis of trying to be consistent here but you know damn well how quickly we'd have those names.

and, you'll have to forgive me for not considering boycotts an equivalent to cross burning in the front yard.

You do realize that petitions are NOT VOTES, right? that there will always be a secret ballot regardless of public petition, yes? If you can't make public the very act of signing a public petition then maybe you should ask yourself why you are afraid to be socially lampooned over your opinions. It's not like gays are some A-Team out to blow up your driveway in 30 minutes. The mellow drama is a bit laughable. How many fucking hetero bashings like Matt Shepherd can YOU name before you start crying about big, nefarious fags hiding in the bushes?

Except we are not talking about boycotts.

The radicals in the movement have already proven that they are more than willing to go to the next step of vandalism of private property when they began destroying church property in California. The next thing will be violence and possibly even someone (on one side or the other) ending up dead. This is a heated debate. People are angry over this issue and violence is going to happen sooner or later.

This is not about boycotts or debate. This is a clear threat of violence.

Immie

sure we are. YOU assume that some gay militia is pawing their hands together just waiting to jump out of the bushes to attack people in their homes instead of gays using this knowledge to restrict their economic impact from those who would discriminate against them. Again, if you can point to a single instance of gays leaping out of bushes go ahead and post it. otherwise your assumptions mean two things. I'm sure you know what they are. When you can show me a hetero Emmet Till then we'll talk about violent reactions.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

Well you just helped me form an answer to wry...i'm still thinking of my position but the retailiation/blacklisting type of stuff is pushing me toward wanting the USSC to judge that names on a petition are private and not to be released publicly.

On any petition too, i'm not thinking about gay rights only. What if you sign a petition to institute a water ban in your town, it passes, your neighbor is angry about it and finds out you signed the petition, then murders you over it. I know I know thats highly unlikely but way stranger stuff has happened.

 

[Shogun]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

I bet the ghost of Tiller the Killer would laugh at your selective standard when it comes to public disclosure.

 

[Luissa]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

Well giving the fact it is Washington State policy, that petitions are public record why shouldn't the names be published? And as for abortionist, they are protected by federal Hipaa laws, so it would be against the law to post their personal information. It isn't against the law to make petitions public.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

I bet the ghost of Tiller the Killer would laugh at your selective standard when it comes to public disclosure.

Shogun he does have a good point in there. The point being that by releasing peoples names who sign petitions you could be putting them at risk.

Any petition too not just gay rights. I mean what if people signed a petition to impeach President Bush, then the list got realeased and some right wing redneck went out and started killing people from the list?

I am decided....petitions should remain private and it should be criminalized to release individual information from petitions.

Unless someone can give me more insight into it that changes my mind.

 

[Immanuel]

YOU may oppose on the basis of trying to be consistent here but you know damn well how quickly we'd have those names.

and, you'll have to forgive me for not considering boycotts an equivalent to cross burning in the front yard.

You do realize that petitions are NOT VOTES, right? that there will always be a secret ballot regardless of public petition, yes? If you can't make public the very act of signing a public petition then maybe you should ask yourself why you are afraid to be socially lampooned over your opinions. It's not like gays are some A-Team out to blow up your driveway in 30 minutes. The mellow drama is a bit laughable. How many fucking hetero bashings like Matt Shepherd can YOU name before you start crying about big, nefarious fags hiding in the bushes?

Except we are not talking about boycotts.

The radicals in the movement have already proven that they are more than willing to go to the next step of vandalism of private property when they began destroying church property in California. The next thing will be violence and possibly even someone (on one side or the other) ending up dead. This is a heated debate. People are angry over this issue and violence is going to happen sooner or later.

This is not about boycotts or debate. This is a clear threat of violence.

Immie

sure we are. YOU assume that some gay militia is pawing their hands together just waiting to jump out of the bushes to attack people in their homes instead of gays using this knowledge to restrict their economic impact from those who would discriminate against them. Again, if you can point to a single instance of gays leaping out of bushes go ahead and post it. otherwise your assumptions mean two things. I'm sure you know what they are. When you can show me a hetero Emmet Till then we'll talk about violent reactions.

I've already posted links to the attacks against churches in California regarding Prop 8. I think you even participated in that thread. I'm not going back to find the links, but if you care to search my posts, and the word link, I'm sure you will find them.

This is only going to lead to violence and intimidation. That is not a good thing in any free society.

Immie

 

[Luissa]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

Well you just helped me form an answer to wry...i'm still thinking of my position but the retailiation/blacklisting type of stuff is pushing me toward wanting the USSC to judge that names on a petition are private and not to be released publicly.

On any petition too, i'm not thinking about gay rights only. What if you sign a petition to institute a water ban in your town, it passes, your neighbor is angry about it and finds out you signed the petition, then murders you over it. I know I know thats highly unlikely but way stranger stuff has happened.

Right now in Washington State (where the issue started) if a water ban was put on the ballot by a petition, your neighbor can find out if you signed a petition. The Anti Gay Rights people just want special treatment in Washington State and California.

 

[Immanuel]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

I bet the ghost of Tiller the Killer would laugh at your selective standard when it comes to public disclosure.

That is funny, you almost make it sound as if I approved of that "pro-life" website or the killing of Tiller.

I'd like to see where you came up with that doozy!

Immie

 

[Shogun]

Except we are not talking about boycotts.

The radicals in the movement have already proven that they are more than willing to go to the next step of vandalism of private property when they began destroying church property in California. The next thing will be violence and possibly even someone (on one side or the other) ending up dead. This is a heated debate. People are angry over this issue and violence is going to happen sooner or later.

This is not about boycotts or debate. This is a clear threat of violence.

Immie

sure we are. YOU assume that some gay militia is pawing their hands together just waiting to jump out of the bushes to attack people in their homes instead of gays using this knowledge to restrict their economic impact from those who would discriminate against them. Again, if you can point to a single instance of gays leaping out of bushes go ahead and post it. otherwise your assumptions mean two things. I'm sure you know what they are. When you can show me a hetero Emmet Till then we'll talk about violent reactions.

I've already posted links to the attacks against churches in California regarding Prop 8. I think you even participated in that thread. I'm not going back to find the links, but if you care to search my posts, and the word link, I'm sure you will find them.

This is only going to lead to violence and intimidation. That is not a good thing in any free society.

Immie

so you assume that gays firebombed churches and that this is the generalized reaction of fags, eh? nice. I guess it's no wonder why white southerners also thought letting ******* off of the farm would create such havoc, eh?

Your predictions are noted and disregarded. Again, until you can cite some vigilante gay A-team reaction then you really have nothing to offer besides paranoia and selective standards regarding disclosure. I've sure as hell never seen you make a statement every time a conservative yearned for medical records of abortion clinics in Kansas; The Ghost of Tiller continues to chuckle.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

In fact, I would not be surprised if these names are released, if we didn't begin seeing "wanted posters" on the net for the people who signed the petition as we saw on that so-called "pro-life" site that posted names and addresses of abortionists.

I also suspect some on the left would be thrilled to death to see such a thing.

Immie

Well giving the fact it is Washington State policy, that petitions are public record why shouldn't the names be published? And as for abortionist, they are protected by federal Hipaa laws, so it would be against the law to post their personal information. It isn't against the law to make petitions public.

no sooner do i hit post reply then i find a post giving me more insight.'

If it is already state law that the names are made public then I dont see the beef.....if you dont want people to know about a petition then dont sign it.


EDIT: Thanks Luissa. Knowing that it was the law already this becomes a non-issue for me.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

This will come back and bite you in the ass.

So does a lot that humans do, so, SO WHAT!

Anyone who doesn't have the cojones to stand behind what they sign petitions for ought not to sign the petitions, the nasty little cowards.....

 

[Luissa]

If it were a petition by ACORN affiliates, I would still oppose the release of their names. There is only one reason people are asking to have these names released and that is intimidation.

The outcome of something like this is that it will keep people from signing petitions and silence their voices. People will be afraid of signing a petition because of the possibility of their names being released and their kids being attacked in school.

Immie

YOU may oppose on the basis of trying to be consistent here but you know damn well how quickly we'd have those names.

and, you'll have to forgive me for not considering boycotts an equivalent to cross burning in the front yard.

You do realize that petitions are NOT VOTES, right? that there will always be a secret ballot regardless of public petition, yes? If you can't make public the very act of signing a public petition then maybe you should ask yourself why you are afraid to be socially lampooned over your opinions. It's not like gays are some A-Team out to blow up your driveway in 30 minutes. The mellow drama is a bit laughable. How many fucking hetero bashings like Matt Shepherd can YOU name before you start crying about big, nefarious fags hiding in the bushes?

Except we are not talking about boycotts.

The radicals in the movement have already proven that they are more than willing to go to the next step of vandalism of private property when they began destroying church property in California. The next thing will be violence and possibly even someone (on one side or the other) ending up dead. This is a heated debate. People are angry over this issue and violence is going to happen sooner or later.

This is not about boycotts or debate. This is a clear threat of violence.

Immie

Violence has already happened, it is called gay bashing. I don't know any christians beat up by gay people, I do know a few gays that were beat up by so called christians. These groups pulled a fire alarm and handed out leaflets, that is alittle different than beating the crap out of someone, and leaving them to die.