And how does any of this apply to the discussion on Ref 71 and the withholding of petitioners names?
I never once mentioned this guy until after you brought him up.
The discussion centered around the reason the gay activists wanted to publicize the names of the petitioners. It seems pretty obvious that the only reason is to intimidate those who have already signed the petition. That can only lead to violence which is the reason this is being discussed.
Most people who sign petitions like that do not expect to be drug out into the public square to be flogged for exercising the right to sign a petition.
I think the name of "Madeline" that you were looking for is Madeline Murray O'Hair. She was a lead figure in the atheist movement for a long time. A public figure and a contentious one at that. She put herself in the public light. She was not "outed" to use an over used phrase. And no, she did not deserve to be harassed.
Immie
You keep saying ''can lead to violence'' as if nothing else can lead to violence.
The fact that most people were ignorant of the public nature of petitions is irrelevant. The backers of the petition obviously left that part out during their specious tales of what signing a petition was about.
Before the CA. Prop. 8 petition drive, it was established fact...knowledge ...that gay marriage proponents had web sites up listing the publicly available names of petition signers.
This knowledge was there for years.
I mention the bigoted Asian christian because his is an example the court just ruled on...he was denied the option to withdraw from a case he helped instigate.
Madelaine was indeed harrassed for her public opinions. Went with the territory. Same with signers of public petitions.
You use terms like 'flogging'l and doing so is hyberbolic and inflamatory.
The courts will not grant special cicumstances for the Prop. 8 signers. They shoukd have known what they were getting into. It was not a new thing that their names would appear on public sites