Prop 8 donors try to protect themselves from attacks
The story is here:
After giving $10,000 to California's Proposition 8 campaign last year, Charles LiMandri began receiving some unexpected correspondence.
"I got about two dozen e-mails and hate phone calls," said Mr. LiMandri, who lives in San Diego. "They were calling me Nazi, homophobe, bigot. I tried to engage people once or twice - I said that Proposition 8 had nothing to do with being bigoted, it was about preserving marriage - but people don't want to engage on the issue."
As a lawyer, however, Mr. LiMandri knew what to do with the e-mails.
"I collected them and turned them in to the lawsuit," he said.
Those e-mails are now among hundreds of exhibits in a landmark case challenging California's campaign-finance reporting rules, which require the release of the names, addresses and employers of those who contribute $100 or more to ballot-measure committees.
The lawsuit argues that those who contribute to traditional-marriage initiatives should be exempt from having their names disclosed, citing the widespread harassment and intimidation of donors to the Proposition 8 campaign. . . . .
Labels: CampaignFinanceRegulation
posted by John Lott at 11:30 PM
1 Comments:
First off - Charles apparently doesn't understand the word "bigot" or "bigotry" as both are defined as intolerance - which is EXACTLY what this is about.
The definition of marriage does not belong to ANYONE. The fact that religious people have, without question, taken ownership of it by hijacking this issue and are now demanding that others agree with them, is very ANTI-AMERICAN - where is the freedom to define one's life.
Laws are already on the books to provide consequences to those who would infringe on the civil liberties of others through violence, etc.
However, like liberals who want to be "offended", there is no RIGHT to comfort or to NOT be offended by someone's response to your personal choice.
Hiding your self-interest by imposing your personal derivations and definitions onto a pluralistic society? I think not. If you had the guts to make a donation, then have the guts to stand up for your position.
Your safety is protected - not your comfort of being challenged.
Government out of this issue, along with abortion, education, charities and other issues will make these polarizations go away.
For conservatives to decry that courts are being utilized for political gains and then create this lawsuit - is hypocrisy.
Nobody ever wants to debate me on this issue because they come to realize very quickly that their derivations of life, their definitions of life and their subjective view of life belongs to them and is anti-freedom when imposing all of it onto others.
Post a Comment
<< Home