In Florida, one can vote to change the Constitution every two years. It takes approximately 600,000 signatures to get a proposed change on the ballot, a figure that Florida4Marriage.org is striving for even now. They missed the deadline for the 2006 ballot, turning in only 455,000 signatures. They vow to have the required number by 2008. The amendment in question (PDF) would rule out gay marriage or anything similar, and would probably eliminate existing domestic partnership laws already in place. As these petitions seem to have become a semi-mandatory part of church services throughout the state, they could very well reach their goal. Now you know the stakes.
An interesting thing about such petitions; unlike a secret ballot, these are public record. Taking advantage of this, the gay affirming, non-denominational Christ Church of Peace in Jacksonville recently posted a searchable list of the names and addresses of all 455,000 people who have signed the petition so far. They did this in association with KnowThyNeighbor.org, which appears to be dedicated to doing this throughout the nation. They ask for local groups to sponsor the website and request the information from their state election officials. They say the main purpose is to open a dialog, but also to expose fraud.
While even the Florida Secretary of State assured Christ Church of Peace that posting this information is lawful, it has still caused quite a stir.
“It’s a gross invasion of people’s privacy,” said John Stemberger, president and general counsel of the Florida Family Policy Council, an offshoot of James Dobson’s national Christian conservative group Focus on the Family.
Stemberger argued that, if Christian conservatives published the names and addresses of gay-rights activists, they would likely be condemned as hatemongers.
“A lot of people would be outraged and say it’s a hateful, un-Christian gesture,” he said.
Obviously there are some important differences here. Tax-paying Florida residents are signing public documents encouraging the denial of rights to other tax-paying Florida residents. Gay rights advocates in general are simply using their First Amendment rights to make an argument for equality. If they were to sign a petition in favor of a ballot initiative, their information would also be public record. We are talking about the proverbial “apples vs. oranges.”
Though uncertain at first about the entire idea, I entered several names into the search. I found a friend of 20+ years and his wife, another friend of fewer years, and my own sister, her husband and their daughter. My sister, who helped me through the rough ending of a five year relationship, and who even prayed for that relationship at the time. When I first discovered these names, I felt a little sick, then disillusioned, and now a little angry. I haven’t decided on the dialog yet but there will probably be some of that, too.
What do you think about this? Do you see it prompting a dialog among friends and family? Is it fair? How else would we know to have such discussions if those in our lives don’t share their views and actions with us?
There seems to be a serious determination to treat gay adults like children, and gay children as persons without their OWN souls, ideas and determinations.
This discovery of yours illustrates the discomfort your family has with you being the same and having the same abilities as they do to choose FOR YOURSELF what you will do with this very important institution in one’s life.
For me, it’s this simple.
These same ex gays, who insist that being gay is a choice, are still giving the choice of what you do with your own sexuality to heterosexual people.
Gay people are barely discussed or part of the equation for the government’s debate on this.
There are no gay people in the Senate, so the FMA being voted on was done without you.
So much for democracy.
And here are the people most intimate with your life, STILL taking THEIR ideas and wants against you.
Marriage is obviously no casual thing for most people.
And if it’s so important, than it should be encouraged in everyone.
But the exception for straight people is as long as gay people want to marry one of THEM, should a gay person share it.
Once again, placing what gay people do with it, in the control of another straight person.
There is no respect whatsoever for gay self determination, regardless that it’s never at the EXPENSE of heteros or what they do.
But the issue always has to be at the expense of gay people, with no explanation from heteros.
Personally, I want straight people to explain to me where they get to contol what gay people do?
Who gave them the privilege to have DOMAIN over gay people’s lives and the decisions that gay people make?
Disapproval of gay people is far different from complete control of them.
Now you know…if only your family knew. Nothing about their deeds will make them better people or improve marriage in general for their hetero peers.
I’d ask them why they put you in the position of not being able to make YOUR own choice with something so important for YOUR life.
David, I trust the Church when they say that their purpose is to create dialog, just like the dialog you will most likely be having with your family and friends. So, I think that is a good idea.
I do, however, fear that it may be used by some people in a negative way.
As for the Florida Family Policy Council’s assertion that it would be anaologous to posting the names of gay activists–my first reaction is to say I’d be ok with that. But, I’d be more worried of negative usage of the posting in that case.
I think there is nothing wrong with posting the names of people who have signed a petition. Too often, people are approached on the street or at their front door and they sign a petition without giving it much thought and consdieration. Issues in which petitions are required are issues that are supposed to be so important that a measure of how strongly people about it is needed to decide how to proceed. If someone is signing a petition, it should mean that issue is so important to them that they are willing to lend their name to the cause. Knowing that one’s name is going to be out there for all to see might discourage folks from signing petitions unless they truly do feel strongly about the issue.
David, as you consider how to approach your family regarding their signatures, remember that it is quite possible that they don’t really know what they were signing, may not have had the petition explained to them well enough to make an informed decision, and may even be a victim of fraud (as in the cases provided in your link).
As far as public records on the internet in general is concerned, I see it as the wave of the future, not for individuals or organizations doing it, but by the government itself.
For example, if a property comes up for sale and I want to find out info about it, I can go the the property assessors office in Dayton. The clerk helps me find the property on the map, looks it up on the computer and gives me a print out if I want.
They’re looking to make all this info available via the internet so that people can get this info from home or office, saving them a trip to the assesssor’s office and the clerks time, perhaps saving a clerks salary in the process.
So anyone complaining about petition signers names being available on the internet are SOL since I can see in the future that such info will be put there by the government itself eventually.
David,
How very difficult for you. But I do think that you have illustrated the need for such a posted list. People like your sister were probably pressured at church to sign – and did so because there was no counter-pressure not to sign. She never thought that you’d find out and assumed that she could take the easy route out, please her church members but not ever have to be confronted by the people she’s hurting. Especially her brother.
It is important that she now knows that taking actions that hurt you and your life are not casual undertakings. And I’m sure she is not alone in making this discovery.
I know it will be tough, but I encourage you to approach her and the others you know on the list. And Regan’s question is very relevant. Ask them why they think that they get to decide what you will do with your life.
I don’t see anything wrong with publishing such a list, but it should be noted that I sometimes sign petitions to get things on the ballot that I don’t agree with so I can help the petition signers earn a living. It does not mean I plan on voting for them.
“I do, however, fear that it may be used by some people in a negative way.”
It already has been used in a way that might be considered negative in Massachusetts. A volunteer fire captian had signed their anti-gay marriage petition. When he came up for reappointment, the council told him that they didn’t think he would treat gay families equally with hetero families and refused to reappoint him.
https://news.yahoo.com/s/ucmg/20060530/cm_ucmg/gaymarriagecreatesnewconflictsforneighbors
That might be a little exteme; I’m not yet resolved about it. But if I were a married guy in his town in Massachusetts, I might fear that I would not have the same access to fire protection. After all, he had demonstrated bias against their families.
But in any case, if someone is willing to change their constitution to exclude people from equal protection under the law, they should at least be willing to own up to their efforts and suffer the distain of gay people and their friends and family.
In this situation, the writer commented:
“The Childses were humiliated. After nearly a decade of volunteering every spare hour to rescue your neighbors, this is your reward? Dressed down as a bigot in public for signing a marriage petition?”
In my opinion, it’s about time that bigoted action results in public confrontation. If you don’t want to be dressed down as a bigot, don’t behave like one. And changing a constitution to take rights away from people solely because they are gay is, by all definitions, bigotry.
awesome!
I’m sorry, but anyone who thinks that they have any “privacy” in signing a petition is quite mistaken.
Maybe these folks will think next time before quickly signing a petition without reading it or without careful consideration of the topic of the petition. I am sure that many people signed it without really thinking about the impact that their signature might have.
It is OUR families and OUR lives that are under attack. It is OUR rights that are being violated. So why are THEY whining because their bigotry was exposed? Anyone who is overtly racist today will probably be shunned by polite society. It simply isn’t acceptable anymore. Same thing will happen with gays and lesbians, given a bit more time.
The fact is that anti-gay legislation like the one in Florida is anti-family and only serves to divide families and friends. The proof is right there in the fact that your own family or good friends may have signed such a ballot. I find the transparency (being able to see who signs) very revealing. Perhaps (as more people in Florida get to know about this) they will be less likely to sign these bigoted and divisive petitions.
I commend Christ Church of Peace for their public service and I hope it leads to more dialogue from people like David to respectfully confront their friends and family. Signing a petition should remain a public act and we all should feel responsible and accountable for our acts as voters and petition signers.
However, voting against a volunteer fire captain and anti-gay marriage petition signer Leo Childs is unfair. People should be judged by their actions, not their beliefs or political associations. I don’t buy the argument that Childs’ signature in favor of an anti-gay marriage amendment implies that he would discriminate against GLBT in his job. Another article about the Childs controversy indicated that the other selectmen “voted against Childs for other reasons”(1).
I have mixed feelings about how polarized American communities are becoming. On one hand, it’s great that we are becoming more conscious about who we support and associate our votes and money with. But on the other hand, it seems very devisive and descriminatory to scrutinize whether the corporation, small business, non-profit, neighbor, employer, co-worker, etc., is “friendly” to our cause or not. Certainly, I don’t like to think my clients, employers, or neighbors are judging me based on my political/religious/social beliefs.
(1) Supporting Link
These people who signed the petition have not done anything wrong, so why are they concerned if their names are made public?
/snark
Actually I have a holier-than-thou brother and sister in-law that signed. Not surprised; they ~are~ better than everyone else.
/snark
My stepmother, who I’ve been on the outs with for about a year signed the petition. That was the straw the broke the camel’s back as far as I’m concerned.
Next time I hear from her, I hope it’s by my reading the obituaries.
Wow. Having personally received hate mail for being involved in LGBT activism in the past, I’m going to think hard about which petitions I sign in the future. I’m going to have to feel very strongly about an issue before I sign onto it.I hope the people who signed the Florida petition feel strongly enough about preventing gender neutral marriages to experience being called publicly or privately to the carpet for their signatures.
We don’t live in an anonymous world.
Here’s a way of thinking about this: Do we expect any public official who is elected to create or enforce the laws of our state and nation to have a right to privacy?
The answer is that at most levels we do not. There is some expectation at whatever basic level, that when you create laws or enforce them, you give up some amount of privacy.
Your home address, telephone number, etc. are all part of your voter information and readily available (how do you think you get political mailers and political phone calls during election season). When you sign a petition, you are in effect helping to create a law. You become a ‘public’ figure in that you have publicly advocated for whatever petition you just signed (one reason I almost never sign petitions even if I agree with the issue).
Everyone who has signed this petition has given up a level of their right to privacy. It’s best that lesson be learned (by the way, you do know the folks in favor of the petition use that list to generate mailers and fundraising requests don’t you? The real difference is that those in support are using the information from the list covertly, while this church is doing what they do openly, in full view of everyone).
Paraphrasing scripture: There is a time when all evil thoughts will be made known openly. It is *clearly* time in this country for the evil of marriage “protection” bigots to be fully examined in the light of day. Only by knowing who our true “friends” and allies are can we confront them.
There are only a few places where one has total anonymity/privacy:
1. The voting booth in a general election (some states, like Florida, do not have open primaries, so you have to declare a political affiliation when you register to vote in order to vote in a primary).
2. The confessional or similar conversation with a clergyperson, provided you have not committed a crime.
3. A conversation between a legally married husband and wife (it’s considered a privileged communication and cannot be admitted to court procedings). Same goes for conversations between an attorney and his/her client – retainer must be signed.
There are undoubtedly a few others, but that’s about it.
Your mortgage and loans, ownership of property, income, etc. are all available to anyone who really wants to know. Also, where you’ve spent money and what you spent it on. The list goes on and on.
Scary, huh?
We do have mixed feelings, but have to fall on the side of thinking openess is best.
Particularly given the number of times such signature gathering has raised problems with false or misused names etc in the past few years. I’d hope every voter will take advantage and check the records.
This does appear to be a modern version of a “show of hands” in the village hall. Again, mixed feelings, because being open in a polarised environment can cause it’s own problems. But at the same time, if you are involved in a public campaign that targets individuals for unequal treatement you should probably also be prepared to be open and honest. I’m sure there’s a number of gay citizen’s out there that are in for a shock or two.
And how very difficult for you David. You seem to be feeling rather let down and betrayed, and that’s perfectly understandable. This is personal, and it’s no use them pretending otherwise. Once you’ve collected your thoughts it could be an opening for talking with friends and family (and not just those who signed). Maybe that’s not a bad thing, even if not wanted. Yuck.
In any case, we know you’ll deal with it in your usual respectful and rational manner. Simply asking for their explanation/understanding may be a good place to start.
A quick google and a run through some randomly selected comments on the web did reveal an interesting theme.
Apart from the broader issues already discussed here, many have objected because this has put them in the position of their true feelings being exposed to neighbours, family and friends. They are now uncomfortable with looking them in the eye etc.
This makes us think the list is a good thing.
Anyone prepared to sign away the equality of others, but unprepared to look them in the eye, should be questioning their own motivations. Anyone feeling uncomfortable should ask themself why they feel that way.
Could it be because they know they are supporting inequality? And were otherwise prepared to do it anyway, regardless?
Regan said:
I’d ask them why they put you in the position of not being able to make YOUR own choice with something so important for YOUR life.
Very good points all, Regan. This is an honest and practical question to ask.
Timothy said:
She never thought that you’d find out and assumed that she could take the easy route out, please her church members but not ever have to be confronted by the people she’s hurting. Especially her brother.
I agree and hadn’t initially thought that through. If anything though, the posting of these names demonstrates why that veil of anonymity should be lifted. People should have that counter pressure to make the consequences of such initiatives real and clear to them. Perhaps if more people had to look their “victims” in the eye, so to speak, there would be a little less inhumanity in the world. That can’t be such a bad thing.
On the personal side, thank you all for your kind comments and thoughtful input. I have a better idea of how I am going to handle this now, and may find a way to post that and the results when I do. It seems most everyone is agreed that posting these names was, at the very least, a productive move. As grantdale said, “Maybe that’s not a bad thing, even if not wanted. Yuck.” It’s been a practical lesson for me, I assure you. I was somewhat skeptical initially, but I do believe this was a good idea, certainly when done without malice as it seems was the case here.
David Roberts
There seems to be a serious determination to treat gay adults like children, and gay children as persons without their OWN souls, ideas and determinations.
Regan, I totally agree with this.
However, I don’t agree with the tactic. Don’t most of us already know who the ‘phobes in our neighborhoods, workplaces, and families are? Why do we need to give them ammunition and make them paranoid?
David, I guess I didn’t read closely enough. I’m sorry you saw names that surprised you and names of people you loved. I hope this does lead to a productive dialogue. *hug*
In my family, people are very outspoken, sometimes too much so. I’m very grateful for that right now–at least we all know where everyone else is coming from, and at least there are no heartbreaking surprises like the ones you’ve just experienced. My people are mostly in Florida; some of their names are on that list. I’ve had to reassure them all that I don’t like that tactic. But I really wonder where my reassurance that they don’t actually hate me and my wife’s guts is at now.
I just learned that our two closest neighbors in Florida had signed the petition.
I feel really betrayed. 🙁
They had been friendly with both Barb and myself for the entire time we lived there (2001 – 2005). All I can figure is that they got conned by some slick-talker that told them it would save marriage from the infidels, or some other BS, because they are the type that forwards every e-mail that says “don’t break the chain, blah-blah.”
Really disappointed in them.
Commentary: SEX-MORALISTS LISTED BY HOMOS ON SITE. DERISION?
Excerpts: This surely is the time to make one’s Christian witness public. Therefore, when the pro-homosexual activity site plastered believers’ names and whereabouts on the site, they are simply adding to the conviction that a genuine believer makes his bold, in-the-open testimony known to the world.
In other words, Thank You, web site, for assisting the moralists in getting out the clean, gospel message.
and…
Every moralist who signed the petition would want neighbors to know of his basic ethic; therefore, one more time the homosexual activists don’t really get the import of the intelligent Christian witness in the public arena.