NYTimes finally acknowledges that anti-Prop. 8 mob is harassing traditional marriage supporters
Hell is frozen over. The New York Times has finally come to the realization that the anti-Prop. 8 mob in California is intimidating traditional marriage supporters with its blacklist maps.
What took them so damn long?
FOR the backers of Proposition 8, the state ballot measure to stop single-sex couples from marrying in California, victory has been soured by the ugly specter of intimidation.
Some donors to groups supporting the measure have received death threats and envelopes containing a powdery white substance, and their businesses have been boycotted.
The targets of this harassment blame a controversial and provocative Web site, eightmaps.com.
…The site pits…cherished values against each other: political transparency and untarnished democracy versus privacy and freedom of speech.
“When I see those maps, it does leave me with a bit of a sick feeling in my stomach,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, which has advocated for open democracy.
(link)
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Shut Up Hippy » Blog Archive » NYTimes finally acknowledges that anti-Prop. 8 mob is harassing traditional marriage supporters
- My Exclusive Interview with Mitt Romney « JoHNBRoDiGaNDoTCoM
- NYTimes finally acknowledges that anti-Prop. 8 mob is harassing traditional marriage supporters — But As For Me
- Prop eighters are haters « Riggword Weblog
- California Proposition 8: The Ugly Specter of Intimidation | FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog
- The New York Liberal Times disses the anti Prop-8 mob? | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- Militant Homosexual KGB “Sleeper” Agents Described Over 25 Years Ago « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
- Can we call 'em bigots promoting hate speech yet?
- Mitt Romney Announces His Candidacy for…Senate?!? « JoHNBRoDiGaNDoTCoM
- NYT finally admits Anti Prop 8 Groups have gotten ugly « Random Thoughts
- lunes linkage 2/9/2009
- New York Times Has a Sick Feeling Over Eightmaps.com : ETC: Everyday Thoughts Collected
- The Bilerico Project
- NYT admits that, yes, Proposition 8 supporters are harrassing the other side « Right Minded Online
- NYTimes finally acknowledges that anti-Prop. 8 mob is harassing traditional marriage supporters « Top Daily Digest Reading
- WaPo Heralds ‘Chorus’ of Gay Bloggers, Ignores Conservative GayPatriot Blog | Latest Technology News - Business News And Expert Advice
- WaPo Heralds ‘Chorus’ of Gay Bloggers, Ignores Conservative GayPatriot Blog
- Wintery Knight Blog
- The difference between the Republican and Democratic sides « DaTechguy’s Blog
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Founding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Boston Globe Climate Beclownment SpectacularDoug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-ShirtRadio Equalizer
» Media Matters Admits Rush Didn't Make Key Racist RemarksDoug Ross @ Journal
» The CRU Climate Scam In 90 SecondsHot Air
» 3rd quarter GDP 2.8%, not 3.5%Mudville Gazette
» Threatswatch: US Embassy Denies Secret Eikenberry Talks With Taliban
Trying out my new storm. Anti-prop 8 mobs are just flat out insane.
Hey mookie, I just looked at your letter…October 2008? I’m just now hearing about it? I doubt it. The media would have been all over that. I’ve never heard of this website you cite either and an internet search only took me to other very obscure news outlets that claimed prop 8 supporters were blackmailing. You sure you are not chap? He loves to footnote obscure things as well.
AP: California Gay Marriage Ban Backers Target Businesses
LA Times
LOL, AT&T, Levi Straus, PG & E? You kidding me? You are going to try to equate these giants with small businesses getting hurt for exercising their rights to free speech? When you go after small business, you hurt private citizens, big corporations is a different story and you know it. Your crazy. I don’t care if you are pro same sex marriage or anti. This is bs, the media is biased and not enough people are looking out to preserve freedom and privacy. I seem to remember the gay lobby praising the Supreme Court for claiming that privacy was inherent in the Constitution (even though it does not really state that) as an implied freedom. Now it does not apply….hipocrites. your argument is flawed.
I’m not arguing anything. The point I’m trying to make is that the public information on donors has been used by groups on both sides of the issue.
It still is not equal. Whether or not you support gay marriage, these tactics are nasty and cowardly and you should be calling them out, not trying to justify it. It sounds to me like all the supposedly moderate Muslims out there who are completely silent for some reason.
#78
Thats why when I submit letters to the editor, I use my alter ego persona/pseudomyn name (the name of an ex-fiancee turned into the masculine form) and yet not easily forgotten since its also the first name of my younger brother.
Some may call it extreme, but Dr. Adams posted an article several months ago about a black female from UNC’s Human Resources Department who was fired for writing a letter to the editor of the local paper critical of gays using orientation as equal with skin color, she didn’t list her job or company and was still fired. At last report she had a lawsuit against the school and I hope she wins it.
Additionally I have had a few college professors actively indoctrinate, and promote the gay agenda with one going as far as to threaten to verbally berate any student who doesn’t agree with her.
Mookie-
If we wanted to harrass gay rights supporters, then we could easily get a copy of the “Gay yellow pages” and target the businesses that advertise in them with naziesque’ tactics. However, thats not our style in debating the issues with civility.
GSP
“This is Sparta!”
Fine, then, controlling for Prop. 8 supporters who went after BUSINESS donations, please cite the stories where Prop. 8 supporters are systematically harrassing individual, private citizens. Like Prop. 8 opponents are.
The OMU and MOOKIE argument is that anyone who didn’t agree with them is a bigot. Well in that case I a proud to be a bigot and they can shove thier flase piety up thier …..
That’s SOP for liberals. Don’t agree with them? You’re a bigot. Your First Amendment rights, plus all that blather about “tolerance” and “diversity” be damned.
What they need, more than anything, are our prayers.
Mookie:
More important than the business/private distinction others have tried to draw is that there is no evidence so far that Prop 8 supporters have used the donor list to commit violence or intimidate opponents. There has been evidence of people opposing Prop 8 doing so.
sonofdy:
Once again, you have managed to be aggressively wrong. Point out anywhere in this thread where Mookie used the word bigot. Instead of reflexively labelling people who disagree with you, you really ought to try reading what people have to say and engaging them on it.
VARGAS. Oh please. You know exactly what i mean. Stop acting stupid. He may not say it but thats exactly what he thinks and if he wants to sweaten it up, then he is just being dishonest about it.
Has anyone checked the Generational Theft Act to see if any taxpayer money is going to these terrorists like it will to ACORN thugs?
Lets ask mookie,
Mookie, do you think it is bigoted to oppose gay marriage? To think it is wrong?
This is just a shameless ploy by the NYT to increase readership by reaching out to new markets.
They’ll be back to fabricating stories and pushing the liberal agenda as soon as subscriptions double from the current count of 87.
It depends on the reason. If you oppose it based on religious beliefs, no. If you oppose it because you hate gays, then yes, that makes you a bigot.
And if you believe it is wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with religon??
IE the people voted???
I personally draw the line between being able to marry legally, with all the rights (and responsibilities) that entails, and churches being coerced by law into marrying same-sex couples in direct opposition to their own teachings and beliefs.
Now, as for tactics of intimidation, a boycott of a business is one thing. Harrassment and threats is where I draw the line (stop listening to the Dixie Chicks’ music, for example, if you want to, but don’t insult/threaten them).
It’s great you make that distinction, but lots of folks – see the Prop. 8 opponents for a PRIME example – don’t.
I’m not sure I understand. Does that mean you would approve of it if CA had voted against Prop. 8?
On February 9th, 2009 at 12:28 pm, Mookie said:
And if you believe it is wrong for reasons that have nothing to do with religon??
IE the people voted???
I’m not sure I understand. Does that mean you would approve of it if CA had voted against Prop. 8?
————————————-
My guess is that he means that, once the vote has been taken and fairly tabulated, the majority vote should not be thwarted by tactics of intimidation/violence.
If you’re still here, Snodfy, feel free to correct if I’m wrong,
frostrt has it right. I would have said, well that just proves californians are dumb, and moved on. But for exactly this reason, almost every liberal in the universe called me a bigot so sorry if you get lumped in with your fellows but too bad. Once the liberal side changes it tactics, I will. I am not bound by christian religous doctrine.
I’m impressed that you’ve met almost every liberal in the universe. You must be a very sociable person.
You keep saying I’m a liberal, which amuses me. Why do you automatically assume that it’s only liberals who support gay marriage?
I have yet to meet a conservative who wasn’t, in reality, a CINO who supported what Prop. 8 opponents want.
Why are you rolling your eyes? There are conservatives on this board that support gay marriage.
I know this thread is getting old, but have to ask. What about the people who do not want to see constant and unending litigation against schools, businesses and every other institution in the state. I am not convinced that schools will not be bullied into providing education about homosexuality to children. If I knew that that was not going to be the case, I could vote to allow gay marriage. We all know that liberal history points otherwise, there is no way that lawsuit after lawsuit will not be filed costing me more money. I wonder, if the ACLU had to repay the costs of their lawsuits in California, the state probably could pay out tax refunds.
If people who vote against it are bigots (thought police anyone?) then there better be some re-education camps set up in the black and hispanic neighborhoods in California. This is going to be an interesting few years, liberal democrats are made up of diverse groups, many of whom really hate each other. It will be fun to watch the democrats across the nation eat each other.
I hope that Michelle picks up on Los Angeles City College getting sued by a Christian student for being shut up by his professor because he had the nerve to support Prop 8 in the classroom.
It’s the classic libtard ‘free speech for me but not for thee!’ heading for court.
Don’t lose sight of the fact that, inside the extremes, there are those of us who oppose it purely on the basis of scientific logic that has nothing to do with religion. We are not bigots and we do not hate homosexuals.
I consider homosexuality to be merely a sexual behavior dysfunction. There are two genders for a reason, etc.
The blacklisting by gay rights activists amounts to religious persecution, folks. Thought that was dead in America, did you? This persecution is directed against Mormons, Catholics and evangelicals. Religious persecution lives on here as elsewhere. If you believe the Bible’s injunctions on marriage and against homosexual behavior, you are worthy of persecution in the minds of the gay rights community and the denizens of those blogs which shall not be named.