Same-Sex Marriage Foes Afraid to Stand by their Donations

by Michael Jones · 2009-01-08 19:45:00 UTC
Topics:

El Coyote boycottIt all started the day after Christmas, with a rather shady article in the Wall Street Journal that suggested donor disclosure laws should be rewritten to protect the confidentiality of political donations.  The reason?  Pro-Prop 8 supporters were becoming the target of boycotts and criticism as their names went public for financially supporting the Yes on 8 campaign.  Hotels, restaurants, theaters, and more were "outed" as having supported marriage discrimination, and as a result, LGBT rights advocates took notice.

Today, folks opposed to marriage equality took it a step further than the op-ed pages, by filing a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court in California to block the release of campaign finance records from public view.  Why?  Because it's easy to hate when you have a white sheet over your head.

Er, I mean, it's easy to hate when you don't have to be financially accountable for your hatred.  Both ProtectMarriage.com and the National Organization for Marriage filed the suit. The ironic twist in all of this, of course, is that these same groups used campaign disclosure laws to target businesses and individuals who supported the No on 8 campaign - including calling for boycotts of Google and Apple and a host of other pro-LGBT businesses, and threatening one San Diego business to give a donation to the Yes on 8 campaign or face "consequences" (or, in other words, we can just call that extortion).  The Yes on 8 campaign even sent blackmail letters to supporters of same-sex marriage, saying there would be repercussions for financially backing the No on 8 campaign.

So let's all choose an ending to this post.  (1)  This lawsuit is nothing more than a horribly veiled attempt to eliminate transparency from the political process and squash the First Amendment.  (2)  This lawsuit is a sign that the Yes on 8 campaign is worried that the marriage equality movement has more powerful economic clout and knows how to use it to call out people on their discrimination.  (3)  This lawsuit proves that the Yes on 8 campaign is comprised of cowards who are either too afraid or too ashamed to put their John Hancocks next to their political contributions.  (4)  A combination of all three.

Michael Jones is a Change.org Editor. He has worked in the field of human rights communications for a decade, most recently for Harvard Law School.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Is it Child Abuse if a Parent Rejects their LGBT Child?
NEXT STORY:
Bullied high schooler convinces MPAA to change ‘Bully’ rating to “PG-13”

COMMENTS (7)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.