Making a List, Checking it Twice
TNG Events Editor Jolly brings news and questions about the disclosure of Prop 8 donors.
The passing of Prop. 8 in California and the ensuing discussion have raised a lot of ethical and philosophical questions regarding the tactics and arguments used in the quest for equal rights, whether they be same-sex marriage or otherwise. The most recent issue is one which the New York Times highlighted on Sunday: publishing lists of the names and addresses online of individuals who gave money towards helping to pass the marriage ban.
California’s election laws require that donors to political campaigns and causes of $100 or more disclose their names, addresses, occupations and other personal information. This information has been collected by opponents of Proposition 8 and has been compiled into an online map of such donors. Individuals on this list have claimed that they have received threatening emails and boycotts of their businesses as a result. Supporters of Prop. 8 have taken their case to court to raise the minimum for disclosure in order to protect individuals from “harassment campaigns.”
Being totally incapable of not over thinking things, I became of two minds about this whole scenario.
My initial reaction to this news was along the lines of: “Duh. Here’s a clue: don’t give money to political causes/positions you’re ashamed of and this wouldn’t be a problem.” Besides, it’s not as if roving queer vigilante squads are bashing and burning their way through towns across America as we speak. It’s totally within one’s legal rights to organize a boycott of a business, and you would think that if someone’s willing to give money towards taking away the rights of strangers based on their sexual orientation, he or she wouldn’t want your dirty homo money anyway. Also, if someone wanted to make up a flyer disclosing the minuscule sum I donated to the No-on-8 campaign, I’d accept that with pride in my convictions.
And yet, that tiny part of me that refuses to let me take an unquestioned stance on pretty much anything nagged me a little bit. While emails and boycotts are one thing, there is the potential for this to go farther. In fact, it kind of reminds me of stories of the lists of the names and addresses of doctors who performed abortions being circulated in the early 90s which were then used as hit lists. The fact that such things may prevent someone from expressing his or her political views for fear of physical retaliation, even if they run in direct opposition to mine, is something I find unsettling. Then again, all of this information is public record, so if someone really did want to get violent, they could do it without the help of this handy little list anyway.
So, where do you fall on this issue? Is there something about this which makes you a little uneasy or do you think I was on the right track with my initial assessment? Inquiring, overactive minds want to know!
5 comments:
I'm actually quite worked up about this. Conflicted, like you.
One of the things it most reminds me of is the practice of newspapers publishing the names and photos of gay men caught in sex stings, which has caused countless suicides. The disingenuous claim that "it's public information" doesn't take into account the way that that public information is used.
I doubt that eightmaps will lead to (any more) harassment or vandalism in California, but it seems mean-spirited and disingenuous, not a tool for accountability. The lists of Prop 8 donors were already public for 2 months before this site went online.
And what if anybody did that for the anti-Prop 8 donors? Or any pro-gay measure anywhere? Would we see it as merely a dispassionate application of "public information"? What if, like the anonymous administrator of eightmaps, such "gaymaps" were also anonymously created?
So yeah, it's public info, but overkill, and clearly intended to say "We know where you live." I doubt that will help fix the mistakes of No on 8 or forge a positive new strategy to win in the future. It's just bile.
Actually, the map that I've seen does have the info for both those who donated for and against prop 8. I think that undercuts the argument against having them a little...
I totally agree with Mike! I think it's a gross practice whether you post one side, or both. There's a difference between having such information "available" to the public, and mass distributing the information in a user-friendly "place blame here" format. Not that it seems to be a violation of anyone's rights... it just seems in bad taste. I would hope accountability laws would be more about a commitment to fairness and good practices in campaign fundraising, and less about judging the people who (biogoted, saintly, or otherwise) legally take part in their government. But what do I know, it's probably already a facebook application by now... we've become such a society of stalkers.
PS. Jolly, were you maybe at the live taping of the gabfest this Monday??? :)
Cory, where's the map that you've seen with both pro- and anti-Prop 8 donors? Do you have a link?
(Not that I think an anti-8 map proves anything except heavy-handed tactics on both sides. But we knew that about the homophobes already...)
I respect your ability to look at all sides, and I think very good points have been brought up by everyone here. However, I agree with your "initial" assessment. If an individual, business or organization cares so much about a cause they contribute money to it, then they should not be ashamed for people to know. I certainly want to know: if they are working to diminish my freedoms and equality, I simply will not support them.
Post a Comment