Prop-8 Supporters Sue For Unconstitutional Disclosure Of Donors

Thursday, January 8, 2009

UPDATE: The media claims Calif. gay marriage foes want donors anonymous. This is UNTRUE! They only want the law modified to protect people from harassment. This might mean disclosing only names instead of addresses and employers, but it is NOT necessarily anonymous. Also, nice charged language: 'gay marriage foes' instead of 'Prop-8 supporters.'

Excellent. and the National Organization for Marriage California teamed up to file lawsuits against the California secretary of state's office to remove all donations for the proposition from its Web site. It also requests that all "all similarly situated persons" shouldn't be bound by the state's unconstitutional disclosure laws.

One woman had her life threatened, many have receiving harassing phone calls and emails, one man had fliers passed around town besmirching his character, temples have received domestic terrorism, windows have been smashed, people have been blacklisted, and many have lost jobs, according to the suit.

The First Amendment Coalition and ACLU, ironically, have supported this attack on basic free speech rights of prop-8 supporters, slamming this lawsuit. Ironic.

The suit further explains: court precedent holds that if disclosure of campaign contributions resulted in economic reprisals or threats of physical coercion against members, that disclosure can be overturned or restricted.

I've detailed some unconstitutional attacks on prop-8 supporters here.

This effort to stop intimidation of free speech will be more successful if we try to modify the Politcal Reform Act of 1974 rather than having it overturned. What is the point of disclosing addresses and employers except to encourage harassment? Of course I don't expect capricious liberals to believe this, but this transcends the gay marriage argument and gets right to the heart of democracy. How can the people rule if they can't speak without the government encouraging harassment?


I do think that there should be transparency with political donations, but what happened to Prop 8 donors was unconscionable. I think that the Chronicle, the LA Times, CA Democrat leader Dante Atkins, Roseanne Barr and others who have openly advocated retaliation against the donors of Prop 8 also ought to be sued for libel, hate-speech and/or inciting the hate-crimes that resulted from their speech. The fact that the ACLU is against this is just another example of how their claim to protect civil rights is a disingenuous front for their real goal: bringing down traditional family and moral values.

Post a Comment


Save the Constitution

Declaration of Liberty

In memory of our God, our Nation, our Religions, our Freedom, our Peace, our Families and our Fallen Dead;

WE THE PEOPLE declare that We will Never Yield to those who would place us in bondage. We will live for the Constitution and we will die for the Constitution, for we know that it was inspired of God for all of his Children.
Copyright © 2009-2010 Good Sense, All Rights Reserved.

Articles, quotes, comments, and images are the exclusive property of their respective authors, who own all rights to their use. Articles do not necessarily represent the views of Good Sense or its contributers. All copyrighted materials appearing on this site and not derived by contributing authors are protected by and used according to “Fair Use” as described in sections 107 through 118 of the U.S. Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code).