"Should Anti-Gay Rights Petition Signers Be Exposed?" asked a teaser headline [screencap shown at right] on CBSNews.com's front page.
"Hot Topic: Battle Rages in Washington State over Privacy of Petition Signers" the subheader read.
While the November 3 article itself by staffer Brian Montopoli was balanced -- giving room for a social conservative activist to defend keeping the names and addresses of signatories of the Referendum 71 petition from being made public -- the headline sets the tone for readers to see pro-traditional marriage backers in Washington State as folks motivated to deprive fellow citizens of their "rights."
So what does Referendum 71 actually do? According to Montopoli:
Voters in Washington state will decide today on a referendum that could effectively roll back legislation passed in May to extend domestic partnership rights and responsibilities to gay and lesbian couples similar to those granted married heterosexual couples.
In point of fact, the legislation itself is not yet law, and the question before voters in Referendum 71 is whether to approve or reject the enactment of the domestic partnership bill:
The legislature passed Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill 5688 concerning rights and responsibilities of state-registered domestic partners and voters have filed a sufficient referendum petition on this bill. This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage. Should this bill be: Approved ____ Rejected ____
Far from being "anti-gay", the petition in question is simply a matter of putting the bill for an up-or-down vote by the electorate. Apparently to CBS News, simply putting the matter before the general public to approve or reject is anti-gay bigotry.
—Ken Shepherd is Managing Editor of NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Both sides have to ask themselves this question...
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 13:20 ET by c5thenIf the issue was reversed, would they want the petitioner's names to be made public? Because that is the precedent that they will be setting.
As for the marriage / domestic partner issue itself. The voters are deciding if they want the state to treat marriage and living together as exactly the same. But wait, notice that it mentions same-sex and senior domstic partners. So apparently if you are younger than 60 and living with a person of the opposite sex you are out of luck in Washington. So this bill doesn't level the playing field, it just diminishes the special significance of marriage.
Yet another way to reverse the descrimination by talking about inclusion.
Throw 'da bums out!!!
Before it's too late.
www.loyaltoliberty.com
I live in Washington State
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 14:19 ET by ElyasI live in Washington State and voted to Reject Ref 71. My question is though, is that if pro-gay marriage crowd is so compassionate then why would we even need to worry about what would happen if the list was published?
I think that this shows that most of the hate comes from the pro-gay marriage side.
No Bumper Stickers
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 16:08 ET by miss911ninjaI know your question was rhetorical Elyas, but it reminded me of why I'd be worried if I had an anti-Obama bumper sticker on my car. My car would be keyed just as surely as the homes of petition-signers will be egged--or worse--if their addresses are published.
Isn't it interesting that
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 16:23 ET by Tom PaineIsn't it interesting that for 8 years I saw a number of cars with anti-Bush bumper stickers none of which ever appeared to have been vandalized. If I put an anti-Obama bumper sticker on my car the inclusive crowd would trash it before I left the parking lot. Funny how all of us right wing haters are the ones who respect other peoples' freedom of speech and private property.
Maine People's Veto
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 15:54 ET by Nortoof a law enacted by the legislature making homosexual marriage legal will be decided today. Wondering if all of us who worked on this against "parriage" will be liable under the hate bill signed in by O as part of the defense bill?
A guidance counselor from Central Maine may have his social workers liscence stripped because he came out in a tv ad against parriage.
I am against revealing the
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 20:02 ET by Dan The Man 2I am against revealing the petitioners, if we do we go back to an older time where ones vote was well known to all and where there was much pressure to make all vote one way; sometimes with great violence.
The vote is for the people, by the people with teh people being teh main thing.
am I missing something?
Tue, 11/03/2009 - 21:33 ET by michiganruthhow is this referendum even about gay marriage? it specifically says that the civil relationship is NOT the same as a marriage. personally, I don't understand why you would not want to give a gay partner the right to, for example, be considered family to visit a loved one in the hospital.
I'm an independent who is considering the Republicans, but if joining the GOP means not being able to support something as innocuous as this, I don't think I'm going to go there.
for those of you about to play the God card, please: aren't we supposed to hate the sin but love the sinner? how can you be against allowing two people to have some basic human rights?
homophilia is not a right, never will be.
Wed, 11/04/2009 - 02:05 ET by SILVERNAMEwho says homosexual relations are a right? sorry ,but they are not, homophilia is not a right, it is a sin, an abomination.
i'm not going to support giving people the right to be a homophile anymore than im going to support giving people the right to be adulterers or pedophiles. no way jose.
no govt should be wasting taxpayers money on sodomites, homophilia should be criminalized, not given legal protection and benefits by the govt.
Homophilia is a worse threat than terrorism.
Sally Kern for President!!
I'm an independent who is
Wed, 11/04/2009 - 02:05 ET by Dan The Man 2I'm an independent who is considering the Republicans, but if joining
the GOP means not being able to support something as innocuous as this,
I don't think I'm going to go there
Ruth, Its hard to believe you are thinking about supporting the GOP. You do realize we are not lock step and each person makes up their own minds. I am an independent who votes GOP most of the time because they have the better ideas.
It is funny that you believe just by joining the GOP that you cant support what you wish to; are you some ind of slave? This makes me think you are a plantby the left. I perused some of your other comments and you label yourself libertarian, well keep it.
As far as your God card, the Bible is pretty explicit about homosexuality. And human rights is mans concept not God's.
The Homosexuals work in incremental steps and over teh last 40 years have been very successful. Thier latest crown is the hate crimes bill which may, and probably will, create problems for free speech advocates. Look to other countries that have passed hate crimes and you will see a progression of what is classified as hate crimes and speech.
And you say this is the USA not Canada or Europe where it is a crime to speak out against certain subjects including homosexuals and how wrong it is. And would you have believed the liberties the admin of Duh Vain One has taken to date?
I am still trying to figure out
Wed, 11/04/2009 - 03:53 ET by Ankharanwhere in the hell the feral government or state governments have any business regulating any marriages.
Marriage is a RELIGIOUS rite. A free person should not have to beg and pay to have a religious ceremony certified by any starte or any feral government.
You, the people, have NO business dictating who can and cannot be married aside from setting the legal limits of protecting minors and the mentally incapable and even felons. But not a citizen in good standing of the feral and state governments.
It is NONE of your business on who sleeps with who beyond protecting minors and the mentally incapable. if you don't like gay marriages.... don't be involved in one. It is that simple. If you don't like gays. Don't associate with them.
Keep this in mind too. Equality under the law. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness does NOT apply to a select few. It applies to all. I see so many peopel here complain about this or that infringement on their rights yet have no problem squashing someone elses rights. Hypocrits onBOTH sides of the isle. Keep your religious intolerance out of everyone else's freedoms. It is that simple.