Despite the fact that the news has decidedly not been riddled with stories of fundamentalist Christians being bullied to death or being injured or maimed or killed for “standing up for murrrge,” aka using their culturally supremacist beliefs as an excuse to hurt gay people and our families, there are always going to be stories where they try to claim the mantle of victimhood. The crime committed against them? They simply are having to learn how to live in a secular society where their beliefs are not considered the norm. Welcome to grown-up land, fundies.
Right now, they are freaking out over the fact that a judge has ruled that the names of the petition signers for the Protect Marriage Washington ballot initiative to repeal domestic partnership benefits in that state [which failed] must be made public. They claim numerous threats have been made against them, which seem to amount to a few angry internet comments without any follow through. As always, we at Truth Wins Out remind our readers that, you know, making threats in comments sections is stupid and immature and shouldn’t be done, but it’s worth noting, again, that poorly thought out comments on the internet from gays don’t seem to lead to fundamentalists actually getting hurt. Anyway, here is some whining:
A federal judge has ruled that individuals who signed a petition seeking the repeal of a 2009 Washington State law expanding homosexual partnerships have no right to keep their names private. The ruling prompted fears that radical homosexuals will follow through on promised retaliation against the individuals.
There they go again, treating us like supervillains with immense power.
U.S. District Judge Benjamin Settle ruled October 17 that Protect Marriage Washington (PMW), the conservative, pro-family group that had organized the petition drive, had not demonstrated “serious and widespread threats, harassment, or reprisals against the signers of R-71, or even that such activity would be reasonably likely to occur upon the publication of their names and contact information.”
“Had not demonstrated.” You see, this is the thing: if they HAD demonstrated that they have a reason to be soiling their adult diapers, and the judge had ruled this way anyway, that would be a problem. But they didn’t make their case!
The ruling, noted PMW in a press release, left the signers open to the wrath of radical homosexual activists who had earlier promised retaliation. Wrote the group’s president, Larry Stickney: “Evidence brought forward by Protect Marriage Washington included death threats, extensive vandalism, overt threats of destruction of property, arson and threats of arson, intimidating emails and phone calls, hate mail, mailed envelopes containing white suspicious powder, blacklists, loss of employment and job opportunities, and gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry, including vandalism and threats directed at religious institutions and religious adherents — all for doing nothing more than standing up for traditional marriage. Nevertheless, Judge Settle wrote that Protect Marriage Washington was unable to prove ‘a reasonable probability that the threats, harassment, or reprisals exists as to the signers of R-71.”
Oh, quelle horreur. The “wrath of radical homosexual activists!” Sounds to me like Protect Marriage Washington is really exaggerating a few internet comments here, and it also sounds like the judge agrees.
Here’s the leader of a pro-gay group involved, being soooo scary:
Meanwhile, at least one homosexual activist group, Know Thy Neighbor, said that it would begin to leak the names, made available by the state for $15, to homosexuals who were looking for people they may know. The group’s director, Tom Lang, told Washington’s NPR radio station KUOW that the group would publish the names in an online searchable database, allowing homosexuals and their friends to search out petition signers they are familiar with and confront them.
Lang cited examples of “people who’ve been in people’s weddings parties and they’ve signed, people in families where the grandmother signed knowing darned well that her grandson was gay. These are the types of conversations that are being had.”
Note that he said that the release of these names will cause something that probably truly is a wingnut’s greatest fear: conversations. Words are hard and are known to have a liberal bias. But I will say that I appreciate when I find out that a friend or family member has affixed their name to an anti-gay proposition of any sort. In my life it leads to neither violence nor conversations, but rather a simple severing of the relationship. Maybe that’s what the wingnuts are afraid of — bigotry doesn’t really like the light of day, does it?
If the release of these names somehow does lead to a sudden spate of violence against Fundamentalists, I’ll be the first to rethink my opinion on this, but until then…
Yeah, don’t hold your breath.
