17 replies to this topic

[natty]

http://www.foxnews.c...raising,00.html

Supporters of the ban on gay marriage said public disclosure of their financial supporters had put the donors at risk of personal harassment or boycotts to their businesses.

Fred Karger, founder of gay-rights group Californians Against Hate, said the initiative's backers had threatened boycotts against businesses that failed to donate to their effort during the campaign.

Wow. Can you show me a better example of hypocrisy?

Boycotts are at the very heart of free speech - if you act like a douche and own a business, expect to have that thrown back in your face.

[Kurb]

Boycotts are at the very heart of free speech - if you act like a douche and own a business, expect to have that thrown back in your face.

Not agreeing with something doesn't make you a "douche"

[cookinwithgas]

There will also be people that seek these business out because of their support of the ban so it will probably even out, unless you happen to be the owner of a tanning salon.

[natty]

Not agreeing with something doesn't make you a "douche"

Well technically yes, but they're still douches.

[Inimicus]

So they have the nerve to tell people how to live, but not the balls to own up to the fact?

psst, hey, Allanis, this is irony.

[-Painted Fan-]

I still don't get this whole thing.
Prop 8 was voted upon in November, but people are still upset about the outcome of that vote.
I didn't vote for Obama, but he was elected as my President. I have accepted that, and support him.
Folks just need to get over this and move on.

[Darth Biscuit]

-
-
-
-
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
-
-
-
-
I'm only posting in this thread to distract Natty.

[Mr. Scot]

Fred Karger, founder of gay-rights group Californians Against Hate, said the initiative's backers had threatened boycotts against businesses that failed to donate to their effort during the campaign.

Public disclosure of political donations is a hot debate. Some people think it should be 100% public. Others say 100% private. I can see both sides of the issue, honestly, especially for people in business. For me, as long as the same standard is applied to people on every side of an issue, I'm okay with it.

I do have a problem with this bit though...

Fred Karger, founder of gay-rights group Californians Against Hate, said the initiative's backers had threatened boycotts against businesses that failed to donate to their effort during the campaign.

It's one thing to boycott people who donate to the other side, but to take the stance of "give us money or we'll boycott you" is intimidation, no different in character than a schoolyard bully.

[Fiz]

the pro-prop 8 people used the same laws they're bitching about now to extort money from businesses.

[natty]

-
-
-
-
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
-
-
-
-
I'm only posting in this thread to distract Natty.

Did someone say something?

[Zaximus]

I think prop-8 had some odd wording and kind of suckered people in.

Anyway, I think it should be 100% public. Gay people should be able to know who doesn't like them, so they don't give those people business, right? And yes, I'm sure people will flock to the businesses that supported it just as much as people that boycott it.

[pittsburghbaby]

I still don't get this whole thing.
Prop 8 was voted upon in November, but people are still upset about the outcome of that vote.
I didn't vote for Obama, but he was elected as my President. I have accepted that, and support him.
Folks just need to get over this and move on.

Presidency is something that should be voted on by the people. Civil rights are not.

[Fiz]

Well said.

when people use the tyranny of the masses as an excuse for bigotry, government should step in.

unless you can give me a good reason why schools should still be segregated