Sunday, January 18, 2009

Anti-Prop. 8 folks map out donors' homes



Ah, the joys of modern technology and the public status of political donations.

Some anti-Prop. 8 folks with too much time on their hands have created http://www.eightmaps.com/, a "mash up" of Google maps and Prop. 8 donor lists that now maps out the home of each Prop. 8 donor, complete with the donor's name, donation amount, profession, employer and donation date.

While this is technically legal, it is a disgusting and disturbing invasion of privacy. Although it's a little encouraging to see how many little flags there are, honestly (and they didn't get everyone - my parents aren't on there, but they donated to the cause), it is beyond unsettling that these people are pushing so hard to personally attack the individuals who supported Prop. 8 - and, furthermore, to go after their livelihoods in today's economy, of all times.

What do you think of the maps? Does this cross the line from the public's right to information and cross into a breach of an individual's right to privacy? Can you imagine this happening on another political cause?

One of the cornerstones of voting in the United States is that you cast a private ballot, free from intimidation or threats. To me, this sort of behavior is downright un-American and wrong.

(PS: Any techie people know how to figure out the source of the Web site? No, I don't want to go mapping them out - but I do think it would be appropriate to start sending emails to Google, complaining of this effort that crosses some lines. I'm wondering if this is something they can take down - but I'm not sure if it technically goes beyond their user agreement. It's just a map with the info. The action for the No on 8'ers is to be inferred.)

15 comments:

Hizzeather said...

Oh snap...I just looked at it for a few moments, and I found Laura, Kim & Debbie on there! So wrong.

cdavis said...

I'm on there! And I'm okay with that. :)

elizabeth-carrie said...

It's a disgusting invasion of privacy eh? So is impeding on the right of EVERYONE to be able to get married.

I would love to ask you Prop. 8 supporters something... you're all for "protecting the family" but, how do you feel about couples who get divorced? What about those adulterers? I bet those don't matter to your "focus on family" cause. Hypocrites. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

What is un-American and wrong is teaching hate. God loves every single person, not just those straight people who go to church every Sunday and pick out bits and pieces of the Bible to follow. And surely your children are getting the wrong message: "people who are different aren't allowed to have the same rights as us bible-toting Christians."

Hizzeather, oh snap yourself. If Laura, Kim and Debbie can't take the heat, then they should think twice about their bigotry and hate.

Finally, it is known that those who are against gay marriage / homosexuality are repressing their own homosexual desires.

Hizzeather said...

Elizabeth-Carrie, you are ridiculous. I won't take the time to argue your inane points...it's been done too many times before. But please, keep posting comments like this. It just makes us look better.

elizabeth-carrie said...

What it does is make you look like a self-righteous and stuck up snob who thinks she is better than everyone else because you happen to be straight.

Homosexuality is genetic and it's been proven time and time again:

"Potential for homosexual response is prevalent and genetic," Santtila P, Sandnabba NK, Harlaar N, Varjonen M, Alanko K, von der Pahlen B.; Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University.

"Genetic research using family and twin methodologies has produced consistent evidence that genes influence sexual orientation," Mustanski BS, Chivers ML, Bailey JM.; Department of Psychology, Indiana University.

"The survival of a human predisposition for homosexuality can be explained by sexual orientation being a polygenetic trait that is influenced by a number of genes," Miller EM.; University of New Orleans.

"Human sexual orientation has a heritable component," Pillard RC, Bailey JM.; Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine.

My point is that I'm contributing facts... proven facts. My other point is to show that through these facts, homosexuality is normal and natural, just like heterosexuality is and thereby every single person who is willing and able should be entitled to the institution of marriage.

Now, you still haven't addressed my questions... I'm very curious. What do you think about people who get divorced? And what do you think about adulterers? Not very "focused on the family" are they?

I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm trying to show the other side.

What gives you the right to decide who should be able to get married and who shouldn't? I really want to know.

cdavis said...

I don't usually get into the mishmash here and I'm not trying to answer for Hizzeather, but if you're genuinely curious here's a genuine answer (from my point of view, anyway).

"How do you feel about couples who get divorced?"

I think it's terribly unfortunate and should be avoided when at all possible. It's bad for families, kids, the institution of marriage and for society.

"What about those adulterers?"

Adultery is one of the worst things a person could do to his/her family. I've never met a single person if favor of it, as I'm sure almost every pro/anti-prop 8 person would agree.


"I bet those don't matter to your "focus on family" cause."

They absolutely matter. But there was not a proposition on the ballot stating "Divorce and adultery are bad." If there was, I would have supported it.

Lastly, this simply isn't an issue of hate. Not for me anyway. I've never done or said anything hateful to or about homosexuals. My heart goes out to those who struggle with it. Of course you can choose not to believe me and call me a hatemonger. You have the right to do that, and I won't try to stop you. But it doesn't make it true.

Christa Jeanne said...

Well put, Davis. I couldn't have said that better.

To add to it, I think it's interesting that E-C and other Prop. 8 opponents seem to think it's morally sound to launch a witchhunt against Prop. 8 supporters. Can you imagine if the tables were turned? Haven't gay rights groups complained of years and years of intimidation and hate tactics against them - and yet, somehow it's fine to use these against people who support traditional marriage?

I am not a bigot. I am not anti-gay. In fact, one of my best friends is gay, and I love him dearly. As I've said many times, I would love, love, love to see him find happiness with someone. His lifestyle is his choice. However, I don't think that it is right to redefine the institution that has been the foundation of every civilization since the dawn of time.

Marriage is more than a legal contract, and it is about more than love, too. It's a matter of bringing together the innate differences between men and women for the perpetuation of the human race and the betterment of society as a whole. The traditional family has been shown time and time again to be the best situation for all involved - and that is definitely without adultery or divorce.

And E-C, as the child of a divorced family, I am most assuredly against the practice. It's wretched for all involved, no matter the age of the children thrown into the midst of it. And adultery is just plain evil and wrong, too. As Davis said, I have yet to meet anyone who supports that choice on either side of the Prop. 8 battle.

elizabeth-carrie said...

cdavis - Myself, as well as other homosexuals "don't struggle" with homosexuality. We struggle with constantly having to fight for our rights and with the basis of being a second class citizen because of our sexual orientation.

I think it is absolutely shocking that one person would vote to take a RIGHT away from another person. Further, the majority does NOT get to vote on the rights of the minority. The California Supreme Court has decided to hear the lawsuit claiming the entire ballot proposition was unconstitutional from the start since it was actually a constitutional REVISION which has a much higher threshold for acceptance.

Christa Jeanne - I'm not launching a witchhunt, by any means. I'm taking the opportunity to share my experience and my thoughts on a subject that I am passionate about. Once gays are entitled to all of the rights and privileges that you have, maybe you won't hear them "complain" anymore.

Because the primary purpose of the Supreme Court (state and national) is to ensure that the majority doesn't trample the rights of the minority. This is the case with every minority right that exists in this country. NEVER has a right been approved by a vote of the people. Every right has been granted by the courts.
By using your argument, Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks and Susan B. Anthony should have been told to "stop complaining and pouting".

And you're sorely mistaken about homosexuality being a choice. It's not a choice. Where is your proof saying it is?

Insanenerd said...

While you may feel it is an invasion of privacy, unfortunately, as you stated, it is legally not.

When an individual makes a public proclamation of support for a measure (in most of these cases a donation), they are doing just that - making a public proclamation of support.

For someone attempt to censor an individuals creative use of public, open source, technology (yes, in this case this is definitely a creative use) is wrong.

Censorship in any form is wrong. Just because some people don't agree with our views, does not make it right for us to attempt to censor them by complaining to Google about their use of Google Maps, etc.

Always choose your battles wisely. In this case, use it to your advantage. Don't get mad and throw a temper tantrum because you are posted on some low traffic website as a supporter. Be PROUD that you are on that site if you actually support Prop 8. Don't light a candle and then hide it.

Now, as for the group/individual who created the site, it is unknown. Here is what I could find:

The domain name itself is registered through a proxy service that hides the owners information.

The site itself is hosted on Go Daddy's servers with an IP address of: 64.202.189.170 and is running in a Microsoft IIS environment in Scottsdale, AZ. To clarify, the SERVER is in AZ NOT necessarily the person.

The Google API key is: ABQIAAAA5QhEe7AqA9k4KzXpqOSyZRRfCvG-Oasgl9buNNaJn-CJF8ldFhT1JXrvx5e4BKgZeD1g_M4ZInE9xg But since we have absolutely no way to publicly cross reference that to a Google account, we are SOL there.

The Google Analytics user id is: UA-6366791-1 but again, just as with the Google Map API key, no way to cross reference who that is.

Mark said...

I suggest that for those who think homosexuality is genetic that you actually read the articles you are citing. For example, the study of Finnish twins entitled "Potential for Homosexual Response is Prevalent and Genetic" concludes that the genetic influence over overt sexual behavior was 27% for men and 16.2% for women. The results from the Swedish and Australian twin studies are similar. These figures are dramatically lower than those for alcoholism or nicotine dependence.

Christa Jeanne said...

Thanks, insanenerd! Yeah, I'm not going to complain to Google because, as you said, these individuals chose to take a stand for their beliefs (as CDavis indicated), and it is a technically legal measure. I just hope people will be wise - I've already heard stories about threatening letters and intimidation toward people on the map, and considering how many of my friends and family are on there, well, I'm concerned.

elizabeth-carrie said...

I'm still waiting for some answers from all of you...

1. Where is it said that homosexuality is a choice?

2. What gives you the right to decide who can get married and who cannot?

Further, I think it is embarrassing and foolish that so much time is devoted to an issue like this. As Americans, more time should be devoted to feeding the hungry, donating time and resources to those less fortunate and educating our children rather than throw yourself head-on into an agenda that goes against the fibers of our very country.

Christa Jeanne said...

Wait all you want, hon. With your approach, I feel like whatever I say will fall on deaf ears. You don't want to hear what we have to say - you just want to rip apart whatever answers we provide. That is not the mission of this blog, and that kind of conversation is not welcome here. We are here to educate and inform - not to argue.

Read through the hundreds of posts we've made with statistics and answers that address your questions (especially the ones leading up to the Nov. 4 election), and if you still can't find what you're looking for, get back to me.

elizabeth-carrie said...

Don't ever call me "hon."

You're not educating and informing. You are spreading statements which you believe that God said. Statements that are untrue. And you think it's okay. All of you fundamentalists have the same attitude: "If God said it then it must be true!"

But, you said it yourself, homosexuality is a choice. I'm asking you to prove it. Where is it stated? In the Bible, homosexuality is mentioned in all of 3 passages. The most common reference against homosexuality comes from a story in Genesis. In Chapter 18 of the book, we see God about to destroy the evil twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. God sends two angels to warn the one godly family of the imminent demise of these cities, only to have the locals demand that these two angels, who appeared like men, come out so they could have sex with them. Of course this didn't please God very much. However, Lot, the father of this one so-called godly family, does an interesting thing. In chapter 19, verse 8, the Bible tells how Lot offered to give his virgin daughters to these men so that they might rape them instead. Is this how God wants us to protect ourselves from the "homosexual agenda," by offering to let them rape our virgin daughters?

And of course, there is Leviticus. It's wrong for a man to lie with another man. But, it's also wrong to eat pork and shellfish. When was the last time you ate bacon? What about shrimp? You can go to hell for that! But, you know, they also said it was okay to own slaves. Do you own any since this is okay?

Further, Christa sweetie, I've no desire to go back and read hundreds of your blog entries. The mission of your blog is not welcome, not in America, for it breeds hatred, ignorance and bigotry. A new dawn is upon us. We have a new president and your twisted logic is shameful and will not be tolerated, not as long as it hurts another person.

Christa Jeanne said...

E-C, we've provided plenty of sociological proof points that support traditional marriage. I believe in the Bible, but I also recognize that relying on the Bible alone is not a valid way to argue in the public forum of ideas, because (as you are proof) it doesn't hold water when the other party in the discussion disagrees with the Bible's validity as a source of authority.

Consequently, I have provided you with where to look if you really want answers to your questions. You choose to blindly throw around the epithet of "bigot" without actually studying out how we've addressed the topic at hand. That's your choice. But I do not appreciate you putting words into my mouth and painting myself, my friends and my fellow bloggers with the broad brush of hateful, ignorant Bible-huggers. It is incredibly disrespectful and ignorant - and, frankly, you are in my (virtual) home. If you cannot be respectful, then take your views to a forum of people who want to hear what you have to say.