Abstract: Supporters of Proposition 8 in California
have been subjected to harassment, intimidation, vandalism, racial
scapegoating, blacklisting, loss of employment, economic hardships,
angry protests, violence, at least one death threat, and gross
expressions of anti-religious bigotry. Arguments for same-sex
marriage are based fundamentally on the idea that limiting marriage
to the union of husband and wife is a form of bigotry, irrational
prejudice, and even hatred against homosexual persons. As this
ideology seeps into the culture more generally, individuals and
institutions that support marriage as the union of husband and wife
risk paying a price for that belief in many legal, social,
economic, and cultural contexts.
Support for Proposition 8, the democratically established
marriage amendment in California, has come with a heavy price for
many individuals and institutions that think that marriage should
remain the union of husband and wife. Publicly available sources,
including evidence submitted in a federal lawsuit in California,[1] show
that expressions of support for Prop 8 have generated a range of
hostilities and harms that includes harassment, intimidation,
vandalism, racial scapegoating, blacklisting, loss of employment,
economic hardships, angry protests, violence, at least one death
threat, and gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry. Because
the issue of marriage is still very much alive in California and
throughout the nation,[2] the naked animus manifested against people
and groups that supported Prop 8 raises serious questions that
should concern anyone interested in promoting civil society,
democratic processes, and reasoned discourse on important matters
of public policy, such as marriage.
Donor Disclosure Laws in the Internet
Age
Much of the hostility directed against Prop 8 supporters has
been facilitated by a California law that requires the disclosure
of certain personal information of individuals who donate $100 or
more in support of or opposition to a ballot measure. Information
subject to disclosure includes the donor's full name, occupation,
and employer.[3] Once this information is disclosed to the
State of California, the state then publishes this information on
its Web site, enabling anyone with Internet access to view detailed
donor reports online in html format or in a downloadable Microsoft
Excel spreadsheet.[4]
With this information at hand, several Web sites have been
designed that facilitate the easy identification and targeting of
Prop 8 supporters. For example, one of these Web sites is a
GoogleMaps "mashup" that combines donor information with an
interactive map, allowing activists to ascertain the identity,
employer, amount of donation, and approximate location of certain
Prop 8 supporters in particular geographic areas.[5] A Web site called
"Californians Against Hate" highlights particular Prop 8 supporters
in its "Dishonor Roll" and provides addresses and telephone numbers
for some of them.[6] At least one Web site allows users to
search for Prop 8 supporters who work in their businesses.[7]
Because of the California donor disclosure law, some Prop 8
supporters have become targets without ever placing a sign in their
yard, putting a sticker on their car, or appearing at a public
rally. These more public forms of support for Prop 8 certainly
generated plenty of animosity, as documented below. However, many
individuals became targets for harassment, intimidation, and
reprisals simply for donating $100 or more in support of Prop
8.
Vandalism and Sign Theft
Many reports of hostility toward Prop 8 supporters involve acts
of vandalism. An elderly couple who put a Yes on 8 sign in their
yard had a block thrown through their window.[8] A senior citizen who
placed a pro-Prop-8 bumper sticker on her car had her car's rear
window smashed in.[9] Some individuals with pro-Prop-8 bumper
stickers had their cars keyed.[10] One woman with a "One Man,
One Woman" bumper sticker had her car keyed and tires deflated
while she was in a grocery store.[11] One man who placed signs
in his yard and stickers on his cars and motorbike reported that
someone egged and floured his home three times and egged, floured,
and honeyed his car twice.[12] Someone also pushed over the man's
motorbike and scraped the bumper stickers off the back glass
windows of his cars.[13] Several other individuals reported that
Yes on Prop 8 bumper stickers were scraped or ripped off their
vehicles or defaced.[14]
Some individuals found their property vandalized with spray
paint. Vandals spray-painted vehicles, garages, fences, and Yes on
8 signs in Yucaipa, California.[15] An Alta Loma resident who
placed a Yes on 8 sign in her yard found the words "love for all"
and "no on 8" spray-painted on her fifth-wheel trailer.[16] In
San Jose, vandals spray-painted the garage doors of two homeowners
who displayed signs supporting Prop 8.[17] Vandals also spray-painted
anti-Prop-8 messages on commercial and residential buildings in
Fullerton.[18]
Other forms of vandalism were more bizarre. One woman who placed
a pro-Prop-8 sign on her balcony reported finding that her
staircase leading downstairs had been covered in urine.[19]
She also found a puddle of urine at the bottom of the stairs.[20]
Vandals also hit houses of worship. Perpetrators used orange
paint to vandalize a statue of the Virgin Mary outside one
church.[21] Offices at the Cornerstone Church in
Fresno were egged.[22] Swastikas and other graffiti were
scrawled on the walls of the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in
San Francisco, a parish known widely as being "gay-friendly."[23] In
San Luis Obispo, the Assembly of God Church was egged and
toilet-papered, and a Mormon church had an adhesive poured onto a
doormat and keypad.[24] Signs supporting Prop 8 were twisted into
a swastika at Our Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic Church in
Riverside.[25] Someone used a heavy object wrapped with
a Yes on 8 sign to smash the window of a pastor's office at Messiah
Lutheran Church in Downey.[26]
In addition, reports of Yes on Prop 8 signs being defaced,
damaged, dislocated, or stolen are almost too numerous to track
reliably.[27] According to one source, the Yes on 8
campaign estimated that approximately one-third of an estimated
25,000 signs distributed in California were stolen or vandalized
before the campaign ended.[28] Prop 8 supporters who replaced stolen
signs often had their signs stolen again.[29] Sign thefts also often
involved the added element of trespass or fear of trespass.[30] In
some cases, perpetrators crossed fences and walls to steal signs or
removed signs that had been securely fastened in place.[31]
One individual reported coming home late and hearing male voices
outside her home.[32] Another individual reported that a
suspected perpetrator quickly drove away when spotted through the
front window of his house.[33]
Harassment, Hostility, and Slurs
Several individuals who supported Proposition 8 reported
receiving harassing telephone calls, e-mails, and mailings. Prop 8
supporters have reported receiving phone calls and voice mails
calling them "bigot"[34] and using vulgar language.[35]
Sometimes harassers called at work.[36] A public relations firm
hired by the Yes on 8 Campaign received so many harassing phone
calls from one person that the sheriff's office became involved.[37]
Other Prop 8 supporters received e-mails, letters, and postcards
using vulgar language[38] and offensive labels like "gay hater."[39]
Through the contact form on his business's Web site, one individual
received an e-mail stating "burn in hell."[40] One e-mail
threatened to contact the parents of students at a school where a
particular Prop 8 supporter worked.[41]
Harassment sometimes took other forms. For example, two women
painted an arrow and the words "Bigots live here" on the window of
an SUV and parked the vehicle in front of a household that had
supported Prop 8.[42] In another case, an individual who
supported Prop 8 found himself the subject of a flyer distributed
in his town. The flyer included a photo of him, labeled him a
"Bigot," and stated his name, the amount of his donation to Prop 8,
and his association with a particular Catholic Church.[43] At
the University of California, Davis, a Yes on 8 table on the quad
was reportedly attacked by a group of students throwing water
balloons and shouting "you teach hate."[44] A professor at Los Angeles
City College allegedly told students in his class, "If you voted
yes on Proposition 8, you are a fascist [expletive deleted]."[45]
One Prop 8 supporter received a book, sent anonymously through
Amazon.com, that contained "the greatest homosexual love stories of
all time."[46]
Prop 8 supporters holding signs in public places also reported
incidents of notable hostility. One woman who stood near a street
with a Yes on 8 sign reported that a man stopped his car and
shouted at her, "You despicable filthy bag of [expletive
deleted]."[47] Other drivers circled the block and
yelled things like "You [expletive deleted]" each time they drove
by her.[48] Once a car with several men stopped, and
a man in the back seat opened the door and threw something at
her.[49] Another driver stopped her car and
yelled, "Get the [expletive deleted] out of here. Who do you think
you are, bringing that hate into my neighborhood?"[50] One Prop 8
supporter who witnessed repeated vulgarities at sign-waving events
said she felt nervous and scared and chose not to take her children
with her.[51] Another Prop 8 supporter concluded that
in the future she would make sure that at least one man was with
each group of wavers to ensure the protection and safety of the
teenagers who participated.[52]
Prop 8 also triggered hostility against African-Americans, who
were reported to have supported the ballot measure by large
margins. "According to eyewitness reports published on the
Internet," states one news source, "racial epithets have been used
against African Americans at protests in California -- with some
even directed against blacks who are fighting to repeal Prop. 8."[53]
One man, for example, reported he was called a particular racial
slur twice and said the anti-Prop-8 protest he attended "was like
being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie
polos and Birkenstocks."[54] Another man reported that "he and his
boyfriend, who are both black, were carrying NO ON PROP 8 signs and
still subjected to racial abuse."[55]
"Mormons in the Crosshairs" [56]
Mormons were particularly and systematically targeted for
supporting Prop 8. One leading gay-rights activist in West
Hollywood said, "The main finger we are pointing is at the Mormon
church'"[57] Joe Solmonese, head of the Human Rights
Campaign, echoed this sentiment on the Dr. Phil show when,
in response to a question from a Mormon audience member asking why
his church was being targeted, he reportedly declared, "We are
going to go after your church every day for the next two years
unless and until Prop 8 is overturned."[58] At least one of the Web
sites targeting Prop 8 donors focuses specifically on Mormons.[59]
And one anti-Prop-8 activist has filed a complaint asking
California officials to investigate the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints for its support for the marriage amendment.[60]
The "Home Invasion" television ad, in particular, sought to
exploit anti-Mormon bigotry for political gain. The ad depicts two
Mormon missionaries invading the home of a lesbian couple,
ransacking their belongings, and tearing up their marriage license.
"Hi, we're from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,"
says one of the Mormon missionaries. "We're here to take away your
rights," says the other. The ad concludes with script and a
voiceover stating, "Say NO to a Church taking over your government.
Vote NO on Proposition 8."[61] This manifestation of
undisguised religious bigotry undoubtedly caused great concern to
many people. The Los Angeles Times, on the other hand,
lamented that same-sex marriage activists had failed to air more
"hard-hitting" ads like it.[62]
After Prop 8 passed, crowds of same-sex marriage activists
congregated for protests at Mormon houses of worship throughout the
nation.[63] One video shows same-sex marriage
activists massed outside the Mormon temple in New York City crying
"fascist church" repeatedly.[64] Another video appears to
show angry activists rattling the gates of the temple in Los
Angeles and chanting "shame on you."[65] Images from various
protests show signs like "Mormon Scum,"[66] "Get your filthy church
off me,"[67] and "Keep your hate in Salt Lake."[68]
Anti-Mormon malice reached a new level when someone mailed
packages containing suspicious white powder to Mormon temples in
California and Utah.[69] At least one of those incidents triggered
a domestic [70] Meanwhile, in
Colorado, perpetrators placed a Book of Mormon on the steps of a
Mormon church and lit it on fire.[71] Police reportedly
investigated the incident as a "bias-motivated arson" related to
the church's position on Prop 8.[72]
Violence and Threats of Violence
Some of the animosity directed against people and groups that
supported Prop 8 was openly threatening or even violent. In
Modesto, for example, a Prop 8 supporter was allegedly punched in
the face by someone who had stolen several Yes on 8 signs.
According to news reports, Jose Nunez, who became a U.S. citizen
just months before Prop 8 passed, was waiting to distribute signs
outside his Catholic church when a man grabbed several Yes on 8
signs and fled.[73] When Nunez followed the thief and tried
to recover the signs, the thief reportedly yelled "What do you have
against gays?" and punched Nunez in the face.[74] According to Prop
8 supporters, Nunez suffered a bloody eye and wounds to his face
and was taken by ambulance to a local hospital "where he received
16 stitches under his eye."[75]
In Fresno, the town mayor received a death threat for supporting
Prop 8. The threat stated, "Hey Bubba, you really acted like a real
idiot at the Yes of [sic] Prop 8 Rally this past weekend. Consider
yourself lucky. If I had a gun I would have gunned you down along
with each and every other supporter."[76] The threat also mentioned
a "little surprise" for a local pastor who supported Prop 8 and
"his congregation of lowlife's" [sic]. "Keep letting him preach
hate and he'll be sorry," the perpetrator threatened. "He will be
meeting his maker sooner than expected."[77] The threat also stated
that anyone in Fresno displaying a Yes on Prop 8 yard sign or
bumper sticker was "in danger of being shot or firebombed."[78]
Police took the threat seriously, launching a criminal
investigation and taking extra steps to protect the mayor and
pastor.[79]
In another incident, an elderly woman in Palm Springs was
besieged by an angry mob protesting Prop 8. Video footage posted on
the Internet shows several men shouting at the woman as a
television reporter tries to interview her.[80] "Get out of
here," one man shouts in the elderly woman's face.[81] Later the video
shows the woman, who is carrying a large cross at this point,
surrounded by several men, including at least one who knocks the
cross out of the woman's hands and stomps on it.[82] Someone also
reportedly spit on the 69-year-old lady.[83]
A small group of Christians encountered similar hostilities when
an angry crowd apparently took them for pro-Prop 8 demonstrators as
they prayed and sang hymns on a sidewalk in the Castro District of
San Francisco.[84] One of the Christians reportedly later
stated that the people in the crowd shouted words like "haters" and
"bigots" and then "started throwing hot coffee, soda and alcohol on
us and spitting (and maybe even peeing) on us."[85] Someone in the
crowd allegedly threatened to kill the group's leader, and someone
else allegedly tried to pull down the pants of one of the men in
the group.[86] A woman in the group was allegedly struck
on the head with her own Bible before being thrown to the ground
and kicked.[87] Video footage posted on the Internet
shows a band of police officers dressed in riot gear fending off
the angry crowd and escorting the Christians to safety.[88]
Employees and Business Owners
Targeted
Same-sex marriage activists have also targeted the places where
Prop 8 supporters work. Businesses and other institutions that
employ individuals who personally donated to Prop 8 have been
threatened with and in some cases subjected to picketing, protests,
and damaging boycotts. Some Prop 8 donors resigned from their jobs
or took a leave of absence to protect their employers and
colleagues.
For example, Scott Eckern was employed as the director of the
nonprofit California Musical Theater in Sacramento before being
targeted for personally donating $1,000 to Prop 8. Once Mr.
Eckern's support for Prop 8 was discovered, the theater was
"deluged" with criticism from prominent artists who opposed Prop
8.[89] Critics included Marc Shaiman, the
composer of Hairspray, who stated that his work could not be
performed at the theater because of Mr. Eckern's support for Prop
8.[90] Mr. Eckern resigned.[91]
Richard Raddon was the director of the Los Angeles Film Festival
before he landed in the crosshairs of Prop 8 opponents. Mr. Raddon
personally donated $1,500 to Prop 8. As in the case of Mr. Eckern,
once information about Mr. Raddon's personal donation was disclosed
to the state and published on the Internet, he became a target of
Prop 8 opponents.[92] According to an op-ed in The
Wall Street Journal, "A threatened boycott and picketing of
the next festival forced him to resign."[93]
The extreme nature of this crude, but effective new tactic was
poignantly illustrated in the case of Marjorie Christoffersen, a
67-year-old restaurant employee who donated a mere $100 to Prop
8.[94] Once information about Ms.
Christoffersen's $100 donation was published on the Internet, Prop
8 opponents launched a protest against the restaurant where she
worked, prompting the restaurant to offer activists a free brunch
and Ms. Christoffersen to offer an apology.[95] However, when Ms.
Christoffersen refused to renounce her support for Prop 8 -- like
Scott Eckern and Richard Raddon, Marjorie Christoffersen is a
Mormon -- the meeting "turned ugly" and "[b]oisterous street
protests erupted that night."[96] Ms. Christoffersen
eventually decided to take a leave of absence to protect the
restaurant, which is owned by her mother, and the other employees
who worked there.[97]
In other cases, business owners who supported Prop 8 either
personally or through their enterprises have had their businesses
targeted for reprisals by same-sex marriage activists. A dentist in
Palo Alto lost patients because he donated $1,000.[98] Purves &
Associates, an insurance company in Davis, was picketed with signs
such as "Purves Family Supports Homophobia" after family members
donated to Prop 8.[99] Protesters rallied and handed out free
ice cream to retaliate against a family-owned creamery that
supported Prop 8.[100] Activists boycotted the Grand Hyatt
hotel in San Diego because its developer donated money to help to
put Prop 8 on the ballot.[101] Same-sex marriage
activists also targeted a self-storage company because its owner
and his family donated money to Prop 8.[102]
Boycotting businesses that engage in commercial behavior
consumers find objectionable is a time-honored form of activism in
American society. However, targeting businesses for the political
and religious views of their owners or even their employees -- and
the decision of these individuals to participate in democratic
political processes -- has raised serious concerns about the state
of public discourse regarding marriage and the condition of civil
society generally. No individual should be compelled to choose
between making a living and participating in democratic processes
affecting fundamental matters of public concern, such as
marriage.
Beyond Prop 8
The weeks and months after Prop 8 passed also witnessed other
incidents of hostility directed against expressions of support for
traditional views on marriage and homosexuality. Some of these
incidents were not directly connected with support for Prop 8,
which suggests, grimly, that some of the hostilities described in
this paper could become more common in political contests
concerning same-sex marriage and other issues involving
homosexuality.
In one disturbing incident just days after Prop 8 passed, a
radical group called "Bash Back!" allegedly invaded a Christian
church in Michigan. The group's Web site featured photos of members
dressed like terrorists and brandishing various objects as
weapons.[103] A press release posted by the Alliance
Defense Fund, a public interest legal association that is suing the
openly anarchist group in federal court, states:
[M]embers of the group dressed in militant garb staged a protest
outside the church during a worship service to distract security
personnel, blocking access to the building and parking lot at
various times. Other members of the group dressed in plain clothes
then deceptively entered the building. At a coordinated time, they
sprang up to disrupt the service, terrifying many attendees. The
group shouted religious slurs, unfurled a sign, and threw fliers
around the sanctuary while two women began kissing near the podium.
The group pulled fire alarms as they ran out of the building.[104]
In accounts allegedly posted on the Internet after the invasion,
Bash Back! described the Mount Hope Church as a "deplorable,
anti-queer mega-church" that is "complicit in the repression of
queers in Michigan and beyond"[105] and cited the church's
"stance on queer identities" as one reason for the attack.[106]
Another case, more widely reported than the church invasion in
Michigan, involved Carrie Prejean, the Miss USA beauty contestant.
Ms. Prejean was competing in the final round of the Miss USA
pageant when she drew a question from pageant judge Perez Hilton
about legalizing same-sex marriage.[107] Ms. Prejean's answer --
that, in her view, marriage should be between a man and a woman --
generated a tidal wave of criticism, including from Mr. Hilton, who
later described Ms. Prejean in crude and derogatory terms in a
video blog on his Web site.[108] A co-director of the
Miss California association also condemned Ms. Prejean, stating
that "[r]eligious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA
family."[109] Both Ms. Prejean and Mr. Hilton have
speculated that her answer cost her the crown.[110]
Lessons of Prop 8 Hostilities
Several anti-Prop-8 activists have condemned certain types of
hostility described in this paper.[111] Some of the incidents
described in this paper have involved illegal conduct, meaning the
wider community has already condemned it. Some acts of hostility
have been perpetrated by random individuals acting in isolation or
by unpredictable crowds expressing anger and frustration.
Yet none of these facts changes the reality that many Prop 8
supporters have paid a considerable price for defending marriage as
the union of husband and wife. Indeed, no matter who is to blame
for the hostility surrounding Prop 8, one lesson of Prop 8 cannot
be denied: Individuals or institutions that publicly defend
marriage as the union of husband and wife risk harassment,
reprisal, and intimidation -- at least some of it targeted and
coordinated.
Furthermore, although some same-sex marriage activists have
expressed disagreement with certain types of conduct described in
this paper, few activists would disavow the ideology underlying
much of the outrage at Prop 8's success. Arguments for same-sex
marriage, although often couched in terms of tolerance and
inclusion, are based fundamentally on the idea that preserving
marriage as unions of husband and wife is a form of bigotry,
irrational prejudice, and even hatred against homosexual persons
who want the state to license their relationships. As increasing
numbers of individuals and institutions, including public officials
and governmental bodies, embrace this ideology, belief in marriage
as a relationship between a man and a woman likely will come to be
viewed as an unacceptable form of discrimination that should be
purged from public life through legal, cultural, and economic
pressure.
Other sources have explained how changes in law based on this
ideology will threaten the religious liberties of individuals and
institutions that interact with the government or become subject to
nondiscrimination laws.[112] The hostility surrounding Prop 8 shows
how, once this ideology seeps into the culture more generally,
individuals and institutions that support marriage as the union of
husband and wife risk paying a price for that belief in many legal,
social, economic, and cultural contexts.
Conclusion
When people stand firmly by their beliefs about marriage as the
union of husband and wife despite facing social stigmatization,
economic hardship, and other reprisals, they provide an important
example of civic courage and inspire particular virtues that
are essential to the proper functioning of any free and open
society. The freedom of parties on both sides of the marriage
debate to voice their views and to promote them in public policy
should be respected.
Thomas M.
Messner is a Visiting Fellow in the Richard and Helen DeVos
Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage
Foundation.