The majority of people who voted for Prop 8 were stating their opinion. Brendan spent money in an attempt to change people's opinion. I think that's a qualitative difference.
Okay, then are the roughly thirty-two thousand people (http://projects.latimes.com/prop8/results/?name=&employer=&amount_min=&amount_max=&city=&state=CA&zip=&position=Support&search=Search) who donated in support of Proposition 8 to be made pariahs? Or just ineligible for jobs which involve leadership in an organization with a broad customer base? (You know, you can search by employer there. Will you be attempting to get a purge going? There are university employees in there--are they making a hostile environment for their students? Better to be safe, right?)
Your position, then, is that voting wrong is okay (how generous), but donating wrong is a social crime. I'd guess that volunteering for a bad cause is in the latter category too, right? Are yard signs out, or do you have to volunteer actual time to be a bad person?
You say that "People are going to draw the line at different points along the spectrum of rights that could be removed." And yes, if Eich had voted for or donated money in support of rounding up gay people and putting them in camps somewhere, I'd think he wasn't fit to be part of polite society. But he didn't. If he'd eaten babies, people would also call for his ouster, but I think that kind of counterfactual misses the point.
I can't help but think that this is an attempt to criminalize (in the court of public opinion, at least) disagreement. Do you remember 2008? This was an open question! We're supposedly a pluralistic society; we should be able to disagree, even about things that matter, without being subject to purges and ex-post-facto decisions like this.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Yes, drawing the line somewhere is important.
Date: 2015-12-01 07:37 pm (UTC)Okay, then are the roughly thirty-two thousand people (http://projects.latimes.com/prop8/results/?name=&employer=&amount_min=&amount_max=&city=&state=CA&zip=&position=Support&search=Search) who donated in support of Proposition 8 to be made pariahs? Or just ineligible for jobs which involve leadership in an organization with a broad customer base? (You know, you can search by employer there. Will you be attempting to get a purge going? There are university employees in there--are they making a hostile environment for their students? Better to be safe, right?)
Your position, then, is that voting wrong is okay (how generous), but donating wrong is a social crime. I'd guess that volunteering for a bad cause is in the latter category too, right? Are yard signs out, or do you have to volunteer actual time to be a bad person?
You say that "People are going to draw the line at different points along the spectrum of rights that could be removed." And yes, if Eich had voted for or donated money in support of rounding up gay people and putting them in camps somewhere, I'd think he wasn't fit to be part of polite society. But he didn't. If he'd eaten babies, people would also call for his ouster, but I think that kind of counterfactual misses the point.
I can't help but think that this is an attempt to criminalize (in the court of public opinion, at least) disagreement. Do you remember 2008? This was an open question! We're supposedly a pluralistic society; we should be able to disagree, even about things that matter, without being subject to purges and ex-post-facto decisions like this.