Marriage petitioners find names on the Web
Chris Markuns, The Eagle Tribune | January 8, 2005
The newest phase of the statewide battle over gay marriage arrived hours before Santa Claus, when Knowthyneighbor.org kept its promise to post the name of every person who signed the petition calling for a vote on defining marriage as between a man and a woman.
And after two weeks — with the exception of a brief crash caused by the initial 2 million Web site hits — people on both sides say the impact is obvious. Some call it the old-fashioned shedding of sunlight on the democratic process and rooting out fraudulent signatures; others say it's a modern form of intimidation.
Either way, the listing of the roughly 140,000 Bay State signers is dragging a new group of partisans into the public part of the debate. And it's clear — at least locally — that most of them don't want to be there. Equally clear, however, is that they have no choice.
"We're making people realize that if you put your name on an issue, you can't put your name on it and run and hide," said Tom Lang, a gay rights activist and co-director of Knowthyneighbor.org. "That's not how we do it in a civilized society."
Thousands of people from the Merrimack Valley signed the petition, which now must be approved by the Legislature this spring before being put on the ballot in 2008. Andover had the most signatures of all the local towns, with 1,014 of its 20,343 registered voters signing. That also represents the highest percentage (5 percent). North Andover saw 767 voters sign (4.5 percent). There were 886 from Haverhill (2.4 percent) and 566 from Methuen (2.1 percent).
Lawrence's total was not available from either the city or state, and because the names were not sent electronically, they are not included in the list provided to Knowthyneighbor.org by the secretary of state as public information. But Lawrence election officials say roughly 250 petition sheets, with varying numbers of signatures, were certified and sent to the state.
Names are easy enough to track down through Knowthyneighbor.org — they are also posted on the Web site of the pro-gay marriage group MassEquality — and signers can be looked up by name, address or community.
When contacted, most are willing to share strong feelings about why marriage should be between a man and a woman. Many signed the petition through a church drive and have religious objections; others share deeply personal stories.
But most of them also had no idea their names would be going up on the Internet, aren't happy about it, and don't want to be quoted discussing it. Responses range from, "This is why I tell everyone we're in a socialist democratic state" to "That isn't very nice" to "I keep my private and political (life) separate, and I just started my own business."
Some say they would have restricted their feelings to the anonymity of the ballot box had they known. Others say they would have signed anyway. But almost all agree it's no fun having their name out there.
"I know there are freedoms in this country, but I'm a little upset by it," said Mary Sudol, 52, of Andover, who did know about Knowthyneighbor.org's plans when she signed at church, where she says some people did not sign for that reason.
"It feels like a little reverse discrimination," she said. "All of a sudden, they're putting my name up there and not asking why I signed it."
Debra Tomaszewski, who since signing the petition moved from Andover to New Hampshire, is concerned about where it might lead.
"That's terrible," she said of the Internet posting. "What else are they doing with the name? ... If they're taking the liberty of posting it, what else might they be doing with it? That's what I wonder."
But Lang insists part of Knowthyneighbor.org's purpose — and, indeed, the purpose of a public petition process — is to foster an open dialogue. The Web site has received many calls and e-mails from people with stories of their conversations with family members, friends or acquaintances who they saw were signers, and it's that kind of chat Lang says many signers truly fear.
"It's not intimidation. It's the fear of having that uncomfortable conversation with some whose rights may be taken away," he said. "We're welcoming and advocating a dialogue, and that's their fear — the intimidation accusation is just a spin."
Sudol counters that people in the workplace, for instance, could be subject to encounters over their belief, while Lang argues that signers should be willing to embrace and explain their decision in a respectful debate, whether with neighbors or relatives.
"People can go out there and say, 'My name's on the list, and let me tell you why,'" he said.
Some are perfectly willing to do so.
"My position is that I'm in favor of civil unions for gay couples, but that the sacredness of marriage should be reserved for couples of the opposite sex," said Kendrick Doe, a 69-year-old Haverhill resident who didn't know his name would be posted, but doesn't mind that it is.
"I made a statement by signing it," he said. "I don't object to it being on the Internet."
The same goes for people like Victor Azzi of Methuen — "I just signed it ... (the Web site) doesn't bother me" — or Jamil Kamari of Haverhill.
"I speak for myself, and I don't care," said Kamari, 42.
But people care when things cross a certain line, said Kris Mineau, director of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which sponsored the petition and created the organization that collected the signatures, Voteonmarriage.org.
"Were getting a number of calls from people who are irate over what they deem to be harassment — receiving telephone calls, materials in the mails, people almost demanding acknowledgment they were duped into signing," he said.
Those kind of accusations continue to be swapped. Knowthyneighbor.org continues collecting what it says are hundreds of testimonials from people who insist their names shouldn't be there because they were lied to about the nature of the petition or simply never signed it. The Family Institute acknowledges that there may have been rare cases of fraudulent signature gathering, but "we believe for most of the (accusations) there's nothing there."
Lang says if that's true, Mineau should "welcome the scrutiny." Mineau says Lang and company should simply let people vote. Both know it's highly unlikely enough signatures will be challenged to change anything, since Voteonmarriage.org collected well over twice the required signatures.
But Lang concedes one concern about the high-profile nature of the latest part of the debate.
"The very negative thing that's happening right now is people are realizing how much fraud there was, and they're afraid to sign anything," he said. "We tell people not to be afraid to sign a petition. Just make sure you read them."
Find out how to contact us for more information. |
