Date: Tue, 19 Jul 1994 23:24:18 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Isaac The following are excerpts from the editorial pages of three Puget Sound papers. One positive, two negative. Ill assume I don't have to repeat the Bigot Busters denials of the ridiculous charges, especially those in the third article. I encourage those of you in the area to express your positive and negative opinions on the matter of Bigot Bustes and possible legislation to the papers involved (and the Tacoma News-Tribune, the Seattle Times and P-I) and Secretary of State Ralph Munro. Thank you. * Richard Isaac __*_*___ \* * / Seattle *\ * ***\**/** rmisaac \/ @eskimo.com ````````````````````````````````` Journal-American (Bellevue, WA), July 18, 1994 EDITORIAL INITIATIVE BACKERS NEED TO PROVE CASE If the proponents of two anti-gay-rights initiatives want to halt harassment of their petition drives, they're going to have to prove that real harassment is actually taking place. So far, they haven't done that. Initiative backers, till licking their wounds from the failure of I-608 and I-610 to make this fall's ballot, took their complaints this week to Secretary of State Ralph Munro. They say members of groups like Bigot Busters, an anti-initiative organization, pushed, shouted at, and spat upon signature gatherers as they passed out petitions. Bigot Busters, for their part, claims that their efforts were virtually passive. They say they simply offered information revealing the initiatives for what they probably were: an effort to legalize blatantly unconstitutional discrimination. Without proof either way, it's impossible to tell who's telling the truth. So far, the petition backers have failed to provide one scintilla of hard evidence that there is real harassment occurring. If the anti-initiative effort is in fact peaceful, then organizers have every right to continue to express their views and offer counter- information. That's the way the First Amendment works. But if they're stepping over the line, then they should be stopped under current anti-harassment laws. They have no more right to be abusive than, say, anti-abortion activists have the right to similar activities at abortion clinics. I-608 backers want Munro to crack down on the effort. They want to ask for new laws that would prevent such anti-initiative activity. That's unnecessary. There already are anti-harassment laws on the books that should fully protect signature gatherers. New laws, including one proposal to include anti-initiative efforts under racketeering laws, amount to special rights for some at the expense of others. And isn't that what the petition backers say they're against? ````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Olympian (Olympia, WA), July 14, 1994 EDITORIAL LAWMAKERS MUST ACT It's time for the state lawmakers to take a hard look at laws governing Washington's initiative process. ... I-608 supporters said their signature collectors were harassed and intimidated by gay-rights supporters rallying under a "Bigot Busters" banner. Gay-right advocates denied the allegations saying they only sought to educate initiative signers. Secretary of State Ralph Munro, the elected official in charge of elections at the state level, has promised an investigation into the allegations of intimidation. ... ...the other, equally troubling issue is whether people can use harassment and intimidation to defeat initiatives. That's where the Legislature must act. Munro likely will propose that lawmakers establish a "perimeter" around signature solicitors to protect them from intimidation. Given the climate on the streets, Munro's proposal makes sense. ... the courts and the Legislature can, and must, lead the way to change [of the initiative process]. `````````````````````````````` Herald (Everett, WA), July 18, 1994 OPINION GAY RIGHTS DEBATE IS TOO IMPORTANT TO BE LEFT TO FRINGES by Peter Callaghan, State Political Columnist, Tacoma News Tribune. Those who brought us initiatives 608 and 610 -- known collectively as the anti-gay rights initiatives -- promise to be back next year for another try at making the ballot. The people who take credit for stopping the initiatives this year -- the self-proclaimed Bigot Busters --promise to be back as well. The first reaction to such news: Oh joy. The second: Thanks for the warning. These folks deserve each other. We all deserve better. [continues, objecting to job and housing discrimination, concerned about affirmative action and govt. set-asides for homosexuals, and acceptance of "all aspects of the so-called gay lifestyle." Suggests "compromise": employment and housing protection and banning affirmative action programs and "state sanction or approval [of] homosexuality."] Unfortunately, the debate isn't being led by reasonable or rational people, at least not in the initiative campaigns. The debate has been captured and held for ransom by those on the extremes. For example, we had two initiatives circulating this spring under the guise of "equal rights, not special rights." In fact, both initiatives --based on a belief that homosexuals are made, not born --would have assigned them second-class citizenry. [continues, describing the effects of 608 and 610: banning minority status, claims of discrimination, etc.; teaching that homosexuality is positive, healthy or appropriate in the schools; taking children away from gay parents in case of divorce.] Had these measures reached the ballot, their chances of passing were iffy at best. While many citizens might agree with parts, the cumulative tone of fear and unfairness would have placed a heavy burden on proponents. That, however, did not stop a group known as Bigot Busters from launching their own pre-emptive strike -- a distasteful campaign against the signature gathering. Interference, intimidation, and harassment were the techniques for discouraging citizens from reading and signing the initiatives. Anyone with concerns about the issue was immediately labeled a homophobe, a hatemonger, a fascist. This gang of street toughs has been praised by liberals and much of the news media. They should be condemned. Bigot Busters is just as responsible for polarizing the issue as are the initiative sponsors. Both sides are so shrill -- and their tactics so distasteful -- that many Americans simply want to avoid the issue. That's unfortunate. It's too important to be left to the extremists. Somewhere there are rational statesmen -- gay and straight, conservative and liberal -- who can put together a solution that pleases no one but satisfies the majority of Americans. If only they'd get the chance.