Report details harassment and 'anti-religious bigotry' after Prop. 8 passage

Sacramento, Calif., Nov 3, 2009 / 06:45 am (CNA).-A think tank has compiled and analyzed reports of the harassment,intimidation, and “gross expressions of anti-religious bigotry” shownin reaction to the successful passage of Proposition 8. If partisans ofmarriage redefinition continue to increase in power, the analysiswarns, those who seek the preservation of marriage as a union of manand wife may risk paying a price legally, socially and economically.The Heritage Foundation’s Oct. 22 report “The Price of Prop 8,”authored by researcher Thomas M. Messner, said that many individualsand institutions who defend the nature of marriage as a union between aman and a woman have paid a “heavy price.”

Militant opponents of Prop. 8 targeted supporters with a range ofhostility, including “harassment, intimidation, vandalism, racialscapegoating, blacklisting, loss of employment, economic hardships,angry protests, violence, at least one death threat, and grossexpressions of anti-religious bigotry,” the report stated.

Vandalism included a brick thrown through the window of an elderlycouple who put a “Yes on 8” sign in their lawn. Another senior citizenwith a pro-Prop. 8 bumper sticker had her car’s rear window smashed.

A statue of the Virgin Mary outside one church was vandalized withorange paint. Swastikas and other graffiti were scrawled on the wallsof Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in San Francisco. At Our Lady ofPerpetual Help Catholic Church in Riverside, signs were twisted intothe shape of a swastika.

A heavy object wrapped with a “Yes on 8” sign was used to smash thewindow of a pastor’s office at Messiah Lutheran Church in Downey.

Sign theft targeting Prop. 8 supporters was significant, with onesource estimating about one-third of the 25,000 signs distributed werestolen or vandalized before the end of the campaign.

Phone calls, e-mails and mailings also targeted supporters of Prop.8. The messages made accusation of bigotry and used vulgar language.One e-mail threatened to contact the parents of students at a schoolwhere a particular Prop. 8 supporter worked.

One individual supporter was the subject of a flier distributed inhis town. The flier included his photo and name and the amount of hisdonation to the pro-Prop. 8 campaign. It labeled him as a “bigot” andreported his association with a particular Catholic church.

Increased support for Prop. 8 among African Americans and members ofthe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, known as Mormons, alsoresulted in their communities being targeted.

Racial epithets were used at anti-Prop. 8 protests, while JoeSolmonese, head of the Human Rights Campaign, targeted the Mormons.

On the Dr. Phil show, responding to a Mormon questioner, he replied:“We are going to go after your church every day for the next two yearsunless and until Prop 8 is overturned.”

An anti-Prop. 8 advertisement depicted two Mormon missionariesinvading the home of a lesbian couple, ransacking their belongings andtearing up their marriage license.

“Anti-Mormon malice reached a new level when someone mailed packagescontaining suspicious white powder to Mormon temples in California andUtah,” Messner said.

Jose Nunez, a new U.S. citizen, was waiting to distribute signsoutside his Catholic church when a man grabbed several signs and fled.He pursued the thief, who reportedly yelled “What do you have againstgays?” and punched him in the face.

Nunez suffered a bloody eye and wounds to his face and required 16 stitches under his eye.

Employees of businesses were targeted by some protesters. Someemployees resigned, while others took leaves of absence. Some businessowners lost business because they had donated to support Prop. 8.

While deeming boycotts a “time-honored form of activism,” theHeritage Foundation’s report commented: “No individual should becompelled to choose between making a living and participating indemocratic processes affecting fundamental matters of public concern,such as marriage.”

California law requiring the disclosure of personal information ofindividuals who donate $100 or more to a ballot measure campaign havemade such displays of hostility easier, the report said. Severalwebsites were designed to use the information to identify and targetProp. 8 supporters.

While acknowledging that many Prop. 8 opponents have rejected suchabuses, Messner argues that the ideology underlying the outrage is acause of hostility.

“Arguments for same-sex marriage, although often couched in terms oftolerance and inclusion, are based fundamentally on the idea thatlimiting marriage to the union of husband and wife is a form ofbigotry, irrational prejudice, and even hatred against homosexualpersons who want the state to license their relationships. As thisideology seeps into the culture, belief in marriage as the union ofhusband and wife will likely come to be viewed as an unacceptable formof discrimination that should be purged from society through legal,cultural, and economic pressure.”

“Individuals or institutions that publicly defend marriage as theunion of husband and wife risk harassment, reprisal, andintimidation—at least some of it targeted and coordinated,” Messnercontinued.