"At issue is whether signing a referendum is a form of political speech protected by the First Amendment and whether there is a right to sign it without public disclosure... Some supporters of gay rights had vowed to put the names of those who signed the petition on the Internet."
On one side, the argument is that these voters have a right to not be harassed for signing, and that we should protect them from any possibility of harassment. On the other, these petitions belong to public records, and when you sign a petition, you have an understanding that people will be able to see if you signed it. The referendum, by the way, failed.
I'm unsure what to think of this. I certainly think that the group "Protect Marriage Washington" has a significant case. It seems to me that they do have the right to avoid any possibility of harassment. On the other hand, I think the idea of an "anonymous petition" for anything takes the power of it away. It's very difficult to take anything an anonymous group says seriously, because they're not willing to step forward for their beliefs. The point of a petition is to be able to attach names to numbers, and this is what gives it weight. I'm kind of annoyed with the few gay rights supporters that want to post these names on the internet, because it seems to imply some kind of desire to have these people harassed. It doesn't actually help the gay rights cause. Ideally, the names could be published as a part of public records, and no one would be threatening to harass these people. Unfortunately, that's not what will happen. Either the nature of a petition will change (and I think make it weaker, but who am I to say?), or people will be harassed.
