Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A Neutral Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Constant Reader who wrote (2162)	7/16/2006 3:28:27 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2253

If I understood that, it gives new meaning to the term "chilling effect."

To: Constant Reader who wrote (2162)	7/16/2006 3:58:20 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2253

And all these years I thought marriage licenses were public record. If an employer has reason to doubt you are married or the person you say is your spouse really is, HOW ELSE can they find out but check public record? In many states, bar association membership and medical license holders are public record. The idea is that John Q. Citizen should be able to check that someone who claims to to be a lawyer or doctor really is. If I have reason to sue a householder, I may want to include all possible defendants, which can mean I need to know who the spouse is or if there is one. So now we create a special category of people whose records are NOT public? Why do they deserve rights I don't have?

To: Constant Reader who wrote (2162)	7/16/2006 4:47:35 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2253

Did I understand this case correctly, Randy? that the pro gay-marriage people decided to "out" those opposed to gay marriage or civil unions? (Making them potentially vulnerable to retaliation by angry gay rights supporters.) Not, as you said, that it makes any difference whatever what the sides are. And there's nothing that I see can be done about it. Except, if this is a precedent, not to sign petitions, if doing so might, in the future, make one vulnerable to any of a variety of nasty possible repercussions.