We’re all fish in the sea, so don’t let anyone off the hook
I am distressed “Support signature privacy” [Opinion, April 18]. The issues are not as clear-cut as they were made.
Is intimidation always a bad thing, such as when some rabid hatemonger encourages the death of the president of the United States? Who gets the right to make the dividing line between protecting privacy and revealing bigotry? Who believes the votes of our members of Congress should be kept secret?
Is it fair to hide behind a mask of anonymity when a life of another and/or a principle of fairness is at stake?
I hold privacy in great respect on a personal level. Your religion and mine are no one else’s business; nor is my sex life or how I run my life when I am not invading the rights of others.
I mind my own business. Is the running of our country’s laws and regulations not my business?
In this case, legitimate rights, according to our Constitution, are being denied to some of our citizens by those who wish to remain secretive, who are not courageous enough to hold a personal belief of which they are convinced of its rightness for all our citizens. Obviously, Referendum 71 has not settled the issue for many who wish to challenge the rightness of a hateful vendetta, which is being and has been fought out internationally for many years.
Should sponsors be the only ones not protected by privacy? Why let them off the hook?
— William Houston, Port Townsend