One of the leaders of the anti-gay marriage referendum in DC lived and worked in Maryland. There is a huge question about the names being residents of the city (according to the last census we had fewer than 600,000 residents so 138,000 signatures buy Lovegra would be a fifth of the population).I have always been aware that signing petitions held ramifications. I wouldn't sign anything in college because my father was still in the military and it might reflect on him. The people who make the threats are committing a crime. With caller ID and other tools, it is possible to trace them back and prosecute them. I think this is the route to go -- make certain that you report all threats and that the local police take them seriously.Yes, standing up for your beliefs may be life threatening. That's always been true. Ask Socrates Generic Lovegra. Excellent, excellent point. There's a micro and macro perspective here. And where you land probably depends on your political perspective. On a micro level, i.e. taking this particular situation, the crux of the matter is McKenna's statement (echoed by some making comments) that there isn't really that much danger. Yes, people may call. Yes, people will criticize. Yes, your life may get a little uncomfortable, but there is no real threat here.But if you take a macro perspective, you have to wonder, as Alito does, at what point does safety become a concern Lovegra 100mg? People have been shot because they stood up for what they believed - see George Tiller. The leader of this petition is getting death threats and opponents come and ask for the name of every single person who signed the referendum. Is this the time to "protect." What if the house of the leader has been vandalized? What if there have been angry protests where violence resulted? What if one of the leaders of the referendum was physically attacked or even killed? What if there was a website publishing the names of everyone involved and encouraging people to harass or even hurt them?So, I think there is a balance between two questions buy Lovegra. One, if the government has reason to believe that disclosure will endanger the public, can they protect the petitioners? Two, is there enough evidence in this particular case to show that the public was endangered? My hope is that the SCOTUS does not wrap those two issues together. I generally agree with the anonymous posters to this site (no irony there of course!), that in general public disclosure is better. I am concerned that the posters to this site haven't thought through the potential ramifications of this case. Here are a few.1. In appears to me that if anyone can file a FOIA getting lists of names and addresses/phone records, then stalkers can search the lists to learn how best to reach their prey. Given some states protect driver's info from being released, this would appear to violate that Lovegra 100mg. And given those laws emereged from some stalking-based murders, I think there will be some messiness here. 2. Many people want privacy to get away from abusive ex-spouses/family/co-workers, etc. This in effect tells them they must pay a heavy price and put their lives at risk to participate in our democratic processes.Signa petition, give you ex a means to find you.3. Several states are both "employment at will" and do not provide protected status for sexual orientation. So if you signed a petition seeking gay marriage rights in those states, your employer could fire you for doing so. 4. Should canvassers be allowed to publicly identify who doesn't sign a petition? Declining to act is itself also a political statement. those of you posting in favor of disclosure--are you saying these four concerns are insufficiently material? My point is supreme court cases are rarely black and white buy Lovegra, and this is perhaps not quite so clear cut as it seems. Just for fun, however, What if every word in every bill had to be traceable back to a specific legislator, and that info could be posted instantly. So a clause that favors company A over company B, we'd get to know who inserted it into the bill. Would legislation change?