Controversy surrounds a letter e-mailed by a Sacramento State student that targetted professors for their support on Proposition 8, the measure that banned same-sex marriage in California.

The letter was addressed specifically to four staff members: professors Sharon Peterson, Kenichiro Chinen, Andre Carlie and staff member Bonnie Smith, who all donated money to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. He also sent it to all faculty, staff and administrators on campus.

Daniel Savino, graduate student in international affairs, asked the professors to meet with him to discuss why they donated money to Prop. 8. He asked the professors why they believe some of their students and colleagues only deserve second-class rights.

In his letter, Savino says he disagrees with their private views, yet absolutely believes in their right to express them. He then states supporting Prop. 8 is different, that it does not exercise free speech, but is a majority taking rights from a minority.

Andre Carli said at first he thought the letter would get him fired. He had read about the artistic musical director for the California Musical Theatre, Scott Eckern, who resigned from his job because of the pressure he was under from the gay community for supporting Prop. 8 in the Sacramento Bee. Carli feared he would lose his job for donating money.

Savino said his goal was and remains to find common ground and allay any fear or concerns of Proposition 8. He feels Proposition 8 won because it was heavily driven by misinformation. He said had people been informed of the real issues, he sincerely doubts they would have voted for the measure.

Nick Burnett, chair of the communications department, said two things struck him when he received the letter. First, he had a concern to how people might react to the individual professors, and second, he had wanted to know if Savino sent the e-mail to students through class lists. Sending e-mails to class lists is illegal under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. This act prohibits data on students to be released. Having access to class lists would be a gross violation of the law, said Burnett.

Barbara O’Connor, communications professor, said she replied to Savino to find out what his reason was behind sending the e-mail to so many people. She said she did not get a response. O’Connor said she is OK with Savino attempting to talk with the professors, but not OK with sending the e-mail to the world.

In an interview with the State Hornet, in response to O’Connor’s question as to why he sent the letter to so many people, Savino responded by saying, “I specifically said in the letter, this is not a witch-hunt. The professors who received this letter have misinterpreted my desire for robust dialogue.”

“This was not an attempt to talk to professors but to embarrass them,” O’Connor said.

O’Connor said this is a wholly unacceptable approach and everyone has the right to follow their political beliefs with contributions. This is part of free speech.

She said there is no question that who donated money to a political campaign is on the public record, but disagrees with how Savino used the information.

“I detected a little hostility in the letter,” O’Connor said. “Wanting to talk people into changing their point of view will not happen by polarizing them. This is part of free speech and the democratic process.”

Savino said originally he was upset and angry. When he reflected on this he said he realized anger is unproductive, that questioning is far more important than ranting.

“I firmly believe these actions (by the professors) shows they support second class rights for students and co-workers,” Savino said.

Thomas Knutson, professor of communication studies, said he thinks what Savino did is disgusting.

Knutson said he is opposed to Proposition 8, but this was not the proper way to handle things. He said the courts are going to have to handle the issue and just because the majority votes on something does not make it right.

“That’s why we have the system we have,” Knutson said. “I am weary of the nastiness on both sides. There is no need for name-calling. It has no part when reasoning the issue.”

Carli said he could not vote because he is a citizen of Italy. He contributed money because he wanted to support his belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. He said he does not hate gay people. He holds nothing against them. Carli felt Savino wanted him to be ashamed of what he did.

“I feel the letter was a way to try and make me feel disgraced because of all the people it was sent to,” Carli said. “After receiving the letter, I felt as if I had a sign on my head saying I was a gay hater.”

Carli said he had been receiving hate mail from the opponents of Proposition 8 prior to receiving the letter. He felt like he was being pulled into a war he had nothing to do with.

Carli does believe he is being used as an example as somebody for gay people to hate. He said if Savino just wanted to address the specific teachers who gave money to Proposition 8, he should not have sent it to his colleagues, the Sacramento Bee and others.

Carli said his department has been supportive of him. He has received letters from people who are opposed to Proposition 8 that support him too.

“Just because I have a different viewpoint, I should not be afraid of the law,” Carli said.

Carli said he has friends with different opinions and sometimes they disagree, but still remain friends.

“If the people to whom I addressed my letter are unashamed of and secure in their views, there should be no problem. To talk of ‘naming names’ is to imply there is some reason to hide a view that, by virtue of their donations, is obviously strongly held,” Savino said.

Nicole Bors, graduate student in speech and pathology, said she thought the letter was not tactful. She said there should be respect when addressing professors.

“I think the letter borders on invasion of privacy,” Bors said.

Savino said this is all public record information and anyone with Internet access can find the information through the California Secretary of State’s website.

Sharon Peterson did not wish to be interviewed because she felt any interview would only serve to give Savino the publicity he seeks and said the e-mail sent from Nick Burnett responding to Savino’s e-mail sums up her feelings.

Burnett said he did not think Savino’s intent was to stimulate a discussion.

Burnett said these monies are in fact federally protected contributions that are required to be made public. Of course, what is not required to be made public is calling these people to account for their political views to their colleagues, students and friends.

Burnett’s letter went on to say, “Whatever your position was on Proposition 8, this tactic of attempting to ‘out’ these people to their students and colleagues is unproductive and rude. Whatever our political beliefs, we come together as a department to support each other and advance the goals of the department and the university.”

In response to being accused of “outing” people, Savino said he supports individual beliefs and his intent was not to “out” people.

“I am sure that he imagines his action will embarrass or humiliate those singled out. There would be no other reason for such a widespread e-mail blast,” Burnett said.

The dialogue, discussion and exchange of ideas are how we should function, Savino said.

“I feel strongly that if I had not personalized my letter, the impact would have been lost,” Savino said.

Savino said he maintains hope and confidence that his professors will not judge him poorly for his deep and sincere commitment to equality. He said there is no best time or place to pursue civil rights.

“The people I care about are being forbidden from being with the person they love. Most of us know people that are gay. Their rights are affected by people who wish to limit their rights,” Savino said.

Sally King can be reached at [email protected]