‘Hacked’ Notice On Preserve Marriage Website

March 18, 2016

As of this writing, the website for the Preserve Marriage — the group behind the petition opposing same sex marriage — is offline and showing a notice saying it was “hacked by Nerisa.”

Clicking around indicates that multiple pages on the site are displaying the ‘hacked’ notice, including the homepage, contact us page, overview page, what is marriage page, civil unions page, video page and more.

Screenshot of the Preserve Marriage website homepage:

Fullscreen capture 18032016 114625 AM

click here banner technology 7

Read More About

Category: All, technology

Comments (26)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. The Hornet's Nest says:

    If this site is this insecure, how can we believe in the “9,000+ people” who signed the petition?

    • Pravda says:

      Bogus numbers

      • veritas says:

        In that case, let’s resolve the numbers once and for all…let’s have a referendum.

    • Smh says:

      The real question is how desperate can someone else be that they feel the need to sabotage this website.

      • Mike Hind says:

        Do you not get how serious an issue this is?
        People are being denied equal access to rights and privileges for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
        How desperate? First off, probably was disgust, not desperation. Secondly, even if it WAS desperation, there’s very good reason for it!

        • Family Man says:

          Very sad to see some high profile people that were fighting for SSM equality spending the last few days fighting to deny rights to long term residents and children born and raised in Bermuda.

          I just don’t understand how people can be all for rights for themselves and not for others.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Why was this in response to my post? What does it have to do with what I said?

            • Family Man says:

              No Mike, it was not directed at you. I truly admire your ethics.

              It’s just sometimes so depressing to see people argue for rights for themselves and in the next breath argue against rights for others. Both are serious issues; the rights of EVERYBODY to marry the person they love and the right for children who grew up here to call this their permanent home and not be forced to leave when they finish school.

  2. Unbelievable says:

    Welcome to the 21st Century, SSM opponents.

    Oh wait….no you don’t understand that idea. Never mind.

    • WarwickBoy says:

      So the right way to debate is not to engage in reasoned back and forth, presenting your positions to the other side and trying to win them over? The right way, in the “21st Century” as you put it, is to simply silence those you don’t agree with?

      Regardless of what side any of us falls on any contentious issue, we should all allow and respect the input from all sides. Remember, the tactics you support to shut down debate from those you disagree with, can always be turned on you in the future in the debate on another contentious issue.

      • Mike Hind says:

        When has the anti-equality side ever engaged in reasoned back and forth?
        When have they ever presented a position that is even a little bit defensible?

        Some of us have been begging for respectful input from that marriage equality opponents and have been met with silence.

        • WarwickBoy says:

          You may not agree with their positions and views (and I don’t agree with most of what they say) but when have they ever tried to shut down the pro-SSM side?

          It’s not about whether their position is at all defensible. Though I support SSM, their position is defensible because they are defending a stance that has been the legal framework in this land for 407 years. It is not an outrageous position to take.

          They are entitled to their view and they are entitled to voice it. Why is someone hacking and shutting down their website the right way to go about debating them? The task for SSM supporters is to convince SSM opponents to change their view and advance the SSM agenda in the fashion appropriate in a parliamentary democracy such as Bermuda is.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Ok, first of all, it seems you’re arguing against things I didn’t say.

            You wagged your finger at someone for showing support for this hacking by tut tutting about “the right way to debate”.

            I pointed out that there IS no debate. A debate has two sides taking positions and then defending those positions. If you’re going to chastise someone for not debating the right way, you can’t then say “It’s not about whether their position is defensible”. That is an integral part of debate.
            And “This has been a legal framework in this land for 407 years” isn’t a position that stands up. At all. Laws change when they’re found to be unfair and unjust. “This is how we’ve always done it” is… it’s just wrong.

            The anti-marriage equality side hasn’t taken a position beyond “Same Sex Marriage shouldn’t be allowed”.

            You’re right about one thing. They’re entitled to their view and their entitled to voice it.
            They’re still able to voice it. But their promotion and support for the legal denial of rights to citizens of this country for absolutely no reason is wrong. It’s unjust.
            Sometimes people feel they need to stand up to injustice.
            That’s what this person did.

            This one act of anarchy by a hacker isn’t silencing them.

            And the right way to debate them is to ask questions… to ask them to offer their position and then defend it. They haven’t. Hence my post.

            The last sentence… I don’t understand. Marriage Equality supporters HAVE been offering valid, defensible arguments and education AND have been debating, as best they can, showing why various arguments offered by opponents aren’t valid or true or based in reality – for example: the paedophilia/bestiality/incest “slippery slope” arguments; the “You have to be able to have kids/offer the best possible situation for raising kids” arguments etc. etc. – and have been met with moving goalposts, evasion, personal attacks, logical fallacies and, in the worst cases, outright lies.

            If your going to chastise people for not debating the right way, you should start there.
            It’s unfair to only do it to one side.

  3. Um Um Like says:

    We should pray the hack away.

  4. Pravda says:

    The Preserve Marriage website was a bogus petition website and the numbers are not real.
    Unless a proper Petition website is used then the numbers are all subject to change as was evidenced on numerous occasions.

    The biggest joke is that Preserve Marriage were/are trying to “hack” the Human Rights of same sex couples by denying them marriage equality with their only justification being some nebulous biblical writings from two centuries ago. Farcical at best, nonsensical, bigoted and discriminatory are a given.

  5. Starting point says:

    LOL must be gods will. He has a plan for everything after all…..

    • veritas says:

      You’re right. Sometimes he allows evil to go forth to reveal the darkness in our hearts, in particular those who reject what Jesus and God had to say about marriage. Rather than write and speak rationally they resort to name calling, Christophobic rants, and vile actions…like hacking. Imagine if the same thing was done to the Rainbow Alliance. This just reveals the immaturity of many people on both sides.

  6. Shari-Lynn Pringle says:

    I wish Nerisa had changed his/her name to god just this once!

  7. Patricia says:

    Typical comments from those who support same sex marriage. Always hate ridden comments. Come on, that’s all you got.

  8. Common says:

    Right. Because if there is a God he would definately be for same sex marriage..you make me laugh pringles….

    • The Hornet's Nest says:

      If there was a God, and their message was true, he wouldn’t have allowed the site to be hacked.

  9. Coffee says:

    They shouldn’t be hijacking a legitimate site . They don’t care for law and order , they are lawless !

  10. MPP says:

    The sad part of this is when people applaud illegal and destructive actions because they are committed against people they disagree with. Don’t we see the problem here? Who are we becoming?

    I don’t support SSM but I would be very disappointed if someone shut down any one of the pro-SSM sites in this manner. The owners of those sites are my brothers and sisters in my community and, while I don’t support what they say, I 100% support their right to say it without harassment.

    • Mike Hind says:

      And yet you have no problem with the destruction of families supported by Preserve Marriage.

      Which is worse? Some Hacker causing temporary mischief or an organization promoting the continued unjust and baseless denial of rights to citizens of this country?

  11. Hardtalk says:

    Some very interesting questions are raised here, where exactly does god stand on SSM? We know from ‘The Word’ that god is male and had at least one child, but this child was born out of wedlock and without the traditional male and female parentage that we would call marriage. So clearly god does not mandate traditional marriage as a prerequisite to procreation.
    The birth of his son was immaculately organized using a surrogate female who had no sexual or genetic interaction in the process and was simply an incubator for the developing foetus. In some ways this seems like an allegorical reference to the techniques being used today to provide gay and infertile couples with babies via sperm and egg donors and in vitro fertilization methodologies.
    The son that was born from this curious and miraculous process spent a relatively short life in predominantly male company and gave no indication of a desire to engage in a normal male/female sexual relationship that would certainly have resulted in the procreation of children.
    Indeed gods son surrounded himself with 12 trusted male ‘disciples’ for his duration on planet earth so we must ask ourselves what lesson was he teaching during his brief mortal tenure.
    Ultimately, we must subject ourselves to the absolute will of god, as our master, to whom we pledge eternal servitude, but before we do, let’s make sure we understand where he stands on SSM!