Tag: Brian Brown

Posted on

Brian Brown of NOM continues to hide his head in the sand

Even as Rhode Island became the 10th US state to approve marriage equality, NOM leader and asshat Brian Brown continues to bury his head in the sand and pretend that he is not fighting a losing battle. From USAToday:

“Does inclusive mean that you get rid of your founding principles? Are party platforms supposed to mean anything? If the party does that, the party is DONE! The party is DONE if the Republican party abandons traditional marriage! It will mean that it has turned its back again on not only its base but on the overwhelming majority of folks who identify as Republicans.”

Brian – that NOM paycheck is going to disappear sooner than you think.  Just saying…

Check out the full interview with Mr. Brown by Susan Page of USAToday below:

Posted on

National Organization of Marriage leader “intentionally” lies – again

“The Senate has abandoned society’s most important institution and put their constituents on a collision course with the law. Lawmakers have allowed themselves to be fooled into thinking they have protected people of faith when in fact they have put those who believe in true marriage in the crosshairs of the law and gay ‘marriage’ activists. It won’t be long before the repercussions begin to be felt.”

“For the first time, the state of Rhode Island is saying to its children they do not deserve both a mother and a father, and are backing a law that is designed to intentionally deprive some kids of either a mom or a dad. It’s bad enough when families break down through divorce or death, but it’s unconscionable when a state encourages this through policies that deprive children of the love of both a mother and a father. This is a very sad day for Rhode Island.” – Hate group leader Brian Brown, who continues to walk down the road of life backwards

First of all, marriage equality isn’t about “intentionally” depriving kids of parents.  It’s about equal rights.

Second, it’s not a sad day Brian.  It’s a “skies are blue” fabulous day for Rhode Island.

The wrong side of history, Brian.  The wrong side of history…

Posted on

Brian Brown is already a sore loser over marriage equality

“I think we’re going to win these cases. But say the worst happens and we lose in a broad way – that means that the Court somehow does a Roe, a Roe v. Wade, on marriage and says that all these state constitutional amendments are overturned, gay marriage is now a constitutional right – well, we’re going to press forward on a Federal Marriage Amendment. We’ve always supported a Federal Marriage Amendment, and there’s a lot of misconceptions about it. Some people try and argue, ‘Well, this is against federalism.’ No, our founders gave us a system where we can amend the Constitution.

“We shouldn’t have to do this, we shouldn’t have to worry about activist judges, you know, making up out of thin air a constitutional right that obviously none of our founders found there and no one found there until quite recently. But if we do, for us, the Federal Marriage Amendment is a way that people can stand up and say, ‘Enough is enough.’ We need a solution in this country, we cannot be, as Lincoln said, half slave, half free. We can’t have a country on key moral questions where we’re just, where we don’t have a solution. And if the Court forces a solution, the way we’ll amend that is through  the Federal Marriage Amendment.” – Hate group leader Brian Brown via Right Wing Watch

Since 1789, there have been over 11,000 attempts to amend the US Constitution.  While these may be approached by “national convention,” none of those attempts have succeeded.

Only 27 amendments have been added to the Constitution.  The first ten are known as the Bill of Rights. The last amendment was added in 1992.

There are two steps to passing an amendment: Proposal and Ratification.

The amendment must first be proposed a 2/3 vote of Congress.

Ratification occurs with a 3/4 vote of the state legislatures or a 3/4 vote of state conventions made up of delegates (not necessarily legislators) elected by the people. That would mean 38 states would have to ratify the amendment.

Not gonna happen with marriage equality, Brian…

Posted on

Brian Brown: I’m so mad at Richard Hanna, I hope a Democrat wins next election

Brian Brown, NOM hate-group leader says he would rather see a Democrat win in the next election than see GOP congressman Richard Hanna reelected due to his support for the overturn of Prop 8 in an amicus brief signed by many prominent GOP politicians. Say Brown:

“There’s absolutely no doubt that we are going be involved in the next election for Richard Hanna’s seat,” said Brown. “What folks don’t understand is that we have Republicans and Democrats who support us, but if a Republican betrays the party platform, betrays his constituents, and does what Richard Hanna does, you can bet we’re going to primary him. And if a Democrat wins in the end, so be it.”

Posted on

NOM’s Brian Brown loses his sh*t over Illinois GOP leader backing marriage equality

“Brady has betrayed us, betrayed his party, misrepresented “key Republican values,” and insulted conservative voters in Illinois and across America who deserve leaders who refuse to sell out on such a fundamental and crucial issue like the defense of marriage, children and family. The future of marriage in Illinois demands that Brady be replaced immediately with a brave pro-marriage individual who will fight back against the out-of-state liberal activists now attempting to impose gay marriage on the Land of Lincoln without the will or consent of the we the people. Tell the Illinois GOP today that Pat Brady must go, and that it is time for the party to reinforce real ‘key Republican values’ — marriage and family, the well-being of children, the rule of law, and the rights of voters like you and me.” – National Organization for Marriage leader Brian Brown

What I find rich in Brian’s statement is HE represents “out-of-state” conservative activists who spend thousands of dollars trying to impose THEIR  will on local politics.

Brian – conservatives scream that marriage is a “states rights” issue.  How about you stay in YOUR state and advocate there?

Posted on

New Facebook page: Brian Brown tried to kiss me

Towleroad points up this new Facebook group.

Here’s just a sample entry:

I met Brian in 2010 at an event in Allentown. We got to talking and he said he would like to take me to a Central Catholic boy’s wrestling match. I didn’t think much of it and said I would love to join him.

At the match he kept saying things like “I bet you couldn’t pin me” and “how much do you think a singlet costs?”

Afterwards, on the way to the car, he said we should have a wrestling match and tried to put me in a headlock. I pushed him away and he lunged at me with his mouth open. I am positive he was trying to kiss me. I ran to my car and haven’t seen him since.

Occasionally he’ll text me, but it’s almost always late at night and usually just says “Hi” or “You up?”

There are also video testimonials like this one:

Posted on

Dan Savage and Brian Brown sit down to debate at dinner

Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, and Dan Savage, writer of the Savage Love column, met at Savage’s home in Seattle for dinner and a debate over same-sex marriage and the Bible. Moderated by Mark Oppenheimer from the New York Times.

I watched the entire “debate.” Here are a few of my own opinions:

• I do wish this had been more of a debate in the traditional sense that a debate gives way to more back and forth and exchange of ideas. This format gave Dan Savage and Brian Brown each 15 minutes to make “opening statements.” That accounted for practically half the debate time in total. I get that opening statements are customary in debates, but fifteen minutes each in a one hour debate seems excessive in that both of these men often have the opportunity to put forth their own lengthy statements of position.

I really would have liked to have seen 5 minute or so “opening statements” and then see the moderator ask more questions and address actual answers. I’m not blaming the moderator – I don’t know who made up these rules. Just saying what I’d have rather seen.

• Many times Brian Brown doesn’t answer questions put directly to him. Almost in the same vein of Sarah Palin in her one 2008 election debate, he brushed aside things he didn’t want to address, and instead addressed what he wanted to talk about. He never really answered the question of would any evidence ever change his mind on the issue of same-sex marriage. This happened a couple of times.

• As in any political debate – which this was since it regards laws and civil rights – a common “trick of the trade” is deflection. Brian Brown over and over again deflects to polygamy as if it’s the topic of the day. Over and over again. As Dan Savage points out, no one in the LGBT community is promoting that idea or legalizing polygamy. But because it is seen as a stark negative, Brian Brown kept coming back to that idea – at times demanding that Dan Savage “defend” polygamy, as if it were Dan’s position. This became very off-putting and, as if often the case in opposing marriage equality, tried to pose an alternate idea as if it were the one being debated.

• I appreciate that these two men remained civil and had the discussion they did. As I mention earlier, the rules seemed set up to just allow talking points at times. I’m not saying I want to see yelling and talking over one another, but I believe shorter time frames for questions and answers would have led to a more diverse and deeper discussion.

Just my thoughts. I may add more upon more reflection.