Tag: NOM

Posted on

GOP quiet on SCOTUS’ marriage equality hearings

Politico notes that thus far the leadership of the Republican Party has not responded to Friday’s Supreme Court decisions.

House Republican leaders had a uniform response to the Supreme Court’s decision to take up gay marriage: silence. The high court’s decision last week to hear two cases relating to same-sex marriage puts that issue at the center of the national debate. And it does so at an exceedingly awkward time for Republicans, many of whom are trying to downplay or moderate their party’s views on social issues to chart a path back to electoral success.

“I’m personally grateful to Speaker Boehner for being willing to defend the law, but it’s clear GOP elites don’t want to talk about it and want to keep it as quiet as possible,” said Maggie Gallagher, a founder of the National Organization for Marriage and a fellow at the conservative American Principles Project. “That’s so obvious, I don’t see any point in pretending otherwise.” Tom McClusky of the Family Research Council said he assumes from conversations he’s had with congressional aides that lawmakers are pleased the high court is taking up the issue. “But there’s just radio silence” publicly, McClusky said. “I was disappointed there wasn’t more from the Hill.”

In related news, Maggie Gallagher said yesterday that she expects SCOTUS to overturn DOMA but uphold Prop 8.

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

Maine: Marriage equality supporters launch pre-emptive strike against NOM

As Mainers United for Marriage gears up for the last weeks of the marriage campaign, they’ve released a new ad that takes on the issue of religious freedom.

Having seen the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage’s playbook in the past and knowing their ads will feature lies about the impact of this law on churches, they’re addressing the attack early.

Smart kids.  See?  We’re catching on…

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.

Posted on

Anti-gay Kirk Cameron says “no” to bullied NJ kids

Anti-gay NOM spokesman Kirk Cameron has responded to the request of a meeting by a group of bullied New Jersey kids.

His response was “no.”

Cameron’s spokesman sent the group an email:

I promise you his goal is not one of trying to hurt people in any way, in fact it is just the opposite. He has a concern for their well being – not only now, but eternally. He goes out to share a positive message through events like this weekend and I assure you he will only be presenting a positive/ inspiring message. I would like to suggest if you really are interested in Kirk’s thoughts on the matter, you can listen online to the interviews and comments Kirk has shared where he was given ample time to communicate his heart and thoughts. I hope you can attend the event and see for yourself.

Garden State Equality responds: “Kirk Cameron has asked us to look into his heart. Now we know the sentiment there: ‘Let Them Eat Hate.’”

I’m not sure I understand Kirk’s reticence to meet with these kids. If he truly wants to help and communicate with them, isn’t face to face the most direct way to do so?

Let’s remember some of Kirk’s “positive/inspiring messages” like this one on CNN where he says homosexuality is “unnatural, detrimental, and ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization”:

Via JMG

Posted on

Champion of marriage – Kirk Cameron

A few months ago the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) got caught in court documents blatantly trying to create resentment between the LGBT community and other minority groups.

Among all their underhanded race-baiting tactics, was the revelation that they were also seeking out “non-cognitive elites” to be celebrity spokespeople for their anti-LGBT cause.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news to all you other non-cognitive types who had applied for the “celebrity anti-gay spokesperson” job, but it looks like the position is being filled by former Growing Pains star Kirk Cameron.

“Kirk Cameron and the anti-gay activists at NOM are making a claim that Americans know to be false,” said GLAAD President Herndon Graddick.

“This rhetoric won’t work anymore. Communities across this country love and cherish their LGBT neighbors, friends and family members. This includes people in families headed by LGBT people. Their implication that LGBT couples can’t create loving and stable homes is not only outdated and irrelevant; it’s designed specifically to hurt those families.”

Earlier this year thousands spoke out against Kirk Cameron’s statement that being gay was “unnatural,” “detrimential,” and “ultimately destructive to so many of the foundations of civilization” including celebrities Kristin Chenoweth, Jamie Lee Curtis, Jesse Tyler Ferguson as well as Cameron’s former Growing Pains co-stars Tracey Gold and Alan Thicke.

Cameron’s comments also come at a time when celebrities from a diverse range of faith traditions, entertainment genres and political backgrounds including Russell Simmons, Carrie Underwood, Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Alicia Keys and Dolly Parton have stated support for marriage equality.

Via LGBTQNation

Posted on

State of California to investigate anti-gay National Organization for Marriage

As a result of complaints by GOP presidential candidate Fred Karger, the California Fair Political Practices Commission will investigate NOM for campaign finance violations.

Press release from Fred Karger:

In his sworn complaint of May 17th, Karger alleged that NOM did not report over $340,000 that it raised to pass Proposition 8 four years ago.

California joins the state of Maine which is in its third year of its investigation of NOM, the leading anti-gay marriage organization in the country.

One of the 11 missing contributions was $10,000 from presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s Alabama PAC. In addition to the Romney money there were 10 more contributions NOM did not report, including: $150,000 from Michael Casey of Jamestown, RI, $100,000 from Sean Fiedler of New York, NY and $25,000 from NOM Board member Craig Cardon of Mesa, AZ, a General Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church).

Via JoeMyGod

Posted on

Over 640,000 thank Starbucks for supporting marriage equality

 

From The Advocate: National coffee chain Starbucks Wednesday received a card thanking the company for its continued support of marriage equality in its home state of Washington.

The National Organization for Marriage launched a boycott of Starbucks because the company’s leaders supported marriage equality legislation that recently passed in Washington. NOM recruited about 28,000 to “Dump Starbucks.”

However, a counterprotest to “Thank Starbucks” grabbed the attention of 640,000 marriage equality supporters.

The pro-Starbucks effort was organized by SumOfUs.org, MoveOn.org, and Washington United for Marriage, which submitted a card with 640,000 signatures at Starbucks’ main corporate offices Wednesday.

“We’ve been stunned by the passionate response to ‘Thank Starbucks’ – our most viral campaign ever,” Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, executive director for SumofUs.org, said in a statement. “We’ve seen in our campaigns that consumers expect corporations to do right by their workers and by their community. We hope that this overwhelming show of support for Starbucks for supporting gay rights will inspire other corporations to keep making similar public statements.”

James Olsen, Starbucks’ vice president of global corporate communications, thanked customers for their support.

“We are long-standing supporters of a culture of diversity, and inclusion and equality for everybody, and I’ll share this with our fellow leaders,” he said. “Thank you very much.”

Posted on

NOM accuses Human Rights Campaign of stealing tax returns in effort to deflect “race baiting strategies”

 
The National Organization for Marriage claims either Human Rights Campaign or an IRS official broke the law by releasing and disseminating the hateful group’s 2008 tax returns listing their major donors, including Mitt Romney. Now NOM president Brian Brown is floating the threat of a federal investigation.

“The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), today demanded a federal investigation of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to determine who was responsible for releasing NOM’s confidential federal tax return information to the Huffington Post,” the group wrote on their blog.

From Brian Brown:

It appears that someone with either the IRS or the HRC may have committed a federal crime by illegally obtaining and then releasing a confidential tax return of the National Organization for Marriage.

It’s clear that the tax return was stolen, either from NOM or from the government. The Huffington Post article says that HRC claimed they received the document from a ‘whistleblower.’ But the term ‘whistleblower’ is completely inapt. We’re talking about a criminal who has stolen confidential tax return information. We demand to know who this criminal is, whether they work for the HRC or the IRS, and how they obtained confidential tax information filed only with the US government.”

I would like to know what the HRC knew and when did they know it. It certainly appears that either the HRC was involved in illegally obtaining this tax return themselves, or they worked with a criminal who stole it from NOM or the IRS. Either way, it appears that a federal crime may have been committed.

Yes, Brian. The Human Rights Campaign broke into your “offices” and stole the documents and then leaked the docs to themselves. Santa Claus kept watch while the Easter Bunny drove the getaway car.

But great way to deflect from the issue of your organization’s divisive race baiting strategies.

Posted on

New York Times on National Organization of Marriage’s “racially divisive strategies”

From the New York Times:

When a light is shined into the dark corners of American politics, it’s never pleasant to see what scurries away. Last week, a federal judge in Maine unsealed memos from the National Organization for Marriage, one of the most prominent groups fighting against same-sex marriage.

They relate to a case filed over whether the group must disclose the donors that helped underwrite a 2009 ballot initiative that overturned the state’s legalization of same-sex marriage. The group uses its designation as a social welfare organization to avoid federal disclosure, but the memos dispel any notion that the claim has any legitimacy. National Organization for Marriage is a political group, through and through.

The documents brag about its “crucial” role in passage of Proposition 8, California’s ban on same-sex marriage that was overturned by a federal appeals court. They describe the group’s use of “robo-calls” to scare residents in different states away from supporting marriage equality. They talk of a plan to “expose Obama as a social radical,” but the most appalling portions deal with the group’s racially and ethnically divisive strategies.

The first line of the the article is truly the most visual AND the most accurate. This forced disclosure was/is NOM’s worst nightmare. Now that we understand what they were planning, it’s easy to see why they didn’t want this to come to light.

The New York Times also sends a message to the GOP candidates:

Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich have publicly aligned themselves with the group and signed its pledge to work aggressively from the White House against same-sex marriage.

Now that the group’s poisonous political approach is out in the open, Mr. Romney and the others should be racing to make clear their disapproval.

We detect no stampede.