Read: NOM's guide to pressuring lawmakers to ban marriages (while pretending you're doing something good and positive instead)
Even though one of the bills for which they are lobbying is, quite literally, one that would alter our U.S. Constitution so that is specifically bans same-sex marriage (H.J. RES 51, Federal Marriage Protection Amendment; Huelskamp), the National Organization For Marriage is telling its supporters to not admit their true intent:
Instead, NOM is telling folks to use the following message, which falsely pits "standing for marriage" with a supposed loss of a right to speak:
Those are just two points you will find in NOM's guidebook for how its supporters are to lobby their elected representatives when visiting the nation's capital on June 19th (the day of NOM's silly "march for marriage," pricey gala, and associated lobby day)
Full trailer: 'The Normal Heart'
Vintage Clinton era oppo memo perhaps even more relevant today
As part of today's massive document dump of previously restricted files comes a 1995 memo titled "The Communication Stream of Conspiracy Commerce." It's astounding how applicable it is to our present political world (and particularly the LGBT fight):
Of course now, there are thousands more outlets that do this kind of work and countless more folks, from everyday bloggers to paid Fox News contributors like Todd Starnes, who facilitate the same trend outlined above. I harp on it all the time. Rather than Vince Foster or Whitewater, the above could easily apply to any of the fake stories that the anti-LGBT movement dreams up and then turns into national incidents via their willing allies in media and Congress. There's nothing new under The Sun (or Fox News or The NY Post or The Washington Times or ...)
In fact, this same document specifically outlines the games of WND founder and "birther king" Joseph Farah, who is still very much working against us today:
If anything, Farah has only ratcheted up his work from where he was back then.
Look, I'm not going to pretend that politics is all pure on the left side, either. It isn't. But when it comes to turning outright myth into an incident and turning cruel demonization into a "values" position, the far-right has no counterpart. This has deeply damaged our debate. It didn't have to be that way then; it doesn't have to be that way now.
Concerned Women For America advises churches to lockdown exclusionary marriage views
While they don't specifically name the "emerging threat" that is so clearly the basis for this advisory document, the Concerned Women For America do want the nation's churches to make sure they put up all the proper walls before the "ever-evolving cultural, political, and legal definition" makes them see just a little too accepting. To accomplish this task, CWA suggests a "statement on marriage and sexuality" that squeezes adultery; fornication; homosexual, bisexual, or transgender relations; polygamy; and bestiality into one big box of "no!":
Regular readers know that I 100% support the right of churches to make these decisions for themselves. That said, I'd probably follow a source other than a D.C. special interest group if I were more concerned about the peaceful kingdom of Jesus and less concerned about the contrived "culture wars" of Pat Buchanan and Jerry Falwell.
Oh, and that whole "bestiality, gayness; tomato, tomato" thing, too. Might want to shy away from that if you care about retaining/gaining followers of an era where folks are more than passingly familiar with both LGBT people and canines.
Video: What does conservative columnist Cal Thomas see as America's biggest threat? Take a guess.
It's hard to sit next to Ralph Reed and be the more anti-gay one. But with this spiel about same-sex marriage posing a bigger threat to America than any outside force, conservative Cal Thomas manages:
I picture Mr. Thomas waking up at night, cold sweats and all, crying out a nightmarish same-sex wedding that just played out in his nocturnal subconscious. "THEIR COCKTAIL HOUR HAD IMPORTED CHEESED I'D NEVER EVEN HEARD OF!" yells the startled pundit before clutching his pillow and rocking himself gently.
But you all go ahead and take over the world, global dictators. As long as you don't make out with a dude, the threat of armed imperialism will never exceed that which my gold-banded ring finger poses to our Earth, apparently.
Correcting NOM's fallacious fear graphic
To foster this truly outrageous new gays-are-the-real-bullies that the anti-LGBT crowd is pushing in order to turn our fellow citizens against us (that's not an overstatement; that's literally what they're trying to do), pro-discrimination special interest group National Organization For Marriage has created this new fear graphic:
Ooh, scary. You can just hear the fear music: Dum dum dum!!!!!
Too bad NOM is flat-out misrepresenting all three of these supposed acts of force. Some facts:
 Brendan Eich made the choice to resign as Mozilla CEO after his presence became a distraction.
 Frank Turek was an independent vendor with various companies, not an employee. And some of those companies (Cisco and Bank of America) chose not to renew his contract after employees complained about his anti-gay views (which go far beyond marriage). This was a perfectly fair choice for any company to make with one of its consultants, but since Turek was on contract specifically to provide seminars to employees, these employee complaints were even more valid.
 Aaron Klein's business, Sweet Cakes by Melissa, closed its doors because it no longer had enough business to sustain itself. This was surely due, in part, to the company's discriminatory views, but that was likely not the only factor. Regardless of the reason for drop in business, it was the market at work—no one forced them to close their doors.
So who will be next? Well that remains to be seen. But you can damn well bet NOM, the good "values" folks that they are, will be there to bear false witness in support of both the fake victim and their own coffers.
Gee, Bryan, can't understand why federal courts are rejecting you gay = incest view
Court after court continues to rule in favor of equality. They are all wrong, says in-no-way-legally-trained American Family Association analyst Bryan Fischer. And these judges are wrong, naturally, because gay people are more similar to pedophiles and people who sleep with goats than they are to heterosexuals.
Move over, Jeffrey Toobin:
So when it comes to the “right” of homosexuals to marry each other (there never can be a “right” to same sex marriage since it is impossible for there to be moral or constitutional “right” to engage in sexually deviant behavior), the only possible question for a federal court would be whether a state’s marriage law is the same for everybody. If it is, the discussion is over.
If the right to marry is reserved under a state’s constitution for individuals of opposite genders, and that policy is applied equally, especially with regard to race (given the historical context of the 14th Amendment) then there is simply no constitutional violation. Everyone is equal before the law. If the same law applies to every citizen in the state, then justice is being served.
Since homosexuals already possess full marriage equality, what they want is not equal rights but special rights, “rights” granted on the basis of sexual deviancy. They want special treatment that is not granted to would-be polygamists, pedophiles, and practitioners of incest and bestiality.
The 14th Amendment doesn’t guarantee anybody special rights, it guarantees equal rights. Homosexual activists have no case and no constitutional right even to be in federal court. The sooner federal appeals courts recognize that the better.
Bryan Fischer: State marriage amendments should not even be in federal court, period [AFA]
If only bombastic commentary, self-assuredness, and open hostility were binding legal precedents, Bryan would be on to something. But since it's not, his animus will only help us win the wins we're already winning anyway.
Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual
Jennifer Roback Morse, who was one of the National Organization For Marriage's top surrogates in the years between Prop 8 and the Supreme Court cases, is just one of the latest to pretty much admit that her side has lost the argument. In a recent speech to Biola University, Morse admits that [a] the Supreme Court essentially issued a "rolling Roe v. Wade" that will ultimately give marriage equality to the entire nation and [b] that she must now, begrudgingly, move on to arguments base more in the emotional and the spiritual (read: her opinions) rather than stick with the arguments that keep losing in courts, legislatures, and voting booths.
You can watch the full talk if you care about her views on career women delaying their choices to start families (the topic of this speech). But for the purposes of this post, you only need to watch the first four minutes:
The thing is, this is where these "pro-family" folks should have always been directing their energy. Had they spent their time working on shaping the culture, helping those who subscribe to their beliefs, maintaining certain views within their churches, and pushing for more people to live in accordance with their faith views, few of us would have had any problem with their work. Most of us wouldn't have even noticed them, frankly.
The problem, of course, is that the instead chose to take this very same basis and inject it into matters of shared public policy. They attempted to use their faith-driven opposition as a way to reject our civil rights. And that is, obviously, why they ended up losing the intellectual argument. They attempted to overreach and eventually people caught on.
So now Ms. Roback Morse is going to focus on "cleaning up" messes that she sees involving but not limited to LGBT rights? Fine! Grab a mop and a broom and start washing away all perceived ills. Just don't go to court and claim that your personally-held and theologically-driven perception is a mandate to shape public policy.