RECENT  POSTS:  » Miami-Dade Circuit judge rules state marriage ban unconstitutional; stays ruling » Video: With marriage equality, Texas could put in a pool at the Alamo » CWA ably demonstrates ludicrousness of American Christian right's persecution complex » Video: CBS News hosts '50 Years Later, Civil Rights;' includes marriage equality, obviously » Audio: White House? Nah. But in race for most anti-gay House member, Bachmann a strong contender » Brian Brown is the victim, y'all. How many times does he have to tell you? » Congrats, gay activists—Bryan Fischer has found new group for his weekly 'Nazi' branding » Maggie Gallagher: Sexual orientation is 'more akin to religion' than to race » NOM is totally popular (*in Ethiopia) » What constitutes 'absolute pure evil' in the eyes of Liberty University dean?  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

09/08/2009

'Yes on 1's most revelatory strategy: Forcing Mike Heath into the closet

by Jeremy Hooper

Ya know, it's interesting what a high profile campaign can do to a movement. When they are not directly pushing a ballot initiative, they have no problem foisting fringe leaders like Mike Heath out into the forefront. They'll proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with a man who has, among so many other things, blamed marriage equality for causing both bad weather and graffiti:

 Mainemarriagerally-1

But when they do have a national spotlight on them, they suddenly drop the man who has defined the Pine Tree state's anti-gay politics for the past many years:

Mestandformarriagerallysep09Poster
Same flyer, same goal: no Heath. Weird, since it's not like Mr. Heath has toned down his "Stand For Marriage"-iness over the past six months. He and his Maine Family Policy Council organization (an official Focus on the Family affiliate) write about gays and their equality on an almost daily basis. And as already mentioned: He's been the face of Maine's anti-equality push for as long as most anyone can remember. The over-the-top, frequently vitriolic face, yes. But a face that mainstream "pro-family" folks like Tony Perkins were more than happy to fete when folks weren't paying as much attention.

You have to ask yourself, Mainers: Is it Mike Heath from whom these folks want to run, or it their movement's own truth? And at the end of Maine day, is there really any difference between the two?

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

No "Maine Legislative Representatives" this time, either. And, a different website. The first one was Heath's, the second isn't. Nice of him to give them the graphics when they don't want him in the picture, huh? Hate knows no bounds.

Posted by: ColdCountry | Sep 8, 2009 1:44:11 PM

They also took out the "homosexual agenda" part, a favorite term for the phobes, and toned it down a bit. Maybe that term is seen as a bit too radical too.

Posted by: Julie M. | Sep 8, 2009 3:53:40 PM

They seem to play down the "Christian" in those ads. The closest they come is the notation under the photo of the Catholic bishop, and a note to contact a church office for tickets. Aren't their Christian credentials the common thread that links all these people together? Their campaign is targeted at relatively moderate/secular people in Maine, and I don't think the hate-wing of Christianity plays well there. I've wondered if that is the reason Mike Heath changed the name of his outfit form Christian Civic League of Maine to Maine Family Policy Council. They need to hide the Christian, so the ads have to talk about "tradition," "protection," "restoring, and "defending."

Posted by: Richard Rush | Sep 8, 2009 4:10:46 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails