Video: Brian and his 'consequences': looking more inconsequential every single day
Ya know, it's interesting to us that the National Organization for Marriage links to the following video clip on its website:
Because the way we see it, interviewer Bruce DePuyt, backed by facts and support from scores and scores of high-ranking officials, thoroughly rips a hole in every last point in Brian's well-worn, Maggie Gallagher-penned script. But don't take our word for it -- we're gonna shut up and let you have a look for yourself:
*Source: NewsTalk with Bruce DePuyt [News Channel 8]
Wow. He was trounced. Not one answer that deviated from the standard boilerplate.
I especially loved how DePuyt asked him if he would stand with DC Vote. "um... uh..."
We should ask him what other issues he feels the city council and mayor are misrepresenting the voters on.
He has a profoundly twisted view of representative democracy.
Good work, News Channel 8.
Posted by: Sean | Oct 8, 2009 4:49:49 PM
I actually think Brian did a good job of defending the NOM position. He made me want to puke... But he debated well. His adversary, however, was brilliant! So, smooth!
Posted by: Coxygru | Oct 8, 2009 5:18:26 PM
OMG, what an incredible fool Brown is. DePuyt was prepared and gave Brown enough rope to hang himself. Could anybody make sense out of his drivel about the DC's EEOC laws and how DC got it wrong????
Posted by: Dale S | Oct 8, 2009 5:35:58 PM
Watch that sick twists face. On his first expression that marriage is a man and woman notice the face. That little snarl.
Fuck you Brian!
Posted by: Tony P | Oct 8, 2009 6:24:49 PM
Someone needs to nominate this newscaster for a GLAAD media award.
The DC Council, the AG and Coretta Scott King are all wrong? Hey Brian, take your head out of your ass.
Posted by: stojef2005 | Oct 8, 2009 7:01:16 PM
Jeremy, are you *kidding?* They linked to this on their own page? Brian Brown was completely shredded in this interview.
The only reason I can think they'd post this link is to play the victim card - claiming that the interviewer was slanted and bigoted in some way.
Posted by: DN | Oct 8, 2009 8:18:31 PM
Yea, that image is their link to the video. They seem somehow proud of it. Very weird.
Although I'm clearly as anti-NOM as one can be, I do have the ability to step back in political matters and look at them objectively. And under any read, this interview is really terrible for their side. Honestly, I just don't think Brian's so good on TV. He manages to keep his composure, but it always seems like there is an outburst lying right below the surface.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Oct 8, 2009 9:08:14 PM
I had to replay the last few seconds just to confirm - the interviewer asks if he'll join DC Vote, Brian Brown tries to dance, and the interviewer *laughs* at him.
Good job, carpetbagger.
Posted by: DN | Oct 8, 2009 9:28:24 PM
*gasps for breath*
Posted by: PINGAS | Oct 8, 2009 10:14:05 PM
Excuse me Mr. Brown but Walter Faunteroy did not organize King's March on Washington. He was one of the coordinators but the organizer was BAYARD RUSTIN, an openly gay African-American.
Posted by: a. mcewen | Oct 8, 2009 10:38:43 PM
I suspect that NOM knows it will be defunded after Nov. 3rd (if it hasn't been already in the wake of the Maine hearing) and so Brian is putting anything up on his website that shows potential donors how hard he's working.
To date, according to Brian's latest update, NOM's NY PAC has gathered $35K. The only message this figure sends to Albany is that Brian Brown and NOM are out of the picture.
Gosh, I hope Neil Corkery and Maggie Srivastav get their chance to testify under oath, too.
Posted by: LdChino | Oct 9, 2009 2:31:44 AM
What would you expect from an unrepentant homophobe?
Posted by: Michael | Oct 9, 2009 6:09:57 AM
Stop by NOMs offices on your way out of town from the Equality March this sunday and leave them a little package of facts about themselves: Fact, Maggie was and is an unrepentant fornicator who should have been stoned by the men in her town for lying about her virginity when she got married (Deuteronomy 22:21). Fact, Maggie married outside of her race and is ashamed of it. Fact: Brian Brown is a carpetbagging racist who consorts with the likes of Mass Resistance, Family Research Institute both of which are considered hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Posted by: Mykelb | Oct 9, 2009 2:33:17 PM
Here's the exchange that got my attention:
Brown: Shutting down Catholic Charities Adoption Agency -- the good that religious organizations are doing, and trying to abide by their faith -- shutting down that good is direct consequence of same-sex marriage.
Depuyt: There's nothing preventing any religious organization from doing everything that it believes is consistent with its teachings, but what they can't do is claim tax-exempt status, and then discriminate. I think that's the rub.
Brown: But, again, the rub is that this is not discrimination. It is not discrimination to believe that there is something unique and special about men and women -- unions of men and women are the only types of unions that can naturally produce children. There's something unique about that. It's shared by cultures that differ on all sorts of other questions. So, to stand up and say that [heterosexual marriage is unique] is not bigotry. It is not discrimination. And, I think what you're seeing, in especially the African-American churches in the district, the fact that people are trying to hijack the civil rights movement and say that this is bigotry to believe that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, they're not going to stand for that.
By any reasonable definition of discrimination, what Brown and NOM are fighting for is freedom to discriminate without folks considering them to be bigots.
Consider various definitions of *discriminate*...
-*- (verb) recognize or perceive the difference
-*- (verb) distinguish between similar items/concepts
-*- (adj) marked by the ability to see or make fine distinctions
Brown and NOM tirelessly promote the false concept that reasonable, thoughtful, moral people see a mile-high wall separating marriage from what already exists between long-term same-sex couples... i.e., that they discriminate between opposite- and same-sex relationships on moral grounds.
What about other definitions for *discriminate*?
-*- treat differently on the basis of sex or race
-*- discrimination toward or against a person of a certain group is the treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit.
-*- to make decisions based on prejudice
Brown just promoted treating couples differently based on their sex.
Brown just advocated discrimination (different treatment) of same-sex couples based on their class (gay people) and category (same-sex couples) rather than anything remotely related to their merits as individuals, couples, or families.
Did he made those decisions based on prejudice?
I'll leave that up to you to decide for yourself.
Posted by: Bose | Oct 9, 2009 7:46:36 PMcomments powered by Disqus