RECENT  POSTS:  » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs  

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

08/17/2012

Institute For American Values' blog: 'NOM further polarizes this 'culture war' and feeds into the cycle of aggression.'

by Jeremy Hooper

From Fannie, a blogger at David Blankenhorn's Family Scholars blog:

As of yesterday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has posted 13 updates and pieces of commentary about the shooting, while pushing the message that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is responsible for the shooting due to its labeling of the FRC as a hate group.

This sort of swift, reactionary politicization of the shooting, without appearing to care or understand why the some might see FRC as a hate group, doesn’t help lessen the toxicity of the national conversation. By failing to concede that hate is a real thing that actually exists in the real world not only against opponents of same-sex marriage, but against LGBT people as well, NOM further polarizes this “culture war” and feeds into the cycle of aggression.

Guard Shot At Family Research Council [Family Scholars]

Pagebreak-133

*Blankenhorn himself has now weighed in. While he does think that Washington Post columnist Dan Milbank is right in his characterization of the SPLC (I don't), I appreciate Blankenhorn—a longtime friend of groups and figures on the far-right, I should remind you—noting the truth about Perkins record and his response to it:

In my view, Perkins is wrong. And I also believe that there is much that needs to be seriously discussed, including by the leaders and supporters of FRC, on what constitutes, and contributes to, some of us “hating” others of us. Simply saying “don’t call us haters” is not nearly enough. But I also think that, on his basic point, Milbank is right.
“Hate groups” [Family Scholars]

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails