RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

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

01/28/2013

Read: FRC files brief in Windsor (DOMA) case

by Jeremy Hooper

FRC with an assist from the uber-far-right Thomas More Society:

FRC's amicus brief in the 'Windsor' case by

What's most striking about this largely inconsequential brief is just how legalese-laden it is. Those of us who know the Family Research Council know the group and its leaders as the "ex-gay"-supporting, overheated rhetoric–spouting, gay-condemning organization that has met the Southern Poverty Law Center's high bar for earning "hate group" status. But the FRC knows that this sort of behavior (i.e. the usual) would hurt their side in court, so the roll back the typical in favor and ratchet up the pragmatism instead. It's as if they are two different groups:the one who raises funds firing up a fervent base and the one that still wants to play with the adults when court/cable news/political convention time rolls around.

A true "friend of the court" would file a response brief presenting the FRC's own verbatim words to the nine justices. If FRC, one of the key organizations behind DOMA's very existence, wants to talk about what really motivates this worthless law, let's also talk about the regular stream of evidence that fills the typical FRC workaday. It should be part of the dialogue.

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