RECENT  POSTS:  » 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 » The religious anti-gay crowd: They never understood the marriage fight; now they don't understand their loss  

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

02/21/2013

NOM staffers say this stuff like they really believe it

by Jeremy Hooper

A properly confused visitor to the National Organization For Marriage's so-called "march for marriage" site asked whether that page was for or against same-sex marriage. Check out how NOM organizer Joe Grabowski responded:

Screen Shot 2013-02-21 At 12.19.52 Pm

(1) I'm for man/woman marriage too. I've toasted many couples, danced many dances, and given countless dollars in gifts. When it comes to the union of love, commitment, and open bars, no one is more game than me.

(2) Individuals and faith communities have every right to speak up for marriage. Or against marriage, for that matter. Freedom of speech means we all have the right to engage without government interference. Freedom of religion grants folks the right to pray or not pray however they wish. However, none of us have the right to use our personal theology to limit others' civil rights, and none of us have the right to flout nondiscrimination laws. And that is the issue here: the opposition's desire to overreach in a way that violates others' freedoms.

(3) No, voters do not have the "right" to limit marriage in the way that the missteps of past referenda suggests they do. Civil rights are not a popularity contest. My marriage is not a student council election. Just because these kind of votes have happened does not make them right. Do not confuse this nation's one-was with its will-be. That kind of thinking has a tendency to backfire, especially when speaking of the course of minority rights and protections.

(4) Go like a truly pro-marriage Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/March4Marriage

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