RECENT  POSTS:  » 'Weekly Standard' asst. editor equates Tim Cook with man who pits God against him » Michigan pastors make unfortunate lifestyle choice; say they'll go to jail rather than not discriminate » PFOX's Quinlan says SBC leader's opposition to 'reparative therapy' is cruel » That Idaho wedding venue posts new 'rules and regulations'; will still perform non-Christian weddings » Another deceptive thing about NOM's duplicitous anti-Hagan ad » NOM trying to shape Arkansas politics without even learning state's abbreviation » Video: Focus on the Family staffer who calls homosexuality 'particularly evil lie of Satan' hangs out in Chicago's Boystown » Video: Another new NOM ad targets Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR); uses James O'Keefe video as source » What the heck is 'NOM Victory Fund'? » Video: NOM reminds North Carolinians that they, Thom Tillis forced state into unconstitutional mess  

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

04/19/2013

Does NOM really think it can (or should be able to) petition the Supreme Court?

by Jeremy Hooper

I haven't written about this weeks-old petition because it's just too silly for words. But since the National Org. For Marriage is ratcheting up the attention it gives to its "petition to the Supreme Court Justices"…

Screen Shot 2013-04-19 At 9.21.42 Am

…I guess we have to talk about it.

First off, let's call this what it is. This petition (which is hosted on Brian Brown's partisan ActRight site) is simply a way for NOM to collect names and build a list. They are collecting email addresses and building a database. Also, since it's hosted on ActRight, Brian probably wants to use it to show off that site's supposed strengths. So that's the first truth: that this fake petition is primarily a way for NOM to collect data that it can later mine. That's obvious.

But even if we were to take them at their word this is somehow a way to shape the court: is that really something NOM believes it can do? Or better question: is this really something NOM thinks it should be able to do? Is NOM, the organization that's always tossing around phrases like "judicial activism," seriously suggesting that the ability to collect names on an e-petition should be something that shapes these learned justices' own legal reasoning? Because if that is the suggestion, then that is a new strain of NOM hubris!

Now again, I don't believe that NOM believes this. At all. As I said, this is just a dressed up way for NOM to collect your information in hopes of building its donor rolls. But honestly, the mere fact that they are putting this out there and giving their less-informed supporters the impression that the Supreme Court's decision-making should be subject to the whims of a popularity contest tells you about all you need to know regarding NOM and its respect for the judicial process.

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