RECENT  POSTS:  » Ireland: Not only a practical win, but also another tremendous psychological shift » Hillary Clinton campaign honors Harvey Milk, LGBTQ rights » You don't have to pounce on every less-than-pro-gay retailer, anti-gay conservatives! » Video: Tony Perkins tells pastors they 'may have five years' before being 'dragged kicking and screaming from your church' » What to even say about Josh Duggar? » GOP prez candidates lining up for NOM-sponsored event in Iowa » Video: Ted Cruz tells viciously anti-gay Family Research Council he's got their back on anti-gay discrimination » Scouts prez seeks long overdue end to offensive stigma » FRC prays against Dan Savage 'spewing upon our nation'; I'll let Dan make that joke himself » Sen. (and prez candidate) Cruz to join extreme anti-LGBT activists at Family Research Council event (#WOTW15)  

« 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