RECENT  POSTS:  » Openly anti-gay Chief Justice of AL Supreme Court vows to openly defy marriage equality » AFA's Director of Issues Analysis: LGBT activists possess 'unvarnished energy of Satan himself » Wait, FRC has been able to 'uphold natural marriage'? That's news to all non–cave dwellers! » Because when am I not calling up Fox News personalities to do my bidding? » Anti-equality conservative admits GLAAD CAP is 'smart' and 'effective' » You know what's not presidential? Like at all? » Inevitable justice temporarily delayed in Alabama » Read: Fed. judge strikes Alabama marriage ban; no stay on ruling » Derisively remembering when full equality was in 'Jeopardy!' » When all else fails, demand your letters are capitalized  

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

12/23/2013

NOM Chair elaborates on NOM's plans for a constitutional convention

by Jeremy Hooper

Earlier this year, I revealed that the National Organization For Marriage has purchased a cache of domain names referring to a "marriage convention" (or "marriage con con"). On Catholic radio last week, NOM Chairman John Eastman elaborated on NOM's plans:


[SOURCE: The Drew Mariani Show, 12/19/13]

A ha! NOM doesn't really think it's going to achieve the unprecedented accomplishment of a constitutional convention. Instead, NOM thinks it can tease the idea so fully that a scared Congress will pass a Federal Marriage Amendment. It's a pressure campaign that NOM is cooking up. That's essentially what Eastman is saying here.

This is of course equally ridiculous. The anti-gay side couldn't pass a federal marriage amendment even during the height of the Bush years, when we had only one state with marriage equality, DOMA still fully on the books, and less than a handful of elected officials on record in support of the freedom to marry. They really think they have headway here in a world where we have eighteen states with marriage equality, federal recognition of these marriages, a majority of our U.S. Senators and our President in support of the concept, and polls that are remarkably higher than they were back during the old FMA push? This is seriously the false hope that NOM is selling to its donors?!

Heck, why even tease the concept of a Con Con at all? After all, most supporters are surely more familiar with the fanciful notion of genies who live in rubbable lamps. Since both are equally grounded in reality, I'm thinking the Aladdin route could be NOM's more bankable choice.

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