Head of Virginia's top anti-gay org: One mean email proves 'the left' is sexist, intolerant
Victoria Cobb is the victim, y'all. After the 4th Circuit decided in favor of marriage equality in her state, the head of the Family Foundation of Virginia, the Old Dominion State's main organization for promoting discrimination against LGBT people, apparently received one nasty email that she found both intolerant and sexist. So clearly this means "the left" is hypocritical:
I receive many hateful voicemails and emails, usually expletive filled, when standing up for our shared values. Normally, we at The Family Foundation try to laugh about or ignore them. On occasion we have to share them with law enforcement due to their threatening nature. But, I received an email yesterday that I have to share because it epitomizes the hypocrisy and hysteria of the left.
The subject was “You are one stupid woman” and the message was just as short: “How does your husband put up with your [stuff]?” (“stuff” was obviously not the word used in the email).
It is fascinating to watch the tolerant and enlightened left revert to intolerant, sexist boors when confronted with a reasoned and intellectual argument in support of traditional marriage, defending the value of life or believing as our founders did in religious liberty.
Perhaps sexism, like tolerance is a one-way street for the left?
Oh please. If Victoria spent the day following a major development pertaining to her LGBT-centered work fielding only one nasty email, then she is very lucky. You should see my inbox! People sometimes use the internet to badmouth opponents; this is not news. All of us who do this kind of work receive our fair share of nasty grams.
But it is both reductive and offensive to suggest that a lone emailer's thoughts constitutes the view of "the left." If I connected Victoria to every nasty note I've received over the past nine years, then I would have to claim that she and her movement to be a band of foul-mouthed, thoroughly unChristian, exceedingly hostile folks who wish me maimed or dead many times over. I have many messages that would suggest as much. But I would never make that connection, obviously, because I know that these hostile (and almost always anonymous) emails are the exception, not the rule. And I much prefer to debate policy than to unfairly connect some random Jane or Joe to a political movement writ large.
I know that Victoria and her movement are doggedly determined to shift themselves into the "victim" box. It's not going to work. It's just making them look silly.
Video: Ohio should be so lucky to have married couples as adorable as George & Henry
GLAAD: Q&A with former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider: 'I’ve never met an 'ex-gay' man I thought was not still attracted to men'
Q&A with former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider: 'I’ve never met an 'ex-gay' man I thought was not still attracted to men' [GLAAD]
Head of Virginia's anti-equality org: 'open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad'
People who oppose marriage equality are not burdened one bit by same-sex couples' marriages. But that doesn't stop Victoria Cobb, longtime head of Virginia's main anti-equality organization, to claim that yesterday's 4th Circuit ruling in favor of marriage equality constitutes "open season" against people like her:
"Today’s ruling and reactions to it clearly prove that it is now open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad, whether motivated by their faith, be it Christian, or Jewish or Islamic, or by their concern for the future of our children.
Despite our disappointment with today’s ruling, despite the charge that we are “motivated by hate,” and despite federal and state administrations set on discriminating against anyone who disagrees with them, The Family Foundation is steadfast and will continue to fight to ensure that children are given the best opportunity to thrive — in a family with a mom and a dad." [FF of VA]
The ego never ceases to amaze me. Here we have a woman who has literally spent the a large part of the last decade fighting for and in defense of a measure that does nothing more than limit the rights of certain kinds of taxpayers in her state. She knew that same-sex couples in Virignia very much wanted the right to marry under civil law, and she knew that they felt their tax dollars entitled them and their families to the same rights and protections that Victoria enjoys. Yet she chose to wake up every morning and go to work for an organization that has dedicated a lion's share of its resources toward preserving discrimination. No one made her do this. For both passion and paycheck, Victoria Cobb chose to attach her name to this form of discrimination.
And yet she is the victim? Give me a break! Or a barf bag.
Force behind Virginia's marriage ban ably demonstrates animus behind it
These man who co-wrote Virginia's discriminatory marriage amendment, Del. Bob Marshall (R), responded to yesterday's 4th Circuit ruling in favor of marriage equality by further proving why bans like the one he championed will all be invalidated in short order. Here are some of his animus-laden quotes:
"advocates and defenders of so-called same sex marriage are their own best undertakers for their hubris in attempting to deny and defy the 'Laws of Nature and Nature’s God'.”
"a civil right based on immoral behavior including acts that disqualify individuals from giving blood."
"Judges Gregory and Floyd, who opine that two men or two women may 'marry' each other do not define what they mean by 'marriage,' don’t explain what consummates a homosexual 'marriage' or why their decision does not support polygamy or marriages between adults and children 'who love each other.' Will three lesbian women in Massachusetts, a 'throuple,' move to Virginia to have their aberrant 'marriage' relationship sanctioned by Judges Gregory and Floyd?"
"a radical and immoral marriage regime on American citizens in defiance of the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God”
"tear the social fabric in ways that can scarcely be imagined"
[FULL COMMENTARY, via AugustaFreePress.com]
You have to wonder what is going through these increasingly option-less aggressors' noggins. One of the key reasons these marriage bans are falling is because Americans are waking up to what we equality activists knew years ago: that these bans are little more than hostility disguised as "marriage protection." Once you cut through the crap and realize the hostility that drives these marriage amendments, even folks less inclined to support LGBT rights generally find these bans impossible to support.
And yet the folks who birthed these biased babies think that doubling down on the animus is a smart strategy for moving forward? Really? I mean, don't let me stop you—but really?!
NOM to show rest of world its impressive ability to exacerbate loss
Back in the spring of 2013, I first told you about the National Organization For Marriage's burgeoning plans to start a global version of their failed American enterprise, which they are planning to called the International Organization For Marriage. Earlier this year, I also first revealed NOM's associations with CitizenGo, a sort of anti-gay version of MoveOn.org. But while I haven't heard much about either effort since those initial reports, Buzzfeed's J. Lester Feder reveals that NOM's global plans are still very well underway:
CitizenGo was conceived of as a kind of MoveOn.org for conservatives. It was based in Spain, but it had aspirations to be a global platform and now has staff working in eight languages, with plans to add Chinese and Arabic. It has an organizer in the U.S., too, named Gregory Mertz, who works out of the Washington offices of the National Organization for Marriage
Today, American ties seem much more about a shared vision to build a global conservative movement rather than leaning on stronger and wealthier U.S. partners for support. [Ignacio] Arsuaga, [Luca] Volontè, and La Manif Pour Tous President Ludovine de La Rochère were all in Washington on June 19 to support the National Organization for Marriage’s March for Marriage. Their more important business, however, might have been in a closed-door summit the next day, where representatives of around 70 countries met to discuss creation of an International Organization for Marriage, according to Volontè and another participant. A follow-up meeting is planned for next year.
FULL REPORT: The Rise Of Europe’s Religious Right [Buzzfeed]
What the hell is the sales pitch? "We are the organization that came into this fight when America had one marriage equality state and not federal rights for same-sex couples. Now there are nineteen states, the nation's capital, full federal recognition, a President who was handily re-elected after he came out for marriage equality, a new pro-equality court ruling every day, and consistent polling showing an ever-growing majority of citizens who oppose the NOM agenda. But trust us—get got this!"
"Oh we totally trust you," reply all of the international LGBT rights activists who are waiting for NOM to futz up their countries' resistance movements the same way NOM's embarrassed the conservative movement here in the states.
Bryan Fischer: Marriage equality supporters are like baseball's legendarily winning team
The '27 Yankees are famed for being really, really, really good. In fact, according to the sporting experts at Wikipedia, the team is remembered as one of the best in history. This team's mighty lineup is where the phrase "Murderers' Row" comes from.
Which is why I'm thrilled that one of the most antigay men in America, the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, seems to think those of us who are on the right side of the marriage issue are the modern equivalents of this winning team. In reference to North Carolina's Attorney General saying he would no longer challenge Team Marriage Equality in court, Fischer writes:
Suited up. But still usually lost.
If that's the framework you want to use, B, I'll take it. It's the most honest assessment I've heard from the AFA in some time.
On NC's Attorney General and the bipartisan hunt for a 'culture war' off ramp
North Carolina's Democratic Attorney General has announced that he will no longer defend his state's discriminatory marriage ban, as he believes it would be "futile" in light of today's 4th Circuit ruling in favor of equality:
And he's right. Marriage equality is inevitable, and people who are inclined to care about justice and their legacies want to be recorded on the right side.
But the politics of it are even more interesting. Increasingly we are seeing political figures from both sides of the aisle jumping at the chance to drop their past resistance to marriage equality (or in the case of Cooper and others, their defense of bad marriage laws) at the very first chance they get. It took Gov. Christie about a half a second after his state Supreme Court opened a path to marriage equality before he announced that his hands were pretty much tied. A similar thing happened in Pennsylvania, where Gov. Corbett (R) announced that he was out of options due to multiple courts' action on behalf of equality. And then there are the Democrats who might be inclined to support (like Cooper) but who just need that one little something—a ruling, a higher ranking supporter, safe poll numbers, a Biden, etc.—so they can come on out and offer their full and unqualified support. We marriage equality activists used to have to poke and prod and get on our knees and beg; people barely need a budge these days.
The truth is that a lot of political figures, from all parties and points of view, are ready to move on from this overwrought fight, which is why you are seeing friend and foe alike look for their easy entrance/exit. For a Democrat, as soon as that one lingering obstacle is moved even somewhat, it's time to dive in head first. For a Republican who might be worried about conservatives voters, it's a search for that one moment they can look too and ask, "eh, whaddya gonna do?" But for many—and an increasing many, at that—the hunt for the next available escape chute is fully on.
Which is good. Marriage equality is wonderful, while the rest of the world is kind of a mess. Maybe the next ten years can be defined by actual social issues that we solve rather than contrived social debates that we belabor?