Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual
Jennifer Roback Morse, who was one of the National Organization For Marriage's top surrogates in the years between Prop 8 and the Supreme Court cases, is just one of the latest to pretty much admit that her side has lost the argument. In a recent speech to Biola University, Morse admits that [a] the Supreme Court essentially issued a "rolling Roe v. Wade" that will ultimately give marriage equality to the entire nation and [b] that she must now, begrudgingly, move on to arguments base more in the emotional and the spiritual (read: her opinions) rather than stick with the arguments that keep losing in courts, legislatures, and voting booths.
You can watch the full talk if you care about her views on career women delaying their choices to start families (the topic of this speech). But for the purposes of this post, you only need to watch the first four minutes:
The thing is, this is where these "pro-family" folks should have always been directing their energy. Had they spent their time working on shaping the culture, helping those who subscribe to their beliefs, maintaining certain views within their churches, and pushing for more people to live in accordance with their faith views, few of us would have had any problem with their work. Most of us wouldn't have even noticed them, frankly.
The problem, of course, is that the instead chose to take this very same basis and inject it into matters of shared public policy. They attempted to use their faith-driven opposition as a way to reject our civil rights. And that is, obviously, why they ended up losing the intellectual argument. They attempted to overreach and eventually people caught on.
So now Ms. Roback Morse is going to focus on "cleaning up" messes that she sees involving but not limited to LGBT rights? Fine! Grab a mop and a broom and start washing away all perceived ills. Just don't go to court and claim that your personally-held and theologically-driven perception is a mandate to shape public policy.
Prop 8 defense attorney now planning lesbian daughter's wedding
The Associated Press reports an astounding footnote that you can use to regale your friends this weekend:
[Charles] Cooper, the lawyer who argued before the Supreme Court in favor of upholding California’s ban on gay marriage learned while he was handling the case that one of his children is gay and now is helping her plan her wedding with another woman
Prop 8 lawyer's views on gay marriage evolving [AP via UT San Diego]
In a related story: Antonin Scalia will do a guest arc on Modern Family as Mitch and Cam's wedding officiant. Maggie Gallagher to be the flower girl.
Okay, I'm making that up. At least I think I am. The way this thing is changing, who knows?!
If you can't afford your event, NOM, perhaps you should just cancel
Even though it got virtually no attention last year, and even though its bussed-in crowds were quite dismal (something honest conservatives even admitted), the National Organization For Marriage is insisting on having a second "March For Marriage" in D.C. They just need their supporters to pay for the damn thing:
We are in the midst of intense preparations for the March, taking place this June 19th. We are securing permits, organizing logistics, signing contracts, making arrangements with speakers...all of which constitute large up-front costs.
And that's why we're launching a campaign to raise $100,000 by the end of April to support this essential initiative.
Essential initiative? Really? I mean, at least last year there were Supreme Court cases that they hoped they could sway with a high turnout. This year, there isn't so much as a bill that has a reasonable chance of moving through Congress. They are simply showing up in D.C., a jurisdiction with marriage equality, to make their opposition more known than it already is. What is this going to accomplish, exactly?
Even if you adamantly oppose same-sex marriage, there are surely better things you could be doing with both your time and your money. To me, this (and that same evening's high dollar gala) seems much more like a way to keep NOM in its comfortable K Street office than it does anything else.
A hill of beans: 'Ex-gay'-defending legal firm selling coffee to fund discriminatory endeavors
Exceedingly anti-LGBT lawyer Charles LiMandri is the head of the operation, and anti-LGBT activist Maggie Gallagher is the chair of the board. Their star client is the "ex-gay" advocacy firm JONAH. This is how the so-called Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund is now funding their anti-LGBT endeavors:
True to its cause, I hear the coffee will curdle in the cup whenever a gay person even thinks of adding...
Which is weak. I'll stick with Starbucks.
Anti-gay talker Steve Deace lets LGBT movement know: we're about to sue churches, apparently
In truth, the consumer fraud legal case involves an organization, not a church. And no one is trying to hide it. For the past year-and-a-half, the Southern Poverty Law Center's lawsuit against Jews Offering New Alternatives for Healing (JONAH) for allegedly violating New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act when it provided its so-called "conversion therapy" services to impressionable gay clients has been firmly imprinted on public record for consumption by anyone with an ability to access Google. We are proud of rejecting an offensive form of "therapy" that all credible scientific outlets (and the Republican governor of New Jersey) reject as fraudulent and/or dangerous.
But when you take that piece of information, as relayed by anti-gay pastor Jim Garlow, and then filter it through another anti-LGBT radio host, Steve Deace, who is determined to make LGBT activists seem like "fascists" and the politically involved people who really overstepping religious bounds, this is how it comes out to supporters and the eleven social conservatives Deace tagged in the post:
Of course there isn't one grain of truth in the twisted version of facts that Mr. Deace's dangerous game of telephone is shouting out as reality. There isn't a credible LGBT activist or group with even much interest, much less a goal, in "targeting" any church's teachings. Sure, LGBT people who are committed to a particular faith might be advocating change from within the religious perspective to which they subscribe and that they hold dear. And yes, there are faith-centered LGBT groups that would like to see sweeping changes within the religious community overall. But there is not even the inkling of an effort to legally target churches for what they preach. I would think that would go without saying.
But these days, it apparently must all be said. The anti-LGBT far-right, dismayed by a sheer inability to win just about anything resembling a victory, has gone into a truly bizarre and somewhat frightening panics mode where they will say and do just about anything to make us look awful, if not evil. They now use words like "homo-fascist" and "jihad," and phrases "gay Gestapo," as if those are normal, okay things that people say in fair debate. They turn our most basic of stands in support of our selves and our families into supposed acts of aggression against them (because it's always about them). They, the crowd that has been using personally-held faith against our legal rights for decades now, have convinced themselves that we are coming for their religion. And they are now messaging all this out in the most hyperbolic ways imaginable, in hopes that they can turn this increasingly personal shotgun approach to animus into a new phase of their political movement.
The "homo-fascists" are going after churches? Sure, why not? After all, this is throw-it-at-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks-time. And should their games of telephone go from rhetorical viciousness to literal, in-the-streets aggression? Why that's just a "culture war" casualty, I guess.
Audio: Bored on an apparently too factual weekday, Richard Land pushes 'gays are sexually abused' lie
Longtime Southern Baptist something-or-other Richard Land is filling in this week for Tony Perkins on the Family Research Council's daily talk show. As you will hear in this clip, he is keeping the rabidly anti-gay myths alive while the boss is away. Right Wing Watch brings us the clip:
So offensive to both LGBT people and all of the elders we encountered while growing up. Implicit in this baseless claim that the far-right loves to cite without backing is the idea that someone close enough to us to have access made some sort of untoward advance at the expense of both our innocence and heterosexuality. Because it's not enough for them to go after us and our adult rights. No, no—they have to call into question and demean our childhood memories, family members, older friends, and just about anyone who they can "find out" as having "made us" who we are.
But they're of course the victims, y'all.
It seems when you equate gay folk with those who sleep with animals, it sticks; funny how that works
The Lansing Board of Water and Light in Lansing, Michigan, was planning on running a Duck Dynasty lookalike contest. However, once a local customer wrote to tell the board about Phil Robertson's disturbing comments equating homosexuality with bestiality, the folks in charge quickly changed their plans:
After receiving [a local's] email, “it took about a minute to decide to drop the contest,” BWL spokesman Steve Serkaian said in an interview. “We didn’t want any controversy from this matter to detract from what has been a longstanding, family-friendly event whose proceeds are donated to charitable causes.”
FULL: 'Duck Dynasty' contest dropped from Lansing BWL event [Lansing State Journal]
Because words have consequences. Mr. Robertson had every right to say what he said (or the many things he has said), and the A&E network has the right to keep him in the cast. But no one is free from scrutiny. Phil Robertson's words have forever marred that show's light, fun, family-friendly vibe. Mr. Duck Dynasty has, on several occasions, given voice to animus—and that animus will keep many decision makers from getting in bed with controversy (even those who might personally agree with him). When Mr. Robertson, on his own accord, chose to turn a press opportunity into a condemnatory act, he chose to connect his valuable property to harsh controversy. That's on him.
Of course Fox News' resident anti-gay shit-stirrer, Todd Starnes, is trying to run this his the latest "we're the real victim" routine. Which should tell the Lansing BWL that it absolutely, without a doubt, 100% made the right choice here.
Video: A new low for Robert Oscar Lopez; anti-gay 'bisexual' peddles offensive claims on Bryan Fischer's show
Game over, ROL. With this, all credibility is gone. Forever. Out the door. You are an anti-gay activist who clearly puts that agenda above all else. Stop pretending, big guy.
*On second thought, I guess he's not pretending. In one of the most insane pieces of anti-LGBT commentary I've ever read, he writes in American Thinker: "If I have to choose between homophobes who will protect children’s rights to a mother and father and pro-gay advocates who think homosexuals have a right to take kids from other people, guess what: I’ll work with the homophobes."
As you choose. Birds of a feather, frankly.