Does NOM really believe its 'once and for all' silliness?

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

01/14/2014

by Jeremy Hooper

When talking about the truly ridiculous idea of a federal marriage amendment, something that couldn't even pass during the height of the Bush era "protect marriage" push, the National Organization For Marriage has begun using this messaging:

Sorry, NOM, but you lost me at "once and for all." I mean, surely even the most ardent NOM supporter doesn't believe that they have the ability to put a period on this conversation.

We live in an America where seventeen states plus D.C. have marriage equality (with one more, Utah, in limbo). In this America, married same-sex couples have full federal rights and benefits. In this America, all credible polling points to majority or near-majority support for full equality, with the trend lines showing an uptick with every eighteenth birthday. In this America, hundreds of thousands of same-sex couples are living their lives in loving, committed, contributive civil marriages. In this America, top rated sitcoms like Modern Family put same-sex weddings at the heart of their scripts and without any controversy and with retention of their ratings. In the more progress-peaceful of our jurisdictions (like here in Manhattan), there is no longer even a conversation to be had. Equality is the winner.

And yet here we have NOM suggesting that not only can they pass an FMA, but that when they do pass this unicorn of legislation, we gay folk are just gonna throw up our hands and be like, "Yup, you won, once and for all. Here, take my marriage license! Anything else you want to rob from my home, or are you good?" They think they get to tell us that we're done?

It's pure insanity, this idea that NOM has the ability and capital to shut this thing down. The fact of the matter—THE. FACT.—is that the anti-gay movement has no chance of "winning" this thing. None. Zero. Nada. Sure, they might pass one or two more pro-discrimination amendments or even when a court case or two, but it won't change anything. While those of us who fight for the right side of history still have to fight because groups like NOM still force us to do so, there is no doubt that we are the ultimate victors—and soon.

At this point, NOM can barely get an anti-gay conservative elected to a city council, much less roll back the fair, deserved, court tested rights of millions. Perhaps this "once and for all" messaging will bring in a penny or two from Americans who are still dupe-able enough to buy into this losing movement's spin. The rest of us know that this civil rights fight, like every prior civil rights fight, belongs to the side that protects rather than wounds the minority population at the heart of the conversation. We get the happily ever after; NOM gets the "once upon a time..."

space