Monday, March 26, 2012

Court documents prove NOM's plan to divide black, gay communities

Maggie Gallagher of NOM
The National Organization for Marriage's unsuccessful fight to skirt Maine's financial disclosure laws just backfired majorly on the group by revealing a  distasteful part of its game plan to stop marriage equality.

According to a court document that was uploaded online, NOM specifically worked to drive a wedge between the black and gay community on the subject of marriage equality:

According to page 11 of this document called Marriage: $20 Million Strategy for Victory:

3. Not a Civil Right Project 

The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks - two key democratic constituencies. We aim to find, equip, energize and connect African American spokespeople for marriage; to develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; and to provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots. No politician wants to take up and push an issue that splits the base of the party.

NOM has portrayed whatever African-American opposition to marriage equality its spotlighted as spontaneous attempts by leaders and members of the black community to keep its civil rights legacy from supposedly being "tainted" by a comparison to gay equality.

But now we see that there was nothing spontaneous about this. It was a cynically planned effort by NOM - which the organization continues to exploit - in order to drive a wedge between blacks and gays.

And notice how NOM says that one of the purposes of creating this division was to create a negative reaction from gay equality supporters against the African-Americans speaking out against marriage equality.

One doesn't have to spell out how this benefits NOM's efforts. The two sides attack each other with extreme anger causing magazine articles to be written about the division, news programs to focus on the division, and venomous chats to occur on places like Facebook and Twitter.

Some heterosexual African-Americans will let loose with homophobia against the gay community.  And some white lgbtqs will express racist comments about the black community. Both communities will be at each other's throats. There will be no intelligent conversations on the matter and neither community will benefit an iota.

And NOM will sit back and reap the benefits of causing this chaos.

It reminds me of an Aesop fable I once posted:

An Eagle had made her nest at the top of a lofty oak. A Fox, having found a convenient hole, lived with her young in the middle of the trunk; and a Wild Sow with her young had taken shelter in a hollow at its foot. The Fox resolved to destroy by her arts this chance-made colony. She climbed to the nest of the Eagle, and said: "Destruction is preparing for you, and for me too. The Wild Sow, whom you may see daily digging up the earth, wishes to uproot the oak, that she may, on its fall, seize our families as food." Then she crept down to the cave of the Sow and said: "Your children are in great danger; for as soon as you shall go out with your litter to find food, the Eagle is prepared to pounce upon one of your little pigs." When night came, she went forth with silent foot and obtained food for herself and her young; but, feigning to be afraid, she kept a look-out all through the day. Meanwhile, the Eagle, full of fear of the Sow, sat still on the branches, and the Sow, terrified by the Eagle, did not dare to go out from her cave; and thus they each, with their families, perished from hunger.

Moral - Gay folks and black folks can argue all day as to who gets to be the  "sow" and who gets to be the "eagle." But both groups better damn well recognize who the hell the fox is.

Editor's note - There are a lot of court documents and I'm sure that in the coming days, we will learn more about NOM's exploits. Stay tuned not only to this blog but several others.

Bookmark and Share

Anti-gay pundit claims that he is the victim

Scott Lively
Of all of the 36 anti-gay pundits on GLAAD's Media Accountability Project, I would say that Scott Lively has done more than enough to make the list and then some.

The following are his stats:

Former state director for the California branch of American Family Association, which Southern Poverty Law Center named a Hate Group, and formed anti-gay Watchmen on the Walls group based in Latvia.

Called for the criminalization of "the public advocacy of homosexuality."
Is directly linked to anti-gay legislation in Uganda, which makes simply being gay punishable by death.
- Because of his intense influence and work in Uganda, has been blamed for the death of equality advocate David Kato.
- Is now advocating for anti-gay activism in Moldavia.

However according to Lively, he is being attacked for supposedly telling a basic truth. At least that's what he implies in a recent piece on his Defend The Family webpage. He wrote the piece after a lawsuit was announced against him in federal court for his "activities" in Uganda.

'Is NOM pulling a deception in its Starbucks boycott?' and other Monday midday news briefs

NOM's Magic Half Hour -- Are They Lying About #DumpStarbucks Signatures? - I've never been one for turning the screws or kicking a religious right group when it's down (I know. A personal flaw), but apparently I'm not the only one with questions regarding NOM's wisdom with going after Starbucks. A good friend of mine and excellent blogger, Matt Algren (he was probably the first to call bull@^!$ on the charge that Obama appointee Kevin Jennings counseled an under-aged boy to have sex with an adult) noticed something strange about NOM's claim regarding the signatures on its Dump Starbucks petition. You be the judge.

Moneybomb to Defeat Amendment One - Amendment One can be defeated in North Carolina. But it will take some effort. Victories worth winning are worth fighting with for with all of your might. 
200+ Gays And Lesbians Marry In Ohio Mass Wedding - Hot damn!

Anoka-Hennepin School District Rebuffs Conservative Group’s Requests - About time those liars were told to back off.

List of Award Recipients: 23rd Annual GLAAD Media Awards Presented by Ketel One and Wells Fargo - The GLAAD Media Awards were held last weekend. Congratulations to all of the winners, particularly to the motion picture Pariah.

Bookmark and Share

NOM's 'Dump Starbucks' campaign a hysterical flop

Maggie Gallagher of NOM
On Wednesday of last week, the National Organization for Marriage announced a campaign to boycott Starbucks because of that organization's support of marriage equality. According to NOM’s press release:
The new protest campaign was announced after the annual Starbucks shareholders meeting today in Seattle, where NOM spokesmen queried the board on its new policies promoting gay marriage and demanded protection against discrimination for employees, vendors and customers who disagree.

"We respect the important role of businesses in providing goods, services and jobs, and that people of diverse moral views build great companies working together," Brown said. "But Starbucks has corporately, as an organization, endorsed and helped pass gay marriage in the state of Washington. Its executive vice president of partner resources has stated that gay marriage "is aligned with Starbucks business practices and upholds our belief in the equal treatment of partners. It is core to who we are and what we value as a company." Corporations should not take sides in a culture war that pits a company against half the American people, and nearly all its consumers in some international markets."

Of course this press release is totally different than what Brown was telliing NOM's supporters on its blog:

Dear Marriage Supporter,

We are urging consumers across the globe to "Dump Starbucks" because the massive international corporation has taken a corporate-wide position that marriage between one man and one woman should be eliminated and that same-sex marriage should become the norm.

Starbucks did nothing as extreme as Brown makes it sounds and its CEO, Howard Shultz, clearly explained that during the shareholders meeting in question.