Tax Day Tea Parties, as sponsored by Fox News, will heat up the nation next week. But, given the conservative propensity to attract crazy motherfuckers who are arming themselves to avoid the FEMA concentration camps, how will they explain the rather large number of people holding signs asking for Barack Obama's birth certificate and worrying about Democrats putting things up their butts?
I am sick to the teeth of the term "faith", and its corollary "people of faith". It's always bothered me, but as I was taking a shower (where I do much of my deep thinking about stuff that annoys me, perhaps because I feel I'm symbolically washing the ick off), I realized why. It's not just that it's one of those transparent attempts at rebranding, though that's part of it. It's that by rebranding an institution---religion---as a trait, a value really, you imply that people who do not subscribe to that institution don't have that value. The problem is that "faithful" has a couple of meanings. When "faith" is used as a substitute for the old-fashioned word "religion", it means that the person is "faithful", in that she has faith in god. The problem is the word also means steadfast, loyal, true, etc., and I have no doubt that one reason to use "faith" instead of "religion" is to borrow the connotations. It also implies that people who aren't religious don't have all these qualities of steadfastness, loyalty, honesty, etc. If these sorts of connotations weren't being brought to bear, then there would be no reason to switch the terms from "religion" to "faith".
You might laugh at these fundnuts, but they are crafty, and don't mind continuing to promote outright lies and deception, as you will see below, to make their point to less-informed people out there.
- There's a storm gathering...
- The clouds are dark, the wind is strong...
- And I am afraid...
- Some who advocate for same-sex marriage are taking the issue far beyond same-sex couples...
- They want to bring the issue into my life...
- My freedom will be taken away...
- I'm a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job...
- I'm part of a NJ church group punished by the government because we can't support same-sex marriage...
- I'm a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son that gay marriage is OK...
- But some who advocate for same-sex marriage have not been content with same-sex couples living as they wish...
- Those advocates want to change the way I live...
- I will have no choice...
- The storm is coming...
Damon Owens (of NOM): But we have hope...a rainbow coalition of people of every creed and color are coming together in love to protect marriage. Visit Nation for Marriage.org. Join us.
One Iowa has a petition up -- opposing the use of out-of-state money to attack the rights of Iowans at https://eqfed.org/campaign/marriagepetition
As Right Wing Watch and TipsQ note, the e-blast from NOM's Brian Brown is straining to make this a civil rights issue for the persecuted "Christians" without bringing up religion - check out "undermines the core civil rights."
By only one vote, the Vermont House just voted to override Governor Douglas's veto, overturning the common sense definition of marriage shared by people of diverse faiths, backgrounds, nations, and political parties. Today is truly a sad day for Vermont and this nation.But we take heart in knowing that this vote was not representative of what Vermonters understand marriage to be. We know that the Vermont Legislature did everything in its power to avoid allowing Vermonters to vote directly on the future of marriage.
In the wake of the Iowa Supreme Court decision and Vermont Legislature's action, the National Organization for Marriage will tomorrow launch a new national ad campaign that highlights how same-sex marriage undermines the core civil rights of those who believe in the simple truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
Today is indeed a sad day, but let all of us who understand that marriage is the union of a husband and wife redouble our commitment to ensuring that same-sex marriage does not spread throughout our nation, that religious liberty is protected, and ultimately that marriage is restored in these states as well for the sake of our children and grandchildren.
God bless,
Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
That is some seriously preposterous language. They realize that the beautifully written Iowa decision destroyed the religion argument. This just sounds desperate. Exactly what "core right" is Brian talking about? He's going to have to bring up r-e-l-i-g-i-o-n at some point, just so it can be blow away yet again.
UPDATE: Ha! Check out Jeremy's response at Good As You where he breaks it down lie by lie:
Related:
* National Organization for Marriage puts out 'Armegeddon' email UPDATE: HRC's rebuttal just landed in my inbox:
Human Rights Campaign Exposes National Organization for Marriage's Fake Ad for Fake Problems
Right-wing group does not have truth on its side, so it hires actors to spew lies; Audition reel uncovered online
The Human Rights Campaign, the nation's largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, released a statement and a factual rebuttal today on a television spot produced by the National Organization for Marriage and set to run on CNN, the Fox News Channel, and MSNBC in the coming days. In the ad, actors make disproven claims about marriage for lesbian and gay couples.
"What's next for the National Organization for Marriage? Will they hire legendary infomercial pitchman Ron Popeil to hawk their phony agenda?" said Human Rights Campaign Spokesman Brad Luna. "This ad is full of outrageous falsehoods-and they don't even come out of the mouths of real people."
According to sources, the phony ad is set to run eight times per day in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and California. The ad can be viewed here:
The National Organization for Marriage hired actors to peddle their lies about marriage for lesbian and gay couples. The audition reels can be viewed at and
The National Organization for Marriage and Maggie Gallagher is featured on the interactive wall of EndtheLies.org, a new HRC action-based website launched to confront the lies and distortions repeatedly used to defeat LGBT equality measures. National Organization for Marriage was added to the wall after the group created an anti- marriage equality radio ad that played in Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine.
"Again and again, opponents of equality have claimed one shallow victory after another by telling lies about who we are as individuals, as loving couples and as families. These lies must be called out for what they are every time the right-wing seeks to derail our progress by spreading distortions and inciting fear mongering," continued Luna.
EndtheLies.org's interactive wall features videos, audio, pictures, and quotes, calling out those who maliciously use lies and misinformation to interfere with the LGBT community's path to equality. By clicking on the panels of the wall, users can access more information about those highlighted, watch videos, add comments on multimedia discussion boards, and learn how to take action to counteract their misdeeds.
Along with the National Organization for Marriage, the wall currently features the American Family Association (AFA), the elders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern, and Utah State Senator Chris Buttars, Proposition 8 lawyer Ken Starr, right-wing media personality Rush Limbaugh, and GOP Chairman Michael Steele. Users can also nominate their own candidates for inclusion on the wall.
Background Ad Rebuttal
"The Real Truth Behind the Fake Ad"
The general argument of the ad is that the push for marriage equality isn't just about rights for same-sex couples, it's about imposing contrary values on people of faith. The examples they cite in the ad are:
(1) A California doctor who must choose between her faith and her job
(2) A member of New Jersey church group which is punished by the state because they can't support same-sex marriage
(3) A Massachusetts parent who stands by helpless while the state teaches her son that gay marriage is okay
The facts indicate that (1) refers to the Benitez decision in California, determining that a doctor cannot violate California anti-discrimination law by refusing to treat a lesbian based on religious belief, (2) refers to the Ocean Grove, New Jersey Methodist pavilion that was open to the general public for events but refused access for civil union ceremonies (and was fined by the state for doing so) and (3) refers to the Parker decision in Massachusetts, where parents unsuccessfully sought to end public school discussions of family diversity, including of same-sex couples.
All three examples involve religious people who enter the public sphere, but don't want to abide by the general non-discriminatory rules everyone else does. Both (1) and (2) are really about state laws against sexual orientation discrimination, rather than specifically about marriage. And (3) is about two pairs of religious parents trying to impose their beliefs on all children in public schools.
The real facts of each case are:
· The California doctor entered a profession that promises to "first, do no harm" and the law requires her to treat a patient in need - gay or straight, Christian or Muslim - regardless of her religious beliefs. The law does not, and cannot, dictate her faith - it can only insist that she follow her oath as a medical professional.
· The New Jersey church group runs, and profits from, a beachside pavilion that it rents out to the general public for all manner of occasions concerts, debates and even Civil War reenactments but balks at permitting couples to hold civil union ceremonies there. The law does not challenge the church organization's beliefs about homosexuality - it merely requires that a pavilion that had been open to all for years comply with laws protecting everyone from discrimination, including gays and lesbians.
· The Massachusetts parent disagrees with an aspect of her son's public education, a discussion of the many different kinds of families he will likely encounter in life, including gay and lesbian couples. The law does not stop her from disagreeing, from teaching him consistently with her differing beliefs at home, or even educating her child in a setting that is more in line with her faith traditions. But it does not allow any one parent to dictate the curriculum for all students based on her family's religious traditions.
It took about 48 hours for my prediction that the right wing ravings about the Obama Threat would turn into a shootout with the feds before the first act of such violence occurred---hard right wingnut Richard Poplowski shot three Pittsburgh police who had shown up to his mother's house after she asked them to come take him away because he was trespassing. The event was overshadowed in the media by the Binghamton shootings. What's interesting about this particular crime is how it resembles and differs from the pattern I described. Right wing nuts in the Clinton administration would concoct some justification for why federal authority didn't apply to them, then break some law that would cause the authorities to come out, exchange gunfire with the police instead of surrendering, and then become right wing martyrs when someone in their compound got shot. Instead of buying land and holing himself up there while declaring himself a sovereign nation or whatever, Poplowski took a shortcut and ambushed the police by going over to his mother's house with an AK-47 and getting her to call the cops to get rid of him. He also didn't martyr himself, and he had no children on hand as useful martyrs.
Yet another state falls prey to the homosexualists, as the Vermont Legislature voted to override the veto of a marriage equality bill by Gov. Jim Douglas today. Between Iowa, Vermont, and Washington, DC (its Council voted today to recognize same-sex marriages from other states), the Sodomy Squadron is well on its way to completing its mission to destroy heterosexual marriage. Run for the hills...they are ready to write off New England and move out West and South...
More flailing below the fold.
Actual Freeper QuotesWell, add Vermont to the list of useless states I won’t spend any money in again.
Wouldn’t expect anything different from Vermont. Too bad such a beautiful state has to be infected with socialists.
not surprising the homo’s have been invading that state for years. They now Will move their money to other states and pick those states off
ME, NH,NY, NJ, RI,IL,Ohio, WA,OR,CO, all take note
homo’s coming to a state near you
no matter how may states they get it in which will never be mine then AI along with my kids will never accept them as married nor are they normal
I would like to see polygimists get their marriage in those states now
hey why not, lets see if the liberals and homo’s think that religious group should have their marriage and so called rights
This is essentially awful, but the one silver lining is that this calumny was done by a legislature which--presumably--reflects the wishes of its constitutents, and not some unelected black-robed mullahs on the VT Supreme Court. From what I understand of the political demographics of the "Green Mountain" state, this is probably popular with most Vermonters. Pity.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont ain’t exactly the creme of the crop. Three of them you’d expect this BS from and the other one had the general will of their people denied by, yet again; judges.
shame that VT was once the most conservative state in the union but it comes a time when those few conservatives left have to say , time to move out and move on
my wife got out of MA and now we are down here in the south we make our votes count, our state gets our money and it does not go to liberal agenda’s and we helped to get the constitutional change to the FL state constitution.
infact get all conservatives out of the New England area and if one million people moved out and moved south then the laws can be changed for ever to stop liberals
CA, is lost so two million conservatives move out to CO,NM,AZ and it changes the game and political landscape not to mention who would now pay for their liberal agenda’s
This looks like the MO of the gay marriage activists:
1. Have gay marriage put on the ballot.
2. Ignore the results if they don’t go your way, throw a fit.
3. Take your case to the legislature, where it’s legalized anyway. Screw the people!
4. Gay marriage legalized. Those silly citizens, thinking they had a say... Checkmate!
notice now one state has voted FOR homo’s to be married. that is because the majority of folk do not think it is normal for a man to poke another man up the arse or a woman wear a strap on pretending to be a woman. not normal and not natural, so for those homo’s reading this. you are certainly not accepted nor are you normal, you can pretend you are married but you are far from the truth. If what you do is your business then stop the freak parades, stop telling us that you like to poke men up the arse or wear a strap on, stop telling us how you have special rights when you clearly do not according to the constitution
Actual Freeper QuotesEVERY POLIGIMIST NOW SHOULD BE GETTING THEIR MARRAGE LEGALISED AS SHOULD THE WHACK JOBS WHO WANT TO MARRY THEIR DOG
Will you homo’s back that marriage and say it is their right. Only until those groups do this then people will wake up and say enough is enough, one man and woman is marriage , nothing else is close to marriage
for the record to you homo’s I ma not old nor am I religious, I just think you are mentally perverted and sick and guess what so does most folk so stop trying to say it is only religious types against you
we are down here in the south I live in Louisiana in a conservative area and I can’t imagine stomaching was those liberal/socialistic states spew out. I would drown in my own vomit (sorry to be so graphic) if I had to live in any of these states. It is unfortunate because these states are truly beautiful but only in a scenic sense.
for years liberals, aging hippies and homo’s moved tot he state as they were outcasts but then they started to get a foot hold of the state and now are in charge of it.
Believe it or not but on a couple of homo sites they actually tell homo’s where to move and whom to vote for so the agenda can be pushed. Once it has been done then they move on
Look at the MA homo’s who first got married, they moved to other states and did tings like well I want a divorce you have to recognise my marriage or we are here in this new state and we want benefits
It is not marriage they want but it is their agenda tom be accepted and pushed onto the masses
Like I said the only way people will now wake up is for every kind of group to use the same argument for their marriage to be legal. Every argument the homo’s used can be used for other groups and the judges cannot by rights stop their kind of marriage.
There is no comparison between Iowa and the other three states. Sixty-two percent of Iowans oppose gay marriage. And, what happened in that state is nothing short of tyrannical.
This is all according to the “New England Project” that the gays launched years ago as a springboard to national homo recognition. Yep. Look for Maine, Rhode Island and New Hampshire to turn soon. New Hampshire is heartbreaking to me... NH was pretty solid a Red State not that long ago, but I think it's gone forever, no turning back. Too many Massachusetts voters migrated to NH (to escape high taxes no less), and have infected the state like a cancer.
It's only a matter of time that hubby and I are outta Connecticut for good. CT going gay was like the final nail in the coffin... the people had no vote over it, one activist judge decided it was "time to get with the times". The high taxes are killing us as well. Just a matter of time...
The next step, BTW, is a federal lawsuit under the “full faith and credit” clause to require all states to recognize the gay marriages performed in those states where it is legal.
And that’s why we need a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex “marriage.” Personally, I’d be willing to make a deal with the ‘rats in congress to the effect “we’ll let you put FOCA in the constitution if you give us a “one man/one woman marriage amendment”. I think the ‘rats would be happy to throw the pooves under the bus for a deal like that. Sure, it sucks having FOCA enshrined in the Constitution, but abortion is a fait accomplit—even if Roe v. Wade went the other way it still would be (with just a few more limitations). Same-sex “marriage” is far more corrosive to the cohesivenss of the family structure than anything else imaginable.
NOW can we clearly state the Federal Marriage Amendment is required. Full Faith and Credit attacks are now a certaintly and it only takes ONE kook judge to force this on the whole country.
You are wrong. The Full Faith and Credit Clause has never permitted one state to extend it's laws to the rest of the nation (See Nevada v. Hall.) Moreover, the Constitution specifically gives CONGRESS the right regulate under the Clause (which it has done so with the Defense of Marriage Act.)
Finally, there is a longstanding recognized public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. There is a reason that the homosexual activists have desperately kept their cases out of Federal Court. They know that they will lose.
You say we need an amendment.
I need a billion dollar bailout.
My wish is just about as likely to be fulfilled as yours.
When we can’t even elect a majority in Congress, how in the h*ll are we going to get an amendment passed, something at least 10x more difficult?
Simply boycott the states that allow the deviants to gain power over the asylum.
_8x12_300_dpi.jpg)
Remember the Michelle Obama-homeless shelter-cell phone brouhaha from last month?