In a recent Tea Party Unity conference call Brian Brown of the The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) not only tried to sell NOM as a “libertarian” and that the Tea Party should get behind them in denying the gay community its civil rights.
“There is really one or two outcomes that’s going to happen in this: either we’re going to have the state embrace this new definition of marriage and use the power of the state to punish, repress and marginalize those of us that know that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, or we’re going to have the state recognize the truth about marriage. Ours is actually a libertarian argument. We’re not arguing that the state create marriage, the state does not create marriage, but the state has to recognize the truth that marriage is by its nature the union of a man and a woman. When it abandons that truth, you’re giving the power to the state to call black white and white black, to put a falsehood into the law and a state that can do that is a state that pretty much can do anything.”
At one point in the conference call Brown took a call from the infamous hatermonger Brian Camenker of the anti-gay hate group MassResistance who challenged Brown about this selective language use, asking why NOM doesn’t just admit that homosexuality is a “perversion.” Brown admitted that he didn’t think harsher language could sway Supreme Court Justice Kennedy, but he encouraged, yes encouraged extreme hate group’s like Camenker to keep doing their own thing and keep the extreme anti-gay hate and rhetoric flowing:
CAMENKER: It’s concerning to a lot of people that the arguments being used in the various court cases concede that homosexual relationships are legitimate and not a perversion or what have you, we just don’t like them, and we wonder if there was more of a hard stance that they are not legitimate, that it is perverse, unnatural and what have you, that we might have some better success in some of the cases. [...]
BROWN: Whenever I’m asked about what I think about homosexuality, I’m very clear, I believe and as a Catholic I believe in the traditional teaching of our church. I think that sex is reserved for marriage, period. As far as the legal arguments go we may differ. I think a lot of the legal arguments have been made in the Prop 8 case especially have been made to speak to [Justice] Kennedy and Kennedy has already found in the Lawrence case, for example, that states can’t ban sodomy. So it’s not likely that a stronger argument about homosexuality is really going to shift Kennedy.
I know some people think we need to focus more on homosexuality. All I’ll say is that when asked I state what I believe and many of the religious supporters that we’ll have at the march clearly will stand up and proclaim biblical truth on marriage, but I’m not sure whether legally that is the best strategy. Also, different groups need to do different things, not all groups have to do the same thing. So folks that are taking a harder line in focusing more on homosexuality, there need to be different groups doing different things
More unadulterated lies, hate and uneducated trash from the uneducated trash Brain Brown. But he does tip NOM and his own hateful hand proving once again that it’s not at all about same-sex marriage but about hate and bigotry pure and simple.
Listen to the audio via RightWingWatch