Saturday, September 12, 2015

We get it Brian Brown - NOM expedited the release of Kim Davis

Brian S. Brown

Saturday morning Brian Brown, head of National Organization for Marriage, wants us to know; “What a Week For Marriage.” Brown's problem is that NOM has never accomplished anything of lasting value and these days they are barely going through the motions. NOM exists exclusively as an employment vehicle. Those who are on that payroll spend their time attempting to convince potential donors that NOM is using their donations to achieve meaningful results. They exist, therefore they get paid.

According to Mr. Brown:
Thanks to enormous public pressure brought to bear by NOM and our allies — pressure that resulted in hundreds of thousands of Americans signing petitions demanding that Kim be released and that the religious liberty right of Americans be enacted — Kim Davis was unexpectedly freed from jail by federal judge David Bunning, the rogue judge who had her imprisoned for six days.
Really? Because of his devotion, his god has given Brian Brown the ability to read minds, including Judge Bunning's. When did he dial-in the cause for Davis' release and why didn't Brown know in advance? Furthermore, these days Brown replaces the word “activist” with the word “rogue” when referring to jurists who make decisions that he does not approve of. Judge Bunning is apparently a “rogue” for enforcing his injunctions in accordance with Article Three of the Constitution. Next time he will check with Brown or his local bishop first, I'm sure.

Brown further explains:
I don't think it was a coincidence that Kim was freed last Tuesday, because that was the day that NOM worked with Governor Mike Huckabee, Liberty Counsel and others to organize a massive rally at the courthouse demanding that she be released.
“I think, therefore I get paid.” About the only organizing that Brown and NOM did was to beg Huckabee to be a minor participant in what was clearly Huckabee's rally. Lost in all of this demagoguery is the simple fact that, due to the efforts of Judge Bunning, gay couples obtained marriage licenses, got married and will continue to get marriage licenses in Rowan County, Kentucky. Kim Davis was rendered irrelevant. NOM and Brian Brown remain irrelevant.

Brown explains:
NOM has worked hard to defend Kim Davis because she represents an incredibly important principle — that no American should be forced into participating against their will in something as illegitimate and unjust as same-sex 'marriage.' This goes for bakers, florists, inn keepers, photographers and pizza parlor owners, just as it goes for local government clerks.
NOM did absolutely nothing “to defend Kim Davis.” Nothing more than sending a couple of emails — coincidentally begging for money. And some tweets. Clicking on “send” is just so tedious.

Later on, Brown cites NOM chairman John Eastman's September 8 article in National Review. Good. This allows me to compress two pieces into one.
NOM's Chairman, John Eastman, wrote a brilliant article for National Review in which he explains the moral imperative that citizens resist an unjust law and refuse to comply with its dictates. Quoting extensively from the sharply-worded dissents in the Obergefell marriage ruling, Dr. Eastman lays bare any pretense that the majority relied on constitutional principles to impose same-sex 'marriage' on every state in the nation. Instead, he makes clear that it was an act of judicial supremacy that seeks to elevate the opinion of five judges over the words and meaning of the constitution itself.
Brilliant he says. The subtitle of Eastman's piece reads:
When the Supreme Court oversteps its bounds, citizens are right to resist.
“Oversteps its bounds” according to whom exactly? Does the word “citizens” include government officials? Eastman's subtitle summarizes the problem with this entire polemic. What he really means is that if the Catholic Church does not like a ruling by the Supreme Court then Christians are right to resist even if they are government employees. I really, really think that the Supreme Court overstepped its bounds in District of Columbia v. Heller. Can a clerk who feels as I do refuse a permit?

According to Eastman's logic no Supreme Court decision is compelling because every ruling settles a controversy. Thus every decision by the Court might produce a group of citizens who think that the Court overstepped its bounds.

Eastman's piece goes downhill from there:
The double standard on display is palpable. I don’t recall Keegen or any of the other self-righteous, newfound <sic> devotees of the rule of law calling for the resignation of Kentucky’s attorney general when he refused to defend his state’s marriage law …
“Keegen” would be Michael Keegen of People for the American Way. While I find it fascinating that Mr. Eastman would label others “self-righteous” Kentucky's AG (Jack Conway) was acting within his lawful discretion. Also, Mr. Conway was not defying a federal court order.

Eastman has represented NOM about a half-dozen times. Little wonder why he has yet to win a case. Yet Brown goes on for several paragraphs about the great wisdom of Eastman.

Eventually Brown gets to the whole point of this exercise (highlighting added):
Please Support NOM

I conclude with a request for your support. Some of what you see of our work is quite visible, while other elements are behind the scenes. In the last week alone, we sent over one million emails to help publicize the Kim Davis situation, built and launched two websites to help mobilize people to show their support or donate to help Kim and her family, helped organize the rally at the courthouse attended by thousands of supporters, launched social media blasts in defense of marriage, published articles, gave dozens of media interviews, and undertook myriad other activities all in pursuit of enacting protections for people to live out their beliefs of marriage in their daily lives, and to further an environment that will one day lead to the repeal of the illegitimate Supreme Court ruling redefining marriage. All of this work costs money, money that we don't have sitting in reserve. We depend on you to contribute funds each month so that we can continue the important work we do.
I love the part about the emails and social media. How much did it cost to send those emails? What is the price per tweet these days? What did any of that actually accomplish? The ruling in Obergefell is “illegitimate” because the Catholic Church doesn't like it. Secular government is such a nuisance. As for the NOMmers; They exist, therefore they get paid (my apologies to Mr. Descartes).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.