Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Brian S. Brown outlines an agenda

Brian S. Brown
The email from Brian S. Brown, head of National Organization for Marriage, is titled “It's Time To Protect Marriage Supporters From Governmental Discrimination.” That of course indulges in the logical fallacy of begging the question. I qualify as a “marriage supporter” and there is no evidence that his constituency requires protection from the government. If anything they require protection from dishonest money-grubs.

According to Brown:
With Neil Gorsuch now on the US Supreme Court, as one of its last acts of the current term the Supreme Court decided to accept the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a critical case that highlights the growing problem of supporters of marriage being discriminated against by government and targeted for harassment and punitive punishment in violation of our constitutional rights.
Phillips broke the law and discriminated against a gay couple. That is inarguable. Brown is now claiming that it is Phillips who has been discriminated against. Presumably the Court will decide if that law is constitutional. I am cautiously optimistic that this case is going to break in our favor.

Highlights of Brown's narrative include:
He's happily served all clients, and continues to sell baked goods to anyone who seeks them regardless of their religious beliefs, politics or sexual orientation.
What? He did a survey? It is irrelevant. Phillips broke the law. He discriminated against a gay couple.
Contributing his artistry to a gay "wedding" is such a ceremony that Jack cannot in good conscience help with. So when two homosexual men asked him to design a cake for their "wedding" he politely declined.
You would think that we were forcing Phillips to marry another man. Brown can put the word wedding in quotes all he likes. The Catholic Church does not approve and neither does Brown. Yet, it is the law of the land. Too bad. There is no “polite” way to discriminate.
Predictably, the men sued and some months later, after enduring an onslaught of abuse from LGBT activists and a raft of negative publicity, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission determined that Jack was guilty of sexual orientation discrimination, ordered him and his staff to design cakes for gay ceremonies, and further ordered him to undergo a "re-education" program along with filing quarterly "compliance" reports.
“Re-education?” Sure. Just like North Korea. That consists of staff training to avoid further law breaking. Furthermore, to suggest that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission made a determination based on bad press is simply absurd. The average high school moot court would arrive at the same conclusion based up the very unambiguous law. And, in fact, the Colorado Court of Appeals upheld the decision and the Colorado Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Oh, and if you unlawfully discriminate against me, you bet your ass I am going to sue — “predictably” or not.

Behold the bullshit:
NOM is determined to end this type of targeting of people who hold true to the reality that marriage is and always will be the union of one man and one woman. Will you stand with us and help us with a financial contribution so we have the resources to argue for the rights of Jack Phillips and all marriage supporters?
Targeting? The law Phillips broke was duly authorized by the legislature and the governor. Targeting would describe the gay couple who suffered discrimination. Phillips wanted to make a point. He did so at his own peril. And NOM doesn't get to “argue” this case. NOM gets to file a friend of the court brief along with several score of other conservative Christian organizations. How much does it cost to author that brief? How much influence will this have over the case? Answers: Little and none.
It's outrageous that not only can LGBT extremists get the judicial elite to impose gay "marriage" on the nation, but that they can get their allies in government to punish anyone who disagrees and refuses to go along with the charade that marriage is anything other than the union of one man and one woman.
Ain't that just too fucking bad? Marriage equality arrived in the United States more than two years ago and not a single so-called traditional marriage has been affected in any way whatsoever. But we don't care. We neither seek nor require Brown's approval or the approval of the Catholic Church. If they don't like same-sex marriage they are not required to marry someone of the same sex. It's not a matter of disagreement or agreement. We do not care. We do, however, expect everyone to be law abiding which includes obeying unambiguous nondiscrimination laws. Those are not subject to personal approval.

So file your amicus brief. It's not going to matter one way or the other. Rarely do I agree with the late Justice Scalia. However, in Employment Division v. Smith his opinion for the majority made it perfectly clear that religious exemptions to valid laws do not exist. They threaten to make every law unenforceable. I expect the Court to act in accordance with that precedent. Again, I am cautiously optimistic.

NOM has a plan for which it demands financial support:

1. Conduct a strong public education campaign supporting NOM's legal team as we prepare to file amicus briefs with the US Supreme Court in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. The justices of the Supreme Court need to understand the devastation that their ruling redefining marriage has wreaked on the nation.
None of that is going to make the slightest difference. It's just a dishonest pretext for asking for money.
2. Working with allies, organize tens of thousands of Americans to contact Attorney General Jeff Sessions to demand that the Trump administration move forward with a long-promised Executive Order to protect individuals, pastors, churches and nonprofit groups who believe in traditional marriage from punitive actions against them by the government.
That is not up to Sessions and even if it were, it has no effect on state and local nondiscrimination laws.
3. Work with key champions in Congress, including Sen. Mike Lee and Rep. Raul Labrador, to reintroduce the First Amendment Defense Act to make permanent the types of protections that would be contained in an Executive Order and a victory before the Supreme Court. President Trump has already endorsed this type of legislation, but it has not yet been introduced into Congress.
When it became obvious that their legislation was a) unconstitutional and; b) short of votes, they sabotaged the bill by adding in pro-gay language. It is probably a dead issue.
4. As part of the public education campaign, we must highlight the utter hate that many on the left have for people who remain firm in their belief that marriage is as God created it – one man and one woman. This includes formally launching our First Freedom Initiative which, among other things, will highlight the animus and dangerous tactics of groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the grossly-misnamed Human Rights Campaign.
Sure. That is a dishonest appeal. We have no hate based upon the beliefs of others. We do get a tad riled up by discrimination. As I said, no one is forcing anyone to marry someone of the same sex. Clergy are not forced to solemnize same-sex marriages and houses of worship are not forced to host them. Re-branding the same nonsense is still the same nonsense. First Freedom Initiative? Please. No same-sex marriage has ever affected the free exercise of religion for so much as a single citizen.

And while we are at dishonest pretexts for extending arms — palms up, let's inaccurately bash SPLC and the Human Rights Campaign. Those are real advocacy groups that do real good. Neither exists for the purpose of raising money to continue to exist in order to raise money to continue to exist and so on ad infinitum.

Translation for all of thise: “Please send money! I ave nine children to feed!” It is nine, right? What will happen when Brown discovers that one of them is gay. There is that Male Sibling Effect to contend with.

Related content:

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.