NOM's stolen photo

http://www.nomblog.com/15222/

For this one, I've decided to break it down by sections, because, quite frankly, Mr. Brown is ridiculous. My responses will be in italics

My Friends,

Rachel Maddow and her friends on the left are all atwitter about a photo collage created for the www.NHforMarriage.com website that NOM is sponsoring with allies in New Hampshire who are working with us to repeal same-sex marriage there.

You may recall that marriage was redefined in New Hampshire in 2009 after Tim Gill funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into the pockets of Democratic legislators and Governor John Lynch. Lynch ran for office as a traditional marriage supporter, but he betrayed the people of New Hampshire when he agreed to sign the same-sex marriage legislation into law

Brian, who are you to attack Tim Gill for funneling money towards campaigns? After all, Brian, aren’t you pledging 2 million dollars to defeat the four Republican Senators who voted for marriage equality in NY? With all due respect, Brian, you don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to money issues, given NOM’s history of flouting campaign finance laws. Second, he didn’t BETRAY anyone. A majority of senators voted for it, and he signed it into law. You see, Brian, our government works by electing representatives who vote for us. Those representatives voted for it and Lynch agreed to sign it. That is not betrayal, that is how government works.

NOM is committed to overturning that terrible legislative decision, and the people of New Hampshire are with us. Last year, voters in dozens of towns passed referenda demanding their right to vote on the definition of marriage. The referendum measures passed overwhelmingly (the average vote was 63% Yes to 37% No). Not a single town that considered the issue defeated it. Then a year ago, the voters threw out the Democrats who had voted to redefine marriage and replaced them with an overwhelming pro-marriage majority!

Terrible in your opinion. Popular opinion would suggest that you are in the minority, Brian. And Brian, there is not “right to vote on the definition of marriage”. Why? Because, as much as you like to argue that marriage-equality supporters are trying to “redefine” marriage, allowing the populace to vote on a definition of marriage is by its very nature redefining something. Additionally, it sets two dangerous precedents. 1). Allowing the majority to vote on the rights of the minority, and 2). Allowing popular opinion to determine “definitions”. I’m sure Sarah Palin could scrounge up enough support to make refudiate a word.

It's no accident that Maddow and her allies in the gay activist community chose Tuesday to issue their breathless "expose" about NOM's photo "controversy"—on Tuesday the New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee voted overwhelmingly to repeal same-sex marriage! Neither Maddow nor her friends at the Human Rights Campaign can defend imposing same-sex marriage on New Hampshire with no vote of the people

Gay marriage has NEVER been imposed on anyone, Brian. We have three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. In cases like Massachusetts and Iowa, the judicial branch ruled that marriage equality was constitutional. In New Hampshire, the legislative branch voted on marriage. The people voted by voting in their state representatives and senators.

So they issue "reports" and press releases criticizing NOM over a photo collage! They object to us using a photo of a crowd scene, which symbolizes the tens of thousands of New Hampshire voters who are part of our effort. They're upset that the photo was not taken at a NOM rally. Seriously?! NOM using a common use photo in the public domain is considered a great scandal, yet they can redefine marriage—the most important social institution of society against the wishes of New Hampshire voters—and nobody is supposed to object?

Okay, Brian. I’ll play your game. So, I have taken the liberty of making a (badly) photoshopped image of a Nazi rally in WWII Germany, and superimposed your image over that of Hitler. I mean, a public image is a public image, right? And It’s not the photo that matters. It is symbolic of the effort of traditional marriage supporters like yourself. And again, it wasn’t against the wishes of New Hampshire voters. They voted in those politicians to represent their views. That, and again, public opinion supports marriage equality.

It's as if the institution of marriage gets mugged, and they complain about speeding in the neighborhood when someone rushes it to the hospital!

Mugged? Really? That’s the analogy you’re going to use? That’s pretty tasteless of you considering all of the gaybashing that goes on in the real world and bullying that leads to suicides, and the callous response of teachers, who tell students to "act less gay". But then again, Brian, I expect that from you, given your deep ties to the Catholic Church who says that the devil causes gayness. And I don’t know about you, but most people I know that have gotten mugged didn’t need to go to the hospital; they need to go to the police station to report it, and when they do, they don’t speed to get there or run. And just so we’re clear, you’re advocating speeding (breaking the law) in order to “fix marriage”. If that’s not Machiavellian “ends justify the means” I don’t know what is.

Let's teach Rachel Maddow and her pals at the HRC what's really important in this debate in New Hampshire. We've swapped out photos on the www.NHforMarriage.com site to avoid the distraction, now it's time to focus on the real controversy.

So you stopped plagiarizing and are now ready to focus on “the real controversy”. Would that be you now asking people to donate only $99 so that they can remain anonymous? Washington State ruled that there is no threat of harassment, after all, so what are you people afraid of? Don’t you want to take a public stand against marriage? Hell, Strom Thurman took a public filibuster stand against equal rights for blacks in the fifties.

Join with us to restore the law to what it was before Tim Gill and John Lynch hijacked it following hundreds of thousands in campaign contributions.

Call your legislators and ask them to support HB437 to restore marriage as the union of one man and one woman and reinstate civil unions for gay couples. And please make a contribution of $43.70 to help us win this battle. This is going to be a tough fight. Maddow and her uber-liberal allies can be expected to try every dirty trick in the book to defeat us because they know that if we are successful, it will be a tremendous setback for them. But by supporting HB 437 and making a contribution of $43.70 (or whatever you can afford), you'll be showing the left that we are going to win!

Hijacked? Are they terrorists now? And they didn’t hijack anything. IT WAS VOTED ON. Stop spreading your lies, Brian, because people will always be there to call you out on them. And $43.70 is a cute donation total. I like that you also failed to mention that it allows for civil unions for incestuous couples, too. Just for the record, you are okay with brother and sister marrying and having kids if it means marriage is “one man one woman”. And you can’t really accuse others of using dirty tricks, given that NOM bussed in supporters to protest gay couples getting married in NY on July 24^th, and that NOM constantly ignores campaign finance disclosure laws. NOM also has tried numerous scare tactics regarding children to try and win.

Mr. Brown, your attempt to get attention from the real issue here is far from admirable. NOM blatantly LIED to misrepresent its own public support, and then, when called out on it, says that it did not matter. It is great to know that you are okay with telling lies to support your own position, Mr. Brown. I can see that Ms. Gallagher has taught you well.