Apparently Brian S. Brown seeks to convince people that National Organization for Marriage had something to do with the confirmation of Neil Gorsuch. Therefore, it logically follows that people should send money to NOM to do, … something.
The subject of Brown’s plea is “Neil Gorsuch Delivers:”
Decisions of the US Supreme Court announced this week establish without question what an amazing contribution that newly confirmed justice Neil Gorsuch will make to the Court, potentially for decades to come. NOM went all in to fight for Justice Gorsuch’s confirmation, and our confidence in him was validated this week.
I have neutered the link which goes (surprise, surprise) to this:
|Among other things, NOM needs a web designer|
In 1987, televangelist preacher Oral Roberts authored a similar appeal. If his supporters did not send donations totaling $8 million dollars within three months, he warned that God would “call me home.” Pay or I die. NOM’s not there yet but they are sure closing in.
Once again, NOM implies that they can get the Court to overturn Obergefell. Exactly why that should happen remains a mystery. “The Catholic Church doesn’t approve” doesn’t usually work:
While Justice Anthony Kennedy did not announce his resignation from the Court as many had speculated he would do, he or any of the other justices who imposed gay ‘marriage’ on the nation could retire at any time. And when they do, we will need to fight for the appointment of a Gorsuch-like replacement, someone who is committed to reading the constitution as it was originally constructed, and not reconstructing the meaning of the constitution to suit a personal agenda.
Then, of course:
We’re very proud of Justice Gorsuch, and we hope you are pleased that NOM fought so hard for his confirmation. If you share our views, please consider making a financial contribution to support our work Your gift of $25, $35, $50, $100, $250 or $500 or more will go a long way to ensuring that we can continue to fight for conservative, “originalist” judges in the federal courts.
Summer is the slowest time of year for fundraising, which creates challenges for our finances. Please support NOM today with a generous gift. Thank you.
Brian S Brown
There are three or four links in the above text which go to, well, you know.
Gorsuch does concern me. I gather that he is one of the four (or more) justices who agreed to hear Masterpiece Cakeshop. When Scalia was still alive, they could not get four justices to agree to hear an almost identical case concerning a New Mexico wedding photographer (Elane Photography v. Willock).
Anything is possible but I do not see how the Court could defy precedent and grant a religious exception to perfectly valid laws. It would make almost every law in the land unenforceable. This could end up in the “be careful what you wish for” domain. The same justices who ruled in U.S. v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges could validate these nondiscrimination laws and stop, once and for all, the challenges.