Brian S. Brown is at it again. On behalf of National Organization for Marriage: Critical 48 Hours to Fight HR 5, the INequality Act. As I have previously stated, legitimate matching donor schemes are as rare as unicorns. People do not donate money contingent upon the largess of others.
On top of the matching donor dishonesty Brown is suggesting that donations to NOM will have some effect on the destiny of the Equality Act. How will NOM use those funds and how will that affect the Senate’s deliberations? Those questions remain unanswered as Brown picks the pockets of supporters.
In all honesty I doubt that we have the votes necessary for passage. Neither I nor Brown even know whether or not McConnell will allow the bill to come to the Senate floor.
Brown wades knee-deep into the turd pool:
As we’ve discussed, HR 5 is one of the greatest legislative threats we’ve ever faced. It proposes sweeping legal provisions to benefit the LGBT community at the expense of people of faith, churches, and all Americans. The legislation effectively makes demonstrating support for true marriage to be illegal discrimination. It also strips people of faith of critical religious liberty protections. And it imposes a radical gender ideology on the nation, allowing biological men into intimate areas like showers and bathrooms, thus stripping girls and women of their right to bodily privacy. Additionally, biological men will be able to compete in athletics against girls and women simply by asserting a female ‘gender identity’ even though they have a huge physical advantage.
“Demonstrating support for true marriage?” What does that even mean? How does one “demonstrate support?” Furthermore, in this country the marriages of gay couples are as “true” as those of two orthodox Catholics. Brian S. Brown’s disapproval is irrelevant. The measure makes discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity illegal just as it currently makes discrimination on the basis of religion illegal.
A rational reason to discriminate does not exist:
Take that baker for example. According to his religious beliefs same-sex marriage is invalid. So be it. He can hold that view and still bake a cake. No one is soliciting his approval and the cake does not constitute approval. He can comply with the law and no one dies.
The “bathroom” pretext for denying civil rights to transgender people is just that — pretext. Brown’s disapproval is based upon the fact that transgender people create a conflict with scripture.
Nothing in the Equality Act precludes schools from establishing reasonable criteria to prevent transgender girls and women from having an unfair advantage in athletics. It sure as hell isn’t “simply by asserting a female ‘gender identity.’”
The use of defensive quotes around gender identity indicates that Brown does not believe that gender identity exists. Public policy should not be based upon superstition or the ideology of superstitious fools.
In the final analysis this entire enterprise is illegitimate. Mr. Brown is using the Equality Act to raise money. Receiving funds is more important to him, at this time, than the effects of the act. That could change if the measure reaches the Senate floor but that would probably not occur (if it happens at all) until the second week in September when the August recess ends. Even then (assuming that enough GOPers are willing to vote “Yea”), Brown has to answer the question: “What does NOM presume to do about it?”
When and where has National Organization for Marriage ever been successful?
Can Brown convince the faithful that NOM can change the prospective votes of senators? Perhaps in that orbit Brown does not have to convince anyone of anything as long as he postures as his god’s servant.