Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

NOM in Rochester, MN: Return of the sparsely-attended parking lot

NOM Tour Tracker Right-wing

(Today our team is coming to you from Rochester, MN, home of the Mayo Clinic and 153 miles southeast of yesterday’s visit in St. Cloud (they actually had to drive back through St. Paul, where we were on Wednesday, to get here!). If you missed yesterday’ s dueling rallies in St. Cloud, MN, you can find coverage here. You can also find coverage from the big rallies in St. Paul, including video of an especially moving equality rally under the rotunda in the Minnesota State Capitol, by clicking here and here -Adam)

By Arisha Michelle Hatch

The NOM rally has just begun and not many people – be they NOM supporters or equality activists – have found their way to this rural Minnesota church- the New Life Worship Center, which is set in the middle of a large green pasture.

New Life Worship Center in Rochester MN

We count a total of 18 NOM attendees, 9 NOM staffers/volunteers, and 2 priests in yet another parking lot:

Anti-equality supporters in Rochester, MN

(And yes, that’s our old friend, Minnesota Family Council’s Chuck Darrell, of yesterday’s interview fame, who is speaking)

This recalls the #NOMTurnoutFAIL at the parking lot in Lima, Ohio:

NOM's empty-parking lot rally in Lima, Ohio

This event was like that, only with more priests. Actually, if you look at the two images, there’s not a lot of difference.

7 pro-equality supporters stand about 1,000 feet away in this very remote and rural location. We’re in the parking lot witnessing the event. However, the Rochester Olmstead Central Command, a mid-sized RV unit filled presumably with police officers, found the New Life Worship Center just fine; we counted seven police officers.

The local NBC affiliate came to interview Brian Brown, but drove off just before the rally began. One other non-NOM camera crew here.

More to come…

UPDATE BY ARISHA (10:48 PST): In the middle of the rally. The sound system went ironically as Brown spoke of being silenced by equality activists. Whoops. Nonetheless, he kept talking until the sound was quickly repaired.

Our old friend, Chuck Darryl, just finished speaking. He stuck to his traditional talking points speech from St. Cloud, veering completely off-message only once.

“There’s this revisionist notion that faith stops [at the church],” Darrell began. “They believe the lie about the separation of church and state… and what happens is there’s no Christian biblical mindset or voice.”

UPDATE BY ADAM (11:26 PST): Here’s one of the pro-equality supporters, Bob Werner, being interviewed by the local Channel 6 news:

Bob Werner, a pro-equality supporter, being interviewed in Rochester, MN

Phyllis has the video of the interview, which we’ll have up later today.

UPDATE BY ADAM (12:02 PST): A really weird quote from Brian Brown at today’s rally (h/t LLB from the comments):

If we do not stand up for marriage we will be treated under the law as bigots.

One interpretation is that this plays along with NOM’s effort to paint themselves as the poor, oppressed minority standing up for “civil rights”. E.g., if Brown and his comrades do not “stand up” for marriage by using that frame, the rest of the world will see them as bigots denying freedom and equality to their peers.

Or, another interpretation from Str8 AlEye Mikael in the comments:

“If laws protecting gays are passed, we will have to confess to our true nature, and we will be held lawfully accountable for the ways in which we treat those different from ourselves!” There’s a word for that, and I think it rhymes with spigot…

Also, I will have video coming of a today’s chat between Arisha and Brian Brown (it’s a lengthy one), as well as video of the local TV interview with Bob Werner, a local equality supporter.

UPDATE BY ADAM (1:05 PST): Remarkable quote #2:

“It is 1972 for marriage. This is the same as the time as before Roe v. Wade. . . . What if William Wilberforce listened to those telling him not to bring his religion into the public square?”

Right, because same-sex marriage equality is the same thing as the slave trade. William Wilberforce was a prominent British abolitionist.

118 Comments

  • 1. Ķĭŗîļĺę&  |  July 30, 2010 at 3:46 am

    Subkirillexxing

  • 2. Alan E.  |  July 30, 2010 at 3:53 am

    underwriting

    As a side note, we figured out how to put people on hold and make a conference call after 10 minutes of some hilarious conversation. I wish it was being recorded.

  • 3. Ronnie  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:04 am

    Another Church…I am sooooooo not surprised…this image feeds into that proven fact that NOM is forcing their religious superiority onto the American public. Preaching to the choir is filled with so much irony for this "event"

    <3…Ronnie

  • 4. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:08 am

    "……and what happens is there’s no Christian biblical mindset or voice.”

    YEAH!!! There shouldn't be a Christian mindset or voice in Government you idiot!!
    Stupid NOMbies!!!

    subsubsubing

  • 5. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:09 am

    "They believe the lie about separation of church and state."

    Um …

    *runs back to the questions thread*

  • 6. Linda  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:10 am

    "There is no Christian Biblical mindset or voice…"

    Precisely! And proof of their 'Theocracy' agenda.

  • 7. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:12 am

    me too~

  • 8. PamC  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:14 am

    Are there actually Catholic priests in attendance? A church called "New Life Worship Center" usually would do anything to distance themselves from Catholicism. I would say "strange bedfellows" except for the ugly connotations.

  • 9. fiona64  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:20 am

    Yeah, I guess that whole 1st Amendment and Treaty of Tripoli business escapes them.

    (For those who don't know, treaties hold force of law unless revoked — which the Treaty of Tripoli has never been. Article 11 specifies that this is NOT a Christian nation.)

    Love,
    Fiona

  • 10. Str8 AlEye Mikael  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:22 am

    Separation of church and state is a lie? Oh man, I guess we Jews better watch out!

    Now what the hell is wrong with my ancestors, thinking it was OK to move here at the turn of the last century, that this was a place where, by virtue of law and governance, all people's faiths and personal beliefs were treated as equal? I'm gonna have to have a very stern talk with my Bubby.

  • 11. Brittney  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:27 am

    I completely agree! Religion should never play a role in government issues…..
    NOM is trying to shove religion down the throat of America.
    That's really what all this is about, religion. Did any one see 8: The Mormon Proposition? The sole reason Prop 8 was passed was because of the mormons and what THEY believe in.

  • 12. Dave in CA  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:34 am

    This might be old news, but Miss NY has made "gay rights" her official platform. Makes a nice counterpoint to Carrie Prejean, and that other floozy who fraudulently claimed to represent Miss Beverly Hills, CA (and whom Maggie was quick to defend; there is no "Miss Beverly Hills.")
    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/07/2

  • 13. JAB  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:37 am

    Given that the NOM tour is at least in part designed to produce conflicts that will provide support for their claim that they need to keep their supporters names private, these photos may prove very useful for our side. Here we have posted all these photos of individuals who have attended rallies, and there have been no reprisals against the individuals pictured. Surely they would be recognizable to people in their community who wanted to take out their revenge. So where is the danger in disclosing the names of people who gave signatures or money to NOM and it's anti-equality allies?

  • 14. Aya  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:37 am

    I grew up in Rochester. I consider it my hometown. I really, really wish there had been more of a counter-protest. Unfortunately, I moved away when I was 12 and have no idea what their LGBT community is like. If I hadn't just finished taking the CA bar exam, I would've flown out there and stood with a sign myself.

    For whatever reason, the longer this tour goes on, the more personal it's beginning to feel for me. I don't for a moment think this is the last thing they'll attack if they win (which they won't). Gay marriage out the door? Great. Let's go after the Jews now. Or the Muslims. Or non-Christian single parents.

    Disgusting, all of it. I hope God has a special task-force of angels to deal with people like this after they die. It'd be great if He were just as frustrated by this all as I am. Now THAT would be justice.

  • 15. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:39 am

    I think in terms of the signatures they needed to get items on the ballots, some of them might have been made up…and I feel that is why they don't want them disclosed.

  • 16. AndrewPDX  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:40 am

    LOL!

    Ok, so another interview question:
    At your tour stop in Rochester,MN, your official invited speaker Chuck Darryl is quoted as saying, “[equality supporters] believe the lie about the separation of church and state… and what happens is there’s no Christian biblical mindset or voice.”
    Do you support the First Admendment Right to religious expression is for Christains only? What about Jews, Muslims, Bhuddist, Hindu, and other faiths? If this country is for Christans-only, as your offical invited speaker states, should non-Christains be deported? Or put in Nazi-like concentration camps? Maggie, which option would your husband support?
    Or, if you do not agree with your official invited speakers, then do you give a disclaimer that you do not agree? If so, can you then specify which quotes from which speakers are official NOM-endorsed messages, and which are not? It gets real confusing separating out your hypocracy.

    Love,
    Andrew

  • 17. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:44 am

    Brian Brown in Rochester: A stark choice

    Brian Brown's speech: “If we do not stand up for marriage we will be treated under the law as bigots.”

    Not much more to read: http://www.marriagetour2010.com/2010/07/brian-bro

  • 18. Str8 AlEye Mikael  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:49 am

    Haha, what a great quote!

    'If laws protecting gays are passed, we will have to confess to our true nature, and we will be held lawfully accountable for the ways in which we treat those different from ourselves! There's a word for that, and I think it rhymes with spigot…'

  • 19. Str8 AlEye Mikael  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:53 am

    Absolutely spot-on. Personally, I'd like some advance notice if I'm going to be asked to leave. Not sure where my family would go, since reform Jews aren't even that welcomed in Israel these days. Or maybe the feds will grant us the Upper West Side as safe haven for our heathen beliefs and practices.

  • 20. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:53 am

    heheheheehehehehhehehehe
    LOVE IT!!!

  • 21. StraightForEquality  |  July 30, 2010 at 4:58 am

    I'm eager to see it but there is always a "Very long wait" at Netflix. I am glad to see that lots of people want to see it. I'll get my chance eventually….

  • 22. Sagesse  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:01 am

    Re-definition of 'non-event'. What are these people thinking? Good thing money is no object.

    Iowa will be a chance to show what a marriage equality state looks like.

  • 23. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:02 am

    Correction:

    If you do not stand up for marriage equality, you will be treated under the law (and independent of the law) as bigots — and rightly so!

  • 24. Steve  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:03 am

    But….but that treaty was a with a bunch of dirty pirates. It can't possibly mean anything.

  • 25. 4eyedsue  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:03 am

    Please check this out. If you live in CA you can download a petition and help gather signatures to get this on the ballot! Prop8 didn't go far enough- really want to protect marriage?- outlaw divorce! Common California- don't be a bunch of hypocrites! http://rescuemarriage.org/

  • 26. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:03 am

    *bing bing bing*

    We have a winner! There should be no Christian Biblical mindset or voice in our secular government, you pinhead!

  • 27. adambink  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:04 am

    Hey all, two updates posted above.

  • 28. Ed  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:12 am

    Does anyone else think that NOM has a mantra it follows after each (failed) rally? something like…..

    DAMAGE CONTROL!!!!

    Like….oh crap….we really screwed up…..We have to get some DAMAGE CONTROL going right now!!!

    LOL

    Ed

  • 29. Alan E.  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:14 am

    Main Entry: big·ot
    Pronunciation: ˈbi-gət
    Function: noun
    Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
    Date: 1660

    : a person obstinately [perversely adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion] or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

    — big·ot·ed -gə-təd adjective

    — big·ot·ed·ly adverb

  • 30. Linda  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:15 am

    "we will be treated under the law as bigots…"

    How will they be 'treated under the law'….? Oh, wait….that's Brian's way of saying, "the law won't allow us to continue to discriminate."

    Goodness! Ban same sex marriage! Protect Brian's right to discriminate!!!

  • 31. Alan E.  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:16 am

    It's not like they will get fined or go to jail for stating their views.

  • 32. Dave in Maine  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:17 am

    good idea!

    Dave

  • 33. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:17 am

    Only if you continue to ACT like bigots you NOMbie!!!

  • 34. anonygrl  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:18 am

    Does that mean you get all the good bagel places, because if so, can I convert?

  • 35. Alan E.  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:19 am

    They key word, for which I have also given a definition, is obstinately. Instead of calling them bigots or being intolerant, maybe we should go around saying that they are being obstinate. Many bonuses:
    1) We learn a new word
    2) Confuse the heck out of them
    3) we can say "You're just being obstinate, bless your heart."

  • 36. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:20 am

    Now THAT's a T-shirt or poster for sure!!!

  • 37. Rebecca  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:21 am

    How many equality supporters were there today? I see the one guy with a sign, but sadly, that photo makes him look like he was alone…

  • 38. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:22 am

    I actually think there could and should be a Christian "voice" in government. Everyone has the right to petition their government, including Christians. They are free to discuss their hopes and desires.

    What they are not free to do, however, is use their voice to make other people inferior to them under the law. Period. If your Christian world view is that some people are superior and others are inferior, then that world view should not be made law, regardless whether it is based on deeply held beliefs.

  • 39. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:22 am

    Partially OT:

    Does anyone here know whether Chik-Fil-A still is heavily intertwined with Focus on the Family?

    A Chik-Fil-A just opened right by work a couple of days ago, and I know some of our gay employees have been going over there. I suggested to some (before the restaurant opened) that they spend their money elsewhere unless they want to fund an organization that actively works to eliminate their rights — but if the company has eased up, I will too.

  • 40. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:25 am

    Every time I used definitions with these folks, they tell me I'm wrong. It's silly, because they're not only trying to claim rights to the definition of the word "marriage," they're trying to change the definition of the words "bigot," "homophobe," and "discrimination."

    For the record, discrimination is the treatment of one thing differently than another. Period. Same-sex couples cannot marry. Men cannot marry men. Women cannot marry women. Treating men, women, and same-sex couples differently is discrimination by definition. If they are arguing that proponents of marriage equality cannot change "definitions," then they need to stick to their own rules.

  • 41. anonygrl  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:27 am

    Is it just me, or are these people better at playing the victim than an entire LEAGUE of World Cup Soccer team players?

  • 42. Zachary  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:28 am

    According to an earlier update, there were seven supporters for equality today. Don't know if any turned out after that report, but it's at least a minimum of seven.

  • 43. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:30 am

    Can we at least winter in Florida? I really don't want to deal with NYC in the dead of winter.

  • 44. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:30 am

    Isn't that exactly what each and every example they've used has been about? The right to discriminate?

    Christian photographer sued for not photographing same-sex commitment ceremony. The photographer wants the right to discriminate. (Still has nothing to do with marriage — this occurred in NM, where ssm is not legal)

    Church loses property tax exemption for parcel because they refuse to rent it to same-sex couple for commitment ceremony. The Church wants the right to discriminate in things they hold open to the public… so open to the public except for gays. (Still has nothing to do with marriage — occurred in NJ, where ssm is not legal).

    Catholic Charities closes adoption business because they would lose state funding if they continued to deny adoptions to same-sex couples. The charity wants the right to discriminate and still receive state moneys while doing so. (Arguably has something to do with SSM — occurred in Mass., but still related to discrimination).

    Summary: The goal of those who wish to deny same-sex couples the right to marry is to continue to be permitted to discriminate against them. This is absolutely ironic considering that antidiscrimination laws in most states (including CA) specifically state that you may not discriminate based on marital status, which includes whether someone is married, in a domestic partnership, or unmarried.

  • 45. Alan E.  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:32 am

    Chik-Fil-A and In-n-Out rip my heart in two. I love eating there, but I feel so bad when I spend my money there, too.

  • 46. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:38 am

    I dearly lovew each and every post you make on here!!
    You ROCK!!!

  • 47. Str8 AlEye Mikael  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:38 am

    @anonygrl: We'd be willing to export our bagels in return for clean fish, Chinese food and some nice shiksas.

    @nightshayde: You know, we'll probably end up getting Miami too, but to be honest, I'm not sure if I want it. No offense Floridians!

  • 48. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:39 am

    Oh dear. In-n-Out, too? That gives me a big sad (though I haven't actually eaten at one in years).

    I've only eaten at Carl's Jr once in the past 20 years (they were literally the ONLY place open in Big Bear after a snowstorm), and haven't given Domino's any of my money during that same timespan — both because the companies support Operation Rescue. Since I'm vehemently Pro-Choice, there's no way I want my money going there.

  • 49. adambink  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:40 am

    Seven. I just haven't had time to put a photo of them up.

  • 50. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:41 am

    Please note, NOM: you personally have the right to discriminate. You have the right to walk your children past the gay person's house on Halloween. You have the right to tell your children they are not allowed to go over to the gay family's house. You have the right to home-school your children so they don't have to attend that lesbian teacher's class. However, if you run a business open to the public, you must, under anti-discrimination laws, treat every individual the same. In California, the statutes are incredibly broad. You may not discriminate for any arbitrary reason.

    What that means is that I, as a lawyer, cannot refuse to work for you simply because you are a Christian who believes that your book says that gays and lesbians are the devil. See? It works both ways. If you don't want to be treated differently because you are following the little voices inside your head that agree with you, then you cannot tread others differently. At least, that's what I learned in the sandbox when I was 5.

  • 51. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:43 am

    Just checking in.

  • 52. StraightForEquality  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:44 am

    I love it!

  • 53. fiona64  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:54 am

    "Damage control" is exactly the reason that I believe Louis (Hi, Louis!) has made his blog friends-only. He already put up the disclaimer that he has nothing to with NOM (although that is obviously untrue), and now has to shut it down entirely lest they oust him from the Summer of Luuuuurrrrrvvveeee tour.

    Love,
    Siona

  • 54. fiona64  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:54 am

    Alternate: "You're being obstinate. How nice."

    Love,
    Fiona

  • 55. fiona64  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:57 am

    I loved Chik-fil-A, and once they got involved with Focus on the Family, I was done. (I still think they make the best chicken sandwich ever, but I won't get one.)

    I didn't know about In-n-Out, but I'm now officially done with them as well.

    Love,
    Fiona

  • 56. Sagesse  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:57 am

    BB: "If we do not stand up for marriage we will be treated under the law as bigots."

    The marriage equality folk at the Tour stops seldom call NOM bigots. Maggie and Brian are always saying, "if you believe, if you speak the Truth (Truth usually self-evident and undefined) you will be called a bigot."

    It's another of their 'if you say it often enough it must be right' lines. Another way of saying 'they have no legitimate arguments so they call us bigots.'

    So let's get this straight; 'they' are going to pass laws that say anyone who believes in traditional marriage is guilty of being a bigot'. Is that a crime, or a misdemeanor? And what's the penalty… fine, community service, six years in jail?

  • 57. Linda  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:57 am

    The problem is we are trying to debate with people who are incapable/unwilling to think logically.

  • 58. AndrewPDX  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:58 am

    Hello, Richard! I was just thinking… If the horrible happened, and NOM-supported Christian Reich wing nut jobs prevail in exiling all non-believers from the United States of Funamentalism, I'm hoping you may run for political office in whatever country we find ourselves. I'm certain they will welcome your and your husband's wisdom as much as we do in this community. :)

    Love,
    Andrew

  • 59. Joe  |  July 30, 2010 at 5:58 am

    It's funny that Brown claims he and his buddies will be considered bigots if they lose their anti-equality battle, but they'll be known as bigots no matter what laws are or aren't passed. His mindset and beliefs are what makes him and his followers bigots, not laws.

  • 60. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:00 am

    With some quick Googling, I found that In-N-Out puts Bible verses in discreet places on their packaging. I haven't found anything about them donating money to any cause I personally find abhorrent.

    Until I find that evidence, I'm not ruling out In-N-Out. I won't be going to Chik-Fil-A, though. I suppose it's a good thing that I have no idea what I'm missing.

  • 61. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:00 am

    We don't eat at Cracker Barrel or Denny's. In fact, we won't even buy Cracker Barrel Cheese in the supermarket because of their homphobia, and we refuse to go to Denny's because of their racism.

  • 62. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:04 am

    I'm not sure that the presence of bible verses (just the citation to the verses, not the entire verse) on packaging at In N' Out necessarily makes me not want to eat there. I have heard no evidence that the family who owns and controls In N' Out contributed money to Prop 8 or otherwise have taken action to eliminate equality.

  • 63. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:06 am

    That is a possibility. Of course, then I would need to call on everyone here to help with the campaign, (hint to Ronnie, this means wardrobing), and help with filling the cabinet, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. Who knows? Maybe they will let us have a few states here and stay out of our way, or maybe they will all go to Texas, Utah, and Arizona to live and let us have the rest of the country.

  • 64. adambink  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:07 am

    Updated above with amazing quote #2.

  • 65. Dave in CA  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:10 am

    "Protect my right to discriminate!"
    "Ban same sex marriage!"

    Now, that's the kind of sign I would carry right into NOM's midst.

  • 66. Phillip R  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:39 am

    You know….I'm starting to wonder what the real point behind this tour is.

    Something like this obviously takes money to keep going, but with such low turnouts, I don't see that it's panning out evenly cost wise. I'm starting to wonder whether this is more for show in hopes of agitating and provoking the pro-marriage groups.

    I mean really….besides simple upkeep costs on their bus o' hate, Brian and the rest of the staff/speakers are being paid for their time I assume and with turnouts of less than 50 in most cases, where's the cost benefit?

  • 67. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:44 am

    To them, it is a "labor of love." Of course, their definition of love is VASTLY different from what I have always understood love to mean.

  • 68. Steve  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:48 am

    HRC thinks they are just trolling for reactions. Notice how they played up every small incident where they were confronted by protesters? Or even lied about harassment? Harassment their supporters is one the reasons why they want to keep the identities of donors and voters in anti-gay laws secret. They just love to play victim.

  • 69. anonygrl  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:49 am

    "What if William Wilberforce listened to those telling him not to bring his religion into the public square?”

    What if William Wilberforce had not advocated to free the slaves, thereby granting them many more rights than they previously had? Well, perhaps you wouldn't be able to have his fine example to draw such a patently false analogy to your activities with. Who else would you like to compare yourselves with?

    I guess it is just very difficult to find a hero who denied other people equal rights to hold up as a role model for comparison.

  • 70. anonygrl  |  July 30, 2010 at 6:54 am

    Donations. What keeps this whole thing going is people sitting at home petrified by the thought that their lives might somehow be forced to change in ways they don't understand, reading things like "Intolerant Gays Storm the Stage at Pro-Marriage Rally! Threaten to kidnap children! Harass nursing mothers!" and they are frightened. They are then told that NOM is, with their donations, bravely holding off doomsday, and they send money.

    So NOM makes its nut with donations.

  • 71. StraightForEquality  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:02 am

    From NOM's Summer for Marriage Tour website:

    Father Colletti from Cathedral of the Sacred Heart in Winona told the rally in Rochester today that it is important to recognize married mothers and fathers for the role in producing great fruit – both for their own family and for the good of the world. As Pope John Paull II used to say: “The future of humanity passes by way of the family.”

    Producing great fruit? Years ago when I was young, "fruit" was one term for a gay person.

  • 72. jerry Qualey  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:02 am

    One more supporter showed up late. At least he got to wave good by to the narrow minded

  • 73. Ronnie  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:10 am

    Well my mother & father created great fruit but they were not married….MEEEEEEEE!!!!!…..but my Bi-sexual sister only counts as half fruit right?….maybe a fruit puree?..A tomato?… ; )

    <3…Ronnie

  • 74. Tina  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:12 am

    "NOMbies" <3

  • 75. New  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:35 am

    Another Church? NOM's affection with religion puts me back to Prop 8 courthouse: Animus x Rational.
    NOM will end up burying itself in poo poo if they keep doing this way.

  • 76. fern  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:38 am

    At least you have a sense of humor, I remember that term.
    My humor after seeing the picture was: what??? no drive by shooting what is the world coming too……?
    I'm confident SSM will come sooner than we think.
    It's just that people have to "seize the time", which incidentally is the title of a book written by Bobby Seale of the black panther party.
    regards from a white foreigner.

  • 77. AndrewPDX  |  July 30, 2010 at 7:42 am

    Sadly, I have become convinced this is the reason. They need to be the victims, or none of their fear tactics will convince the public any longer. Like Phelps's Westboro kookoos, the NOM team is purposefully trying to incite us to violence (or at least very harsh language, which to their spin doctors can be turned into murder).

    Then, they can go crying to congress and SCOTUS and the general public, cowering from 'teh gayz & Attack Dogz & Submachine Umbrellas'. That way, they can hide the large amount of money they get from the £D$ et al.

    Either that, or they really are that stooopid. But, amassing that much money and that much pr-power… I just gotta believe this whole show is on purpose for some secret devious plan.

    Love,
    Andrew

  • 78. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:00 am

    I'm sure that they feel more comfortable on the grounds of a church (i.e. private property) — our side can't really complain about being kept off private property. When they're on public ground, like the steps of a state building, they have to worry about the big bad gays coming to smite them with brightly-colored umbrellas and sweet black labs vicious attack dogs.

  • 79. Straight Ally #3008  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:01 am

    If we do not stand up for marriage we will be treated under the law as bigots.

    Allow me to parse this a bit. With the spread of marriage equality and related efforts (repeal of DADT, passage of ENDA), there will be greater acceptance of LGBT people in the United States. The viewpoint that sexual orientation is a choice will become rightfully antiquated. Churches that refuse to sanctify same-sex marriages will be slowly marginalized, much as a church that refused to perform interracial marriages would be. Now, I don't believe that such churches will disappear – they are free under the Constitution to determine their membership, clergy, and all regulations for being a member of that church. I do think, however, that the moral zeitgeist will change so that LGBT issues will be less and less controversial, and slowly marriage equality will spread to some denominations that had rejected it before. I'll go further than that – one day, decades from now, various Christian churches who fought tooth and nail against marriage equality will crow that they were always on the forefront of promoting equality for all people. You know, the same way they were always 100% opposed to slavery.

  • 80. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:18 am

    Besides — if they lose money on this tour (which they've GOT to be doing), they can write the loss off on their taxes, right?

  • 81. Mark M  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:20 am

    We could all pool our money…buy an island and start our own country. How fab would that be?!?!?!

  • 82. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:22 am

    Pfft. I don't need Miami. I don't even need most of Florida. I pretty much just want Orlando and its general vicinity — I'm a bit of a Disney enthusiast (and I want to see the Harry Potter area at the Orlando Universal Studios park).

    We can donate its humidity to NOM. I'm a giver like that.

  • 83. Mark M  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:24 am

    hehehehehehehe

  • 84. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:25 am

    While I like the fact that this whole thing came about as a protest of Prop 8, I really don't want to encourage it. All we need is to have the right-wing wingnuts to decide it's a wonderful idea & start pouring money into getting it passed.

    Any of us then who would be against it (since I'm guessing none of us wants anyone to be trapped in a loveless or abusive marriage) would be painted yet again to look like we're against traditional marriage and family values.

    Remember — their side is not very good at distinguishing parody from reality.

  • 85. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:28 am

    They're getting closer and closer to their "one man one woman" goal, methinks.

  • 86. nightshayde  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:29 am

    I still think we should give "them" Uganda — after, of course, trading all GLBT Ugandans (and the people who support them) for them.

  • 87. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 8:30 am

    BTW, has anybody noticed that this tour began on 14 July 2010, the day after "8: The Mormon Proposition" hit Netflix and VOD outlets? Or am I the only one who thinks there may be some ulterior motive related to diverting everyone's attention from the documentary?

  • 88. JonT  |  July 30, 2010 at 9:19 am

    Jweebee scry-bin mahn.

  • 89. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:01 am

    Thanks, Mark!

  • 90. l8r_g8r  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:05 am

    Straight Ally #3008 —

    You have just expressly articulated all of their fears. Their biggest fear is that being gay will become acceptable.

  • 91. Peter H  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:25 am

    1972 for marriage?

    Sorry, but that would be 1968, the year before Ronald Reagan signed the first no-fault divorce law.

  • 92. Anonygrl  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:26 am

    I am a nice shiksa who can cook Chinese food. And fish. Am I in?

  • 93. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 12:12 pm

    Question: Am I the only one who has noticed that this NOM tour started the day after '8:TMP" became available on Netflix and VOD? "8:TMP" became available through these two routes on July 13, the NOM tour started on July 14. Makes me wonder if they are doing this to keep their sheeple distracted from finding the documentary and discovering what really went on.

  • 94. Kathleen  |  July 30, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    And me.

  • 95. Richard A. Walter (s  |  July 30, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    @ Anonygrl: you were in the first time you posted here. After all, you are now mispocah (Yiddish for family).

  • 96. Dpeck  |  July 30, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    Really. Sheeesh. There have always been plenty of bigots of every type and form and none of them get locked up or ticketed for being a bigot. There's no law against having a small ugly mind. The NOMies will eventually be shunned and ignored and abandoned to the dust heap of history, but they won't get charged with a crime just for being bigots. What the hell is BB talking about?

  • 97. You asked, and NOM’&hellip  |  July 30, 2010 at 3:24 pm

    […] is a must-see video I had to highlight for you from this afternoon’s event in Rochester, MN. In fact, given the #NOMTurnoutFAIL in yet another parking lot, one could argue it’s the […]

  • 98. Straight Dave  |  July 30, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    It's not just that gay will become widely acceptable, but more that bigotry will be unacceptable. That's what really worries them. And it's also not so much that churches get marginalized, because deep down I don't think people like Brown give a rat's ass about churches – they're just a convenient excuse to make themselves look more acceptable. It's marginalizing the individual bigots that scares them. Their personal values are undermined and suddenly they've got no friends or support. Now what are they gonna do? They've got to grit their teeth and mind their manners in public. We've seen this movie before, in the last civil rights movement.

  • 99. Roger  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:31 pm

    They "forget" that Wilberforce was a citizen and a Member of Parliament of a country without separation of Church and State.

    And that his religious beliefs led him to campaign not for the infringement of human rights but for their recognition and extension. Nothing in his work or recorded opinions suggests that he would have supported NOM's perversion of Christianity. They are trying to rewrite history.

    "Never, never will we desist till we have wiped away this scandal from the Christian name, released ourselves from the load of guilt, under which we at present labour, and extinguished every trace of this bloody traffic, of which our posterity, looking back to the history of these enlightened times, will scarce believe that it has been suffered to exist so long a disgrace and dishonour to this country."

    (From his speech in the House of Commons introducing the first bill for the abolition of the slave trade, April 18, 1791)

  • 100. Beth  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:35 pm

    8:TMP was a fine movie, but the Mormons were not the only reason Prop 8 succeeded. The No on 8 side ran a colossally misguided campaign. When the Yes people were saying little children will be taught things in school that threaten family values, the No people were showing celebrities and grownups saying "don't be a hater." We should have countered with images of our kids in school, or gay kids in school (bullied much?) or our granparents at our weddings or the sad reality of grown old gay and losing a home when a partner dies or something.
    I think the movie is important, but the lesson I got from Prop 8 is that people need to be shown how many people they already know who are affected by marriage inequality.

  • 101. Roger  |  July 30, 2010 at 11:39 pm

    Le Quatorze Juillet? "Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité"?

  • 102. Fulton  |  July 31, 2010 at 12:03 am

    Ever notice that the decrease in pirates correlates with the increase in global temperature?

  • 103. Sagesse  |  July 31, 2010 at 12:34 am

    @Straight Dave. It's already happened. To paraphrase Maggie, 'we got nothing against gays, but [we] [the people] draw a bright line around marriage'. It's no longer politically acceptable to be 'anti-gay', but marriage is a topic where the public is still divided. NOM folks are anti-gay in their hearts, if only because MG and BB are Catholic, and their church tell them it's ok… They're not ordinary bigots, just religious bigots, which is their constitutionally protected right. And they have no problem hanging out with bigots.

    But their territory is getting smaller and smaller.

  • 104. Sagesse  |  July 31, 2010 at 12:45 am

    What a superb observation. One of the reasons the US has a separation of church and state was because the England they rebelled against, and much of Europe, had state religion.

    Think what things would be like if the founding fathers had been a little less obscure on this point.

  • 105. Steve  |  July 31, 2010 at 1:50 am

    Ironically, it's freedom of religion that has allowed radical Christians in the US to become so immensely powerful and subjugate the country with their quasi-theocracy.

    On the other hand, some European countries like Sweden still do have a state religion, but religion on a whole is a private matter and doesn't play much of a role in people's lives, let alone politics. Sweden is also among the most progressive countries when it comes to gay rights.

    Separation of church and state is a great idea, but unfortunately it's undermined all too often. And usually when people claim religious freedoms.

  • 106. Dave in Maine  |  July 31, 2010 at 2:03 am

    Yes, I agree with you guys about In-N-Out. The owners may be religious, but so what? Many gay people are. Just the face that they are so religious as to have the citations on the inside bottom rims of their cups (from what I remember) is not enough, for me, to justify a boycott.

    It seems that boycotts are called far too easily and far too often and some people are quick to do it without knowing all the facts. What companies out there HAVE supported Prop 8? (Stand for Marriage Maine contributors can be found here: http://www.mainecampaignfinance.com/Public/entity… NOM donated more than a million dollars here in Maine, by the way…).

    Dave

  • 107. Dave in Maine  |  July 31, 2010 at 2:11 am

    I agree with you, Beth. And that is exactly what we did for the No on 1 campaign here in Maine. We used REAL gay people who showed their faces to the entire state (and the rest of the world). We should the state that these are your neighbors and friends, not just some vague concept. It almost worked, but the fear that Stand for Marriage Maine spread was a little more effective.

    Let's see if I can embed this No on 1 clip…

    Dave

    [youtube =http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKBkVF6aexA&hl=en_US&fs=1?rel=0&color1=0xe1600f&color2=0xfebd01]

  • 108. You asked, and NOM’&hellip  |  July 31, 2010 at 2:03 pm

    […] is a must-see video I had to highlight for you from this afternoon’s event in Rochester, MN. In fact, given the #NOMTurnoutFAIL in yet another parking lot, one could argue it’s the […]

  • 109. With marriage equality fa&hellip  |  August 1, 2010 at 12:46 pm

    […] Iowa, after a weekend drive from Rochester, MN, where NOM experienced it’s second parking lot #NOMTurnoutFAIL (the first was in Lima, Ohio). Iowa is the first state we’ve encountered since New Hampshire […]

  • 110. Sioux City: NOM goes for &hellip  |  August 3, 2010 at 10:52 am

    […] may be having parking lot flashbacks to Lima, Ohio and Rochester, Minnesota. Props for trying to make the third time the charm, I […]

  • 111. They’re baaaaaack: &hellip  |  September 27, 2010 at 11:12 am

    […] we see our old friends Brian Brown, Maggie Gallagher, and Louis (hi, Louis!)? Will they hold more rallies in empty parking lots? Will the fringey fringe from places like Indianapolis and Harrisburg show […]

  • 112. With marriage equality fa&hellip  |  September 28, 2010 at 7:38 am

    […] Iowa, after a weekend drive from Rochester, MN, where NOM experienced it’s second parking lot #NOMTurnoutFAIL (the first was in Lima, Ohio). Iowa is the first state we’ve encountered since New Hampshire […]

  • 113. They’re baaaaaack: NOM &hellip  |  September 28, 2010 at 8:54 am

    […] we see our old friends Brian Brown, Maggie Gallagher, and Louis (hi, Louis!)? Will they hold more rallies in empty parking lots? Will the fringey fringe from places like Indianapolis and Harrisburg show […]

  • 114. wunder  |  August 5, 2013 at 11:46 am

    I recently would not go away completely your web site in advance of implying that that I essentially treasured the conventional data any person offer on the targeted traffic? Can be destined to be back ceaselessly so that you can research cross-check brand new discussions

  • 115. Nashville TN Emergency Locksmiths  |  February 5, 2014 at 7:01 am

    Hi, I log on to your blogs on a regular basis. Your story-telling style is witty, keep up
    the good work!

    Here is my webpage – Nashville TN Emergency Locksmiths

  • 116. Keyword here for blog comments  |  February 21, 2014 at 3:10 pm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCpYNBaplMs Morris Region Separation Lawyer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCpYNBaplMs http://www.ParsippanyLaw.com Morris Couty, NJ Separation Attorney

  • 117. Online Pharmacy  |  May 14, 2014 at 1:09 am

    I have been browsing online more than three hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours.
    It’s pretty worth enough for me. In my view, if all webmasters and bloggers made good content as you
    did, the internet will be a lot more useful than ever before.

  • 118. hair loss  |  May 16, 2014 at 6:40 pm

    I think this is one of the most vital information for me.

    And i’m glad studying your article. However want to statement on some basic
    issues, The web site taste is perfect, the articles is in point of fact
    great : D. Good process, cheers

    Also visit my webpage hair loss

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!