Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Blast from the past: NOM’s Brian Brown used to “pray away the gay”

NOM Exposed Right-wing

(Cross-posted at Good As You)

By Jeremy Hooper

Brian-BrownNowadays, National Organization For Marriage president Brian Brown is way too politically savvy to encourage gays into scientifically discredited “ex-gay” change.

But that wasn’t always the case. Back when Brian was heading up the Family Institute of Connecticut and the national interest was much more lacking, a less public version of Brian was all about helping parents “prevent your child from embracing this destructive way of life”:


(click the image to enlarge)

“LOVE WON OUT” CONFERENCE IN BOSTON ON OCT. 29TH [Brian Brown]  On October 29th, 2005, Focus on the Family will be holding a Love Won Out Conference at Tremont Temple Church, 88 Tremont Street in Boston, MA. A complimentary Pastor’s Breakfast will be held Sept. 8th from 8 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Tremont Temple Church for clergy wishing to learn more about the conference.  With Connecticut’s same-sex civil union law going into effect one month from today, pastors, parents and other concerned citizens will be increasingly forced to face issues relating to homosexuality. The Family Institute of Connecticut, therefore, strongly recommends that our members attend Love Won Out in Boston.  At the conference, you will hear from nationally known experts who have firsthand experience with the seldom-told side of the homosexual issue. You’ll learn how to minister to a loved one who’s dealing with homosexuality, respond to misinformation in our culture, defend biblical beliefs and prevent your child from embracing this destructive way of life.  Ministers who attend the Sept. 8th Pastor’s Breakfast will be Focus on the Family’s guests for a complimentary breakfast and morning seminar that will equip them to more effectively convey the truth about homosexuality, compassionately without compromising. Three of Love Won Out’s keynote speakers will share their testimonies and address specific topics.

Family Institute of CT (archive)

What do we hear from NOM all the time? False victimization. Charges that Brian and crew will be unfairly labeled “bigots.” An attempt to flip the script to make the anti-LGBT crowd seem like the sympathetic figures.

But here we have it, almost five years ago to the date: Brian ignoring a preponderance of credible science to say that gays can and should pray away the gay. When it comes to Brian’s career in LGBT politics, somehow we’re having a hard time feeling sorry for whatever historical meme might take hold.



  • 1. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:13 am


  • 2. Ķĭŗîļĺę&  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:14 am


  • 3. Mouse  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:29 am

    Accurate labels are not unfair.

    Bigotry is a lifestyle choice.

  • 4. nightshayde  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:17 am

    Too bad they won't try to "pray away the bigotry" instead.

  • 5. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:38 am

    My thoughts exactly.

  • 6. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:43 am

    Yeah, wouldn't that be nice?

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 7. Linda  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:18 am

    Ah, but see…their bigotry is sanctioned by their (interpretation of) scripture.

  • 8. Marlene  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:39 am

    Has been that way for generations, Linda!

  • 9. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:38 am

    2005 is hardly in the distant past, either.

  • 10. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:29 am

    Tell me about it. Life is way to short. At least the good years are.

  • 11. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:15 am

    Life is short, but the years are long.

  • 12. Michael  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:40 am

    The odorous vermin! Someone get me some "Brian B-Gone"

  • 13. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:04 am

    We sell that in the Stanley Home Products catalog. It is called I-X Insecticide spray. And for anyone who wants, I will make a good deal for case lot purchases!

  • 14. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:42 am

    Good as You has an update to this post from NOM's blog today.

    NOM on 'ex-gay' group: Merely 'helping gay people lead Christian lives'

    Exodus Int'l has lost its tax exempt charity status in New Zealand, and NOM is aghast.

  • 15. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:50 am

    I love the word AGHAST. It's so…Victorian.

  • 16. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:28 am

    From NOM's press release about the Exodus business…

    An earthquake is beginning: If "gay is like black," then "Christian is like racist."

    The first sentence sounds an AWFUL lot like "A storm is brewing…" doesn't it? Does this mean we can expect a commercial with people standing around being shaken up by an earthquake, instead of hit by lightening and saying "I was a gay man who is by law now not allowed to be straight, and I am afraid!", "They will teach MY children what all those so called Psychiatrists, psychologics, pediatricians and other medical experts across the globe say aout ex-gay ministries failing entirely, and that makes me want to hide under a rock!" or some equally silly nonsense?

    The second sentence… well, who said that other than YOU GUYS, Brian? "Gay" is a class of people who need protection under the law. "Black" is a class of people who need protection under the law. If "Christians" were, as a class, discriminating against gays, then yes, Christian IS like racist. They aren't. Nice try, but many Christians do not stand with you in your discrimination, Brian. So better would be "NOM is like racist". When you put it that way, it is absolutely true.

  • 17. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:47 am

    From the press report the NOM blog links to

    " The commission said the trust was not performing any public benefit because homosexuality was not a mental disorder and did not need curing.

    The commission noted that the American Psychological Association said there was little scientific evidence to show that homosexuality could be "cured" and attempts to do so could cause harm."

  • 18. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:05 am

    And of course, NOM's response, that the action was taken, "on the grounds that helping gay people lead Christian lives is not a charity"

    More from NOM's Ministry of Truth. It's not the advocacy for leading a Christian life that's the problem, it's using Christianity as a weapon to "cure" people from a non-existent "illness" and harming them in the process.

    I'm curious… you know that movable middle we talk about? For those in those group who are people of faith, do you think this comes across as double-speak the way it does to us? That is, when someone who isn't firmly in the pro-equality camp already reads a story about the commission's actions and the reasons for it, then sees NOM's reaction, do you think they see the fallacy in NOM's claims?

  • 19. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:16 am

    Absolutely it comes across as double-talk.

    I have learned more about what real Christianity looks like from my friends at the Metropolitan Community Church than I ever did before. There is no irreconcilable difference between being gay and being Christian.

    I have said before, and will doubtless do so again, that I would *never* have stepped foot in church again if I hadn't meant the pastor of my local MCC congregation. The first and only time someone has welcomed me to a church happened the day I came to MCC at his invitation (after asking whether it was okay for straight people to come, to which his amused reply was "I practice Jesus' radical belief that *everyone* is welcome").


  • 20. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Gross! The NOM wants me to live like a xtianist? It makes me want to exfoliate.

  • 21. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:47 am

    fiona, I'm guessing the people at MCC are all pretty solidly in the pro-equality camp. They're not the people I consider to be in the movable middle.

    My question was about the people who either haven't formed an opinion one way or another, or who are opposed to marriage equality but only because they haven't thought about it much. Do you think those people read that news story about why the commission ruled as it did and then see the fallacy in NOM's claim that this was an attack on a group just "helping gay people lead Christian lives"?

  • 22. Bob  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:48 am

    Kathleen, great question, as a person of faith, and one whose family belongs to anti-gay Church, I find it very difficult to find anyone in that group to be the movable middle.
    And this is why I take so much encouragement from those people of faith on this site, who remain in their church communities fighting for change, especially straight allies.

    My experience is that the people of faith who believe in the inerrancy of scripture, will always support NOM's position, because otherwise their belief is shattered, and that is an awakening they are terrified of, it is very hard to find a movable middle in these churches, but those people who continue to do so for example the momron mothers on this site, are so very courageous, because for myself and many others, the result of being open and opposing, results in shunning, creating painful life experiences, but ones I find necessary.

    Now the real movable middle in faith groups are those who don't adhere to the inerrancy of scripture, and those churches have already made great strides in being open and welcoming. They clearly see the fallacy of NOM's claims, and actually talk about it in their sermons.

    If you remember our long thread of discussion with Colin , in breaking the ningth circuit, he was a person who believed in inerrancy of scripture, (every word of the bible is the truth), and look at the extent he went to to defend his (belief), that is what they are doing defending a belief. and defending a belief breaks down to the argument so humorously observed in Rob's video about Maggie, told you so , no you didn't, and that just becomes a repetiion. There is nothing to prove, only a belief to defend.

    The religious right is fractured, and in some circles, this is talkied about as the new reformation, a necessary movement in true spirituality, to realize the bilble is not inerrant. that is the ongoing debate.

    To put it bluntly, in Canada we have equality in marriage, but my family and the Church they attend are American to the core, in the sense that they believe the country and our politics has strayed, and they're waiting for the religious right in the states to bring us back into line.

    It is very true that once equality comes the fight has not ended, but you just have a more advantgeous position to carry on the battle.

    That's another reason I envy you Kathleen, you weren't brough up in a religious environment, it all must be very confusing to people like you, and it's people like you that are the solid foundation or cornerstone, that we cling to for grounding, as we continue our struggle. in our faith communities.

    As I said befoe, in my youth I left mine, and it hellped but the reality is, that is where I must return and be visible, it's my small part,

  • 23. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:34 am

    Oh, I know that MCC is definitely pro-equality. However, a lot of the "mainstream" denominations are becoming more that way (e.g., United Methodist Church, American Baptist Conference) because they *are* starting to really think about what it means to be Christian — and how Jesus believed that everyone was welcome.

    So, yeah. I would say that the movable middle is getting bigger all the time among people of faith.


  • 24. Don in Texas  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:18 am

    @Bob at #22:

    "Fantastic doctrines (like Christianity or Islam or Marxism) require unanimity of belief. One dissenter casts doubt on the creed of millions. Thus the fear and the hate; thus the torture chamber, the iron stake, the gallows, the labor camp, the psychiatric ward." — Edward Abbey

  • 25. Bob  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:39 am

    @Don in Texas, thanks for that qoute, as the one dissenter in my family, my sphere of infuence, it rings so true, and actually I find some comfort in those words, , simply because they shed light on the truth. I am gay and I do not believe what they do, I am an insult and embarrasment and threat to them because I question..

  • 26. Paul in Minneapolis  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:00 am

    It makes me want to exfoliate.

    Don't molt, Bolt!

    : )

  • 27. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 3:49 am

    WOW! New Zealand yanked Exodus Internationals' tax exempt status???? GOLLY! Maybe, like marriage equality, this will be a wave that starts breaking on other foreign shores, then here??? So interesting! (I guess I missed this news story.)

  • 28. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:29 am

    I think countries outside the US draw a tighter line around religious freedom. Individual freedom of religion and religious speech, absolutely. Organized religion's freedom of religion and religious speech within the four walls of its church, and in ministering to its members, absolutely.

    Charity is a giving thing, no strings attached.

    A Catholic charity offering social services (even adoption services) and especially if they take public funds for it… is a social service agency, which is not entitled to discriminate in employment or offering its services, and proselytizing is frowned upon.

    A Catholic chaplain in the military understands that his is an interfaith ministry, and while he would minister to a Catholic in accordance with their mutual faith, he would minister to any service member with respect for that person's faith tradition (including none).

  • 29. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:37 am

    "Charity is a giving thing, no strings attached. "

    Plus, it's not like Exodus' classes and workshops are free….right? Don't they bleed families' funds to pay for the "treatment"??

  • 30. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:04 am


    Just pointing out that in the US, a charity, or a non-profit, based on Christian ideals gets to play the Christian card for all it's worth.

    In other countries, the likes of the Catholic charities of Boston and DC are just charities. They aren't the Catholic Church. If they're offering adoption services or homeless shelters, they are offering them to the community, not just to those who share their beliefs.

    And of course using the Catholic charities as an example, since it's one of BB's favourite examples and not to pick on them over any other deserving self-serving denomination.

  • 31. Michael  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:32 am

    The problem with your statement, Sagesse, is that I've seen Roman Catholic chaplains who did all they could to stifle me as a Jew when I was on active duty. I had applied to be a Jewish lay leader on a base in Mississippi. The base chaplain sat on the application for six months. It took an end run around him (using the Protestant chaplain) to get accredited by the JWB. The Catholic chaplain, to say the least, was not pleased, as he knew he sat on the application because he didn't want a Jewish presence known on the base.

  • 32. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:43 am

    @ Michael

    I was talking about military chaplains in other countries. I am appalled that (some) military chaplains in the US think of their ministry as an extension of their church in civilian life. What about the religious freedom of all the service members like yourself who may not have access to a chaplain of their own faith.

    It's just another example of the plainly illogical notion that freedom of religion is my freedom to impost my religion on everyone else.

  • 33. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:56 am

    @ Michael: Which base were you on in Mississippi, and when were you there? And which branch were you in? My husband was in Mississippi when he was in the Air Force, and he is Jewish. He even got food shipments from JWB.

  • 34. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:09 am

    @ Carpool Cookie: I was given an information packet about 13 years ago by someone who wanted me to consider Exodus International. At that time, according to the packet, the "treatment" was running an average of $5,000 a week. And for what? To learn something I already knew quite well how to do–to loathe myself! I did NOT need to throw away $5K a week to learn that! Especially since at that time I wasn't even earning $5K a YEAR!

  • 35. Straight Dave  |  August 31, 2010 at 10:44 am

    I was at Keesler AFB in Biloxi, MS from May-Sep '70. What about BZ? Not that I ever had need for a chaplain's services, but it's nice to know what connections are out there.

  • 36. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 12:21 pm

    I think he was briefly in Biloxi, but I don't know if that was a stopover on his way to Columbus, MS, or on his way back from Vietnam. It would have been about that same time I believe.

  • 37. Michael  |  August 31, 2010 at 11:49 pm

    Richard A. Walter – I was stationed at Naval Air Station Meridian (about 20 miles outside of town). I never requested food shipments from the JWB as there was a small Jewish community here in town and they got extra supplies to help me out for the week.

    Sagesse – It was just this one particular chaplain. I'm thinking he was in cahoots with someone higher up on base, but there was not much they could do about the Jews on base because basically I became the "expert" and they could not say, "No, that's wrong" because they didn't want to know about things Jewish. Remember, we're talking the buckle of the Bible belt here.

  • 38. Richard A. Walter (s  |  September 1, 2010 at 12:40 am

    @ Straight Dave: From what BZ has just told me, he was at Keester for about a week and a half for a training class. But your dates coincide with the time he was at Keester. His USAF time predated his rabbinical training at 770 Eastern Parkway. His longest times were in Vietnam and in Columbus.

  • 39. Michael  |  September 1, 2010 at 1:02 am

    Forgot to answer the other half of the question: I was in Meridian from July 1980 to October 1982.

  • 40. Sagesse  |  September 1, 2010 at 1:21 am


    Actually, the military chaplains (retired and active) have been making a lot of noise in the DADT debate along the usual 'my freedom of religion trumps your freedom of religion' lines. They bemoan that, when they take the pulpit, they will no longer be able to preach that homosexuality is a perversion and an abomination. (Evidently, a disproportionate number of chaplains are Southern Baptists.)

    Imagining myself as a service member, I would find it abhorrent if I walked into a church service and was harangued by a (say) Southern Baptist as though it was 'his' church, even though I was (say) an Episcopalian. And aren't there loads of topics to choose from, without feeling compelled to lecture on homosexuality. Surely some sort of interfaith ministry approach would be appropriate out of respect for the service members the chaplaincy is to minister to…. but it doesn't seem so.

  • 41. Michael  |  September 1, 2010 at 4:07 am

    I never really dealt with the chaplains in Meridian except for this one situation. Because I am Jewish and the chief chaplain (Roman Catholic) sort of made it clear in the beginning he didn't want to deal with Jews, I ended up interacting with the Jewish people in the town of Meridian which, back then, had 2 houses of worship (one Orthodox, one Reform). I went to the Orthodox services on Friday night (and they made me lead the prayers EVERY SINGLE WEEK to the point to where I could do a full Orthodox Friday night service in 27 minutes).

    The one time I did try doing outreach to the base hierarchy was for Rosh Hashanah one year, and several different command commanders came for about an hour or so. At least they got a taste of what it was like. Whether they learned from it, I don't know. I hasten to add that none of the chaplains came.

  • 42. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:05 am

    This is from NOM's comment section…..
    total idiot, but this is what we are up against.

    Posted August 31, 2010 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Homosexuality is a behavior, not an immutable characteristic like race! This is so simple and so fundamental and the stubborn refusal to accept this by so many could very well be the undoing of human civilization and even, by increasing instability and divisiveness by making the universal agreement on shared values and goals impossible, the harbinger of human extinction.

    Even most lesbians admit that they were not born lesbian but instead chose that as a lifestyle. Of course the choice almost always comes in response to some amount of conversion activity by others. And once this choice, this conversion, is made, the girls/women become different people. It is as if they have become transformed like the characters in "The Invasion of the Body Snatchers," as their outlooks, interests, and goals are no longer the same though they may appear just as before. They have in a sense abandoned the human race and become part of a new group, one which has members that want to convert others to their side, a side which has no interest in the welfare of the entire human race but only in the welfare of its own group of females or even of lesbians, which one might say is a very unhealthy, divisive, and hateful group.

    I can't even formulate a response……

  • 43. Vanessa  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:14 am

    That was the most disgusting thing I have read in a while. Literally made me physically ill. FUCK BRIAN BROWN AND FUCK NOM. I hope their "tour" bus falls off a massive cliff and there are no survivors!

  • 44. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:20 am

    "Ed's" comment made my stomach turn as well. Though while I agree that NOM and its followers need a heavy dose of common sense I can honestly say that I don't want them to die in a bus crash.

    That's not what our community should be about.

  • 45. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:23 am

    Vanessa, now tell us what you really think, LOL 🙂
    If you Google Brian Brown Bigot my comment here on P8TT shows up third, so that is real high in Google search results. We should all, always remember to type "Brown Brown the Bigot" when we comment on him here on P8TT.

    For Maggie Gallagher the Hater, we should use that for her as she said during the NOM summer of #FAIL Tour she doesn't like it when people call her a hater. In fact she said, "I am not a hater"

    Brian S Brown from NOM IS a BIGOT, he knows that there a children of GLBT families that are not permitted to legally be a family becasue of him. He knows that the children of GLBT's do jsut as well as children of OS parents, he knows all this and yet he keeps repeating lies, lies, and more lies. THAT makes him a bigot, when he has the scientific proof and continues to cling to his assumptions whihc are lies.

  • 46. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:17 am

    Ed, what is your theory? Do you think "John" who wrote this on the NOM blog really beleives everything he wrote? I dont' think he believes it at all, I think he is just writing total smack, and he knows it. Don't forget NOM moderates all thier posts so this comment has been approved by a NOM moderator. No comment gets through without NOM approving it, remember that.

  • 47. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:21 am

    Oh i know, SG, they have banned me from posting there.
    They also know that comments like this will only add fuel to the fire, and what better way to sway peple other than instilling fear?

  • 48. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:22 am

    I can only hope that's posted by someone trying to make them look bad. Invasion of the Body Snatchers??????

    I sooooo wish this poster would go on TV.

  • 49. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:27 am

    I'd honestly rather see Larry Adams (that was the nooseman's name, right?) plastered on the news. I think that throwing him and his ilk into the spotlight on this issue will help bring more people to our side.

  • 50. Vaati  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:46 am

    My only response would be this 'john' apparently had his balls ripped off by one of our more aggressive, but equally lovable, lesbians and can simply not let it go. I would love to see this emasculated troll actually site facts to support his stance, but since none exist this is just another inflammatory piece of garbage we've come to expect from someone with half a brain.

    As for recruiting, I would LOVE to be able to recruit some people (Mariska Hargitay, Jeri Ryan, Kate Mulgrew) but clearly that isn't how it works. It dawns on me that these people might fear conversion because they truly see gays as some sect of a new religion.. one they just might be feeble minded enough to slip into and must fight tooth and nail to resist. Maybe 'john' is fighting the urge to join us so hard he's beginning to believe his own trash even though he desperately wants a piece.

  • 51. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:50 am

    If we could convert people I'd love for our next recruits to be Maggie, Brian, and Louis (hi Louis!) so that they could know what it really feels like to be homosexual.

    I have a feeling that if it were as "contagious" as they make it out to be then a WHOLE lot more people would be homosexual.

  • 52. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:54 am


    Star Trek Voyager fan much?
    My bf and I are as well 🙂


  • 53. Michael  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:33 am

    Wait, you want to recruit Olivia Benson, Seven of Nine and CAPT Janeway? Say it ain't so!!!

  • 54. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:13 am

    Or maybe John is a closet case?

  • 55. Ozymandias71  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:57 am

    It's a ridiculous spin – and naturally, the tens of thousands of personal testimonies (even from former 'ex-gays') easily available on the Internet are simply ignored – it used to be that people like 'John' would say 'well you might think you're born gay, but you're just deceived' but now there are far too many testimonies out there of LGBT folk who are saying the same thing – 'I was born this way!' – that now it's just not talked about.

  • 56. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:21 am

    Thank GOD for the Internet.

  • 57. [email protected]  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:46 am

    WOW! What a bunch of ignorant drivel. Reminds me of the brainwashing I received as a child.

  • 58. Ozymandias71  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:15 am

    Sounds typical… and my feeling is that once someone's opinion becomes *this* entrenched, it won't matter how much evidence or testimony is offered otherwise. We've seen enough of that from the trolls that come by spouting their bigotry and nonsense, right?

  • 59. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:40 am

    I've seen this sort of response… on my Youtube video page there is a guy who does not write as clearly, but rants about the same sort of thing, some sort of "Gender separatist propoganda", he calls it.

    Honestly, I think it is just that the man cannot find a woman who will even consider sleeping with him, so he ends up blaming lesbians for turning women away from men. It is truly bizarre, but the more I read, the more that impression seems to fit. I can't begin to address the concept, because, as a woman, I am just one of the alien pod beings, and he will not take in one word I say.

    When the delusion runs this deep, I don't think there IS a response to it, other than to hope, silently, that the local mental health authorities catch up with the guy before he does something that requires the police to shoot him on the spot.

  • 60. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:36 am

    Yeah, I saw some of those posts from the 'Gender separatist propaganda' guy… he wasn't quite firing on all thrusters.

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 61. Sheryl, Mormon Mothe  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:48 pm

    Man, this commenter is so off base. I've worked with lesbians, I've gone to parties given by lesbians and not once has anyone tried to convert me (perhaps I should be insulted that I'm not "good enough"?) As all of you already know, lesbians are, except for the sexual orientation, just other females. Perhaps if a change is noted when a person accepts their sexuality, that change is a more confident person who just may tell you to stuff it and not allow you to put them down anymore. I can see where that would upset some people who like to control and put others down. I know, preaching to the choir.

    Where, oh where do these people come up with this stuff.

    Sheryl, Mormon Mother

  • 62. Linda  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:56 pm

    I'll tell you where they come up with that stuff: from the tracts and pamphlets made readily available to them in their church lobbies! All they need to know they can find inside their church walls; and if they find it there, it's Truth, no questions tolerated!

  • 63. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:15 am

    When the anti-gay xtianists behave this way, of praying away the gay, they make a mockery of their religion. They seem to treat their deity like a lucky rabbits foot.

  • 64. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:22 am

    If their deity actually exists and operates like the Bible describes then I doubt ANYONE will be getting into heaven. Everything's a sin.

  • 65. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:33 am

    Yes, especially since the bible says that if you disobey one word of it's teachings and laws, it's as if you've violated the whole thing (!!!!!) No pressure, of course : )

    James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

  • 66. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:24 am

    If they're so sure of themselves, and their morals, they should've had the cajones to talk about them in the Perry v. Schwarzenegger trial.

    I can't wait until we win this case. The bigots want to learn the hard way.

  • 67. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:25 am

    This comment is a reply to Ed. Not sure why it was posted this way.

  • 68. Marlene  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:47 am

    Who says bigots can learn, Bolt?? Most of them wallow in self-pity and blame others for their own shortcomings.

    There have been a lucky few who've literally seen the light and have denounced their racist past.

    I remember alooooong time ago when Donahue had a family who all belonged to the Klan and hardly ever met and talked to people of color. Once they got to truly know what they were like and found out they had more in common than they thought, they came back on another show to denounce racism and their Klan membership!

    It's too bad I don't have the proverbial three wishes, as one of them would be for bigots to become what they hate the most and live like that until they realize they were wrong.

  • 69. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:49 am

    If you've never seen the musical "Finnian's Rainbow" you might want to look it up. A leprauchan, a pot of gold and an Irish father and daughter turn up in a town somewhere in Kentucky (near Ft. Knox). Various fun things happen, including a wish on the pot of gold that turns a bigotted Senator from white to black. It is kind of fun, but dated, so take it all with a grain of salt.

  • 70. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:48 am

    Look, Look, Look to the Rainbow
    And Follow the Fellow who Follows A Dream

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 71. anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:30 am

    I love that I can always trust someone around here to come up with the right video at the right moment! 🙂

  • 72. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:28 am

    In the last few weeks, I've heard or seen some Christianist Right figures talking about how "People are not what they DO"….implying that though someone may have gay sex (I guess), they are not inherently gay (?)

    But [i]what is[/i] anyone [i]aside[/i] from what they do? People can talk about what they [i]want[/i] to do all the time…but at the end of the day, it is the things we do that we have decided to devote our time to.

    It's such a strange statement for someone to make in this day and age. "People are not what they DO…" (???)

    Uhh, what else [i]is[/i] there??

  • 73. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:43 am

    So um… a politician who sleeps around may not really be an adulterer and someone who kills random strangers isn't necessarily a murderer. If those two descriptors don't apply to those examples (according to Christianist Rightists) I'll go with philanderer and serial killer.

  • 74. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:52 am

    Has anyone else seen this term used as some kind of argument from the Christianist Right? ("People are not what they DO…") I think it's used to somehow explain away some "falling into" gay sex….they're really straight, underneath it all, and just need to be pulled back out. Maybe it was Mormon leaders using the phrase???

  • 75. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:20 am

    There's a guy who posts pretty regularly on Mormonsformarriage who insists that he isn't gay anymore because he hasn't had gay sex — even though he is still only attracted to men — and because he is married to a woman. He claims that Exodus and the like "saved his life" and is very upset about the Mormonsformarriage site because "it is homophobic because it doesn't support straight marriage" or some such twaddle.

    So, yeah … there are people who think that you're only gay if you've had same-sex intercourse — regardless of your primary attraction, etc. I don't get it.


  • 76. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:48 am

    <cite>'You are what you do, not what you say you'll do.'</cite> — Carl Jung, pioneer of psychology.

    Apparently these right-wing Cristianists are not Jungians. Are they followers of Freud instead?

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 77. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:34 am

    Coolies: not [ ]

  • 78. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:35 am

    And note to myself: "Cookie" not "Coolie" … really really bad.

  • 79. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:51 am

    That's the first time I've been called a "coolie," actually. A new and broadening experience! Perhaps I'll be called "collie" next?

  • 80. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:59 am

    My last name used to be Tait. I frequently received mail addressed to "Kathleen Tart."

  • 81. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:17 am

    @cpc "That’s the first time I’ve been called a “coolie,” actually. A new and broadening experience! Perhaps I’ll be called “collie” next?"

    good stong belly laugh from France.

  • 82. Carpool Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:22 am

    I love the title "Kathleen Tart" ! !

  • 83. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:31 am

    I wasn't insulted. 🙂

  • 84. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:48 am

    I love the title “Kathleen Tart” ! !
    Me too. I think you should change this to your Forum Name.

  • 85. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:51 am

    Kathleen, if it helps any, I've always thought of you as a tart.

    And I LIKE it.

    (licking my lips!)


  • 86. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:21 am

    Heh. My surname (some of you know it from FB) is pronounced just like it looks. I have been addressed as "Mrs. Cashcow" (bad plan, when you're trying to solicit donations — and believe me, the person on the other end got an earful about sounding words out) and my husband as "Mr. Cartwright." His response was that no, Mr. Cartwright was down at the barn with Hoss and Little Joe, but he'd be happy to go find him.


  • 87. mandy  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:58 am

    Is that like you are what you eat? or I know what you are but what am I?

  • 88. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:29 am

    Oh damn it….I wasn't supposed to use brackets…that's at imdb!

  • 89. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:31 am


  • 90. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:32 am

    Don't worry about it, I still put the proper emphasis on the words when I read it.

  • 91. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:33 am

    Yeah, you gotta use these symbols for hte brackets

  • 92. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:35 am

    Hey the symbols didn't show up, huh?

  • 93. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:37 am

    Let me try… these symbols here:

  • 94. Phil L  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:39 am

    Okay, they've magically become invisible.

    I think we should stop fighting to make them appear or we might end up in Italicisle or Boldtown for the rest of the comments.

  • 95. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:39 am

    I think they're called carets, or something.

  • 96. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:50 am

    Less than and Greater than symbols for all you math peeps 🙂

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 97. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:53 am

    I believe they ARE called carats… but remember the trouble you all got into yesterday when I was away?

    Use your carats with care, people!

  • 98. bJason  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:35 am


    I apologized like a zillion times! 🙂

    I almost tried to put zillion in bold but decided against it!

  • 99. anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:33 am

    I am teasing Jason. Frankly I thought it was hysterical. Like we had all suddenly become stoned or something… and we had to emphasize everything we said because it was…. tee hee hee…. all vitally important.

    And tasted like cheese doodles.

  • 100. AndrewPDX  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:36 am

    @anonygrl… Mmm… cheese doodles

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 101. RebeccaRGB  |  August 31, 2010 at 10:40 am

    They're called ANGLE BRACKETS. Or, less-than and greater-than signs. 🙂

    A caret is this: ^ Not the same thing.

  • 102. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:37 am

    According to the HuffPo, a very expensive, $5000pp, fundraiser will take place for AMFER, in NYC. Olson and Boies will attend.

    I would like to be someone's date for this event.

  • 103. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:27 am

    Thx Bolt- This is a GREAT article, I hope everyone here reads it.
    This is that cocktail party that Malmhorn (Now I know I spelled that wrong, you know the Rep who just came out gay) got Paul Singer to throw for AFER.
    I transposed the guest list into text jsut in case you would like to copy and search for how to send these people a thank you card.

    At the home of Paul Singer in New York

    Joshua Blumenfeld
    Mary Cheny
    Lew Eisenberg
    Steve Elmendorf
    Mark Gerson
    Hon. Dick Gephardt
    Benjamin Ginsberg
    Chad Griffin
    Hon. Isreal Hernandez
    Margaret Hoover
    Hon. Michael Huffington
    Coddy Johnson
    Henry R. Kravis
    Michael Lebowitz
    Amy Mehlman
    Bruce Mehlman
    Garrett Moran
    Charles Myers
    Kathryn Navab
    Alex Navab
    Aimee Nuttall
    Scott Nuttall
    John Podesta
    Steve Schmidt
    Frank Selvaggi
    Tom Synhorse
    Hon. Michael E.Toner
    Amb. Mark Wallace
    Nicolle Wallace
    Hon. William F. Weld
    Hon. Christine Todd Whitman
    Elizabeth Wurtzel
    Ted Olson
    David Boies

  • 104. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 4:57 am

    Well, well, well! What is next? Brian making some big mistake and being outed as either bisexual or gay and married as a cover? Only time will tell, and then the truth will win out!

  • 105. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:00 am

    He definitely seems on the gay-side, to me. But then, wouldn't someone have come forward if they'd been involved with him romantically?

  • 106. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:59 am

    Would YOU admit to that? I would have trouble doing so if it were me.

  • 107. Ozymandias71  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:07 am

    As if I needed any more reasons to grit my teeth whenever I hear about Bryan-the Bigot-Brown…

    Anyone who touts the effectiveness of 'pray away the Gay' completely ignores people like me, who went through it, suffered immensely while doing it, and spent years afterward in recovery from it… a recovery process which, thankfully enough, has allowed me to FINALLY embrace the idea that having a Partner is right and good.

  • 108. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:12 am

    I'm so sorry you were put through this. It's already difficult enough to accept oneself in a society that has a long way to go in embracing diversity, but to be subjected to such damaging "therapy" is unimaginable.

    HUGE HUGS!!!!

  • 109. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:31 am

    Your testimony is POWERFUL
    I am so sorry you went through that sh*t, but so happy you came out the other side and are doing just fine now. Really happy for you Ozymandias71.

  • 110. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:36 am

    Oh god (and I mean that in a secular way), how horrific. That all must have been very depressing and painful. Glad you got out, and back on your feet : )

  • 111. PhillyKarl  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:41 am

    I'm glad you made it out alive. I, too, am an Ex-Ex-gay. Attempting to be healed took a decade of my life. I saw the damage it did first hand. I was lucky to see the light and get out before…. I don't even want to think about it. I wasn't present at the church when my excommunication was announced, but 10 years later a young man came up to me at a gay event and told me he was there when it happened. He was only 13 at the time and boy, did it leave a lasting mark on him. The truly horrible thing is, most of the people who were running the Ex-gay ministry were genuinely well meaning people who have absolutely no idea how much harm they inflict.

  • 112. carpoolcookie  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:45 am

    I'm glad you made it out, too. Eeeek!!!

  • 113. Ozymandias71  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:01 am

    PhillyKarl, I'm glad we *both* made it out alive!


    I agree – the folks who ran the 'ex-gay' therapy sessions for me were genuinely nice, compassionate Christians – I wouldn't even characterize them as 'Christians' – who truly only wanted to see 'the best' for me.

    Unfortunately, that's one of the factors that kept me going to the sessions – I *knew* these folks loved me, and I *knew* they truly didn't have any malice toward me… but they had been completely taken in by the 'hate the sin, not the sinner' mantra that they couldn't even see the damage being done 'to the sinner' (me) not the 'sin' during the sessions.

    I haven't talked to those folks in a very long time… but I can only hope that seeing me fall apart emotionally in the last session – and the forceful testimony of a Christian counselor who informed them, in no uncertain terms, that these 'ex-gay' sessions were doing tremendous harm to me, had an impact and caused them to re-evaluate the effectiveness of this 'ex-gay treatment.'

  • 114. PhillyKarl  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:56 am

    Yo StraightGrandmother!
    I have to tell you, I never dreamed I would be able to enjoy the sunshine after coming through the darkness. Every day I appreciate that I am one of the lucky ones. I saw damage done to these men every week. Men who were afraid to form close friendships with other men for fear of what it may lead to, and unable to generate the feelings for women that they prayed to God for without ceasing. I saw despair just eat away at them, year after year. But enough. I have a wonderful Italian partner that I am just ITCHING to marry. And I am so happy that your son is blessed with such a wonderful mother.

  • 115. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 1:55 pm

    Another survivor, here to give testimony that Pray Away hte Gay, DOESN’T WORK, duh! I am hoping you are enjoying the sunshine PhillyKarl, after coming through the darkness.

    I’ll be honest when my son came out to me, I first asked, “Are you sure” then second I asked, “Do you think you can change?” When he assured me he could not change, then I didn’t have any choice but to accept and love him for who he is. He told me he wasn’t going to be able to change so what could I do?

  • 116. Anonygrl  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:01 am

    Thank goodness you have managed to put yourself back together again, and can speak out against it!

    Good for you for finding your own strength.

  • 117. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:02 am

    Yes, Ozymandias, I, too, am glad you made it out alive and were able to get the help you needed to repair and rebuild your life and your self-esteem after that awful tragedy. Nobody should ever be forced to go into that. And I think you and PhiilyKarl are two of the lucky ones, because you did get out in time and were able to recover from the trauma inflicted upon you.

  • 118. Joel  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:28 am

    Since religion is being discussed here, particularly the Fundamentalists' view of the salad barbible, I'd like to direct your attention to an amazing letter from a pastor to one of his congregation. If you haven't ever read it, do take the time; it's a beautiful letter that is also well researched. And I have used it in my personal fight to get my mother-in-law to realize that G-d did create Steve as well as Adam. While I'm sure most of you are familiar with this wonderful letter, I've never seen a link to it in these posts, so here it is:

  • 119. Joel  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:29 am

    Silly me! The letter is known as "Letter to Louise."

  • 120. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:33 am

    Curious, how is that working on your mother in law, and results yet?

  • 121. Joel  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:52 am

    It's a very slow process, SG. I'm letting my husband handle it, because he knows her so much better, of course. She actually likes me (and my cooking), and she's very fuzzy about actual Scripture. Mark just sent her the article about the "gay gene" being a gene sequence in the mother, so now she's having to deal with the possible fact that her son's homosexuality was actually her "fault." (The irony is actually amusing.)

    I don't think she's made it all the way through Letter to Louise yet, I'm hoping it will make a little difference in her mind set, and open her up to discuss some of its points with me, rather than Mark, who is a little more sketchy on the Biblical details.

  • 122. [email protected]  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:34 am

    This new add is awesome. Please post to the front page.

  • 123. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 5:53 am

    Well done.

    Out of curiosity, could an ad like this, that uses actual parts of the NOM ad, actually run, or is it a copyright violation. I realize that this kind of thing is posted online all the time, not quite a parody, but a response. But can a political ad be constructed this way?

  • 124. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:07 am

    I know very little about copyright, but I believe "fair use" includes using excerpts for purpose of commenting on them.

  • 125. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:22 am

    Actually, this ad does not violate any copyright laws, because full credit is given to NOM for the use of their ad. This is an ad very similar to political ads that use one politician's ad in an ad for the opponent, where the opponent takes all of the talking points of the first ad and shows where those points are misleading or just out and out wrong. That is what this ad does, and that is what will keep this ad out of trouble.

  • 126. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:44 am

    Simply giving credit to the copyright holder doesn't protect you against a copyright violation. If I copy and distribute a copyrighted book, naming who the author is won't make my copying okay.

    This video MAY be considered fair use, particularly because there is strong First Amendment protection for political speech which is balanced against the copyright claim. In general, fair use analysis looks at these four factors:

    1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
    2. The nature of the copyrighted work
    3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
    4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

    I think where this video might get into trouble is the amount of the original NOM video it uses. However, that may be mitigated by the fact that even this copying doesn't diminish the commercial value of the original work, as NOM never intended to sell the video.

    I haven't kept up on case law in the area of copyright. I'd recommend asking a lawyer whose practice in the area of intellectual property.

  • 127. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:45 am


    I was, literally, just curious. This is such a straightforward way to knock down the opposition's argument, you'd think It would be used more often in political ads, and I'm not used to seeing it in such a direct, line-by-line way.

  • 128. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:47 am

    I'm interested, too. It's not a clear call on this video. I agree that it's effective.

  • 129. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:07 am

    Great video!

  • 130. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:08 am

    Woo Hoo! You Nailed them!!!!
    I particularly love, LOVE LOVE how many times the word discrimination is used. That's right this is discrimination, say it loud and often, DISCRIMINATION. The judge said 59 times in a 138 page ruling this is discrimination.

    [email protected] did you make this video??? It is a great video. I am going to go next to the website that was shown on the video,

  • 131. Ozymandias71  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:10 am

    Excellent ad!

    NOM's ad is misleading, full of lies and once again, designed to incite fear to those who see it, and are uninformed about the actual facts of the case. The internet needs to be flooded with videos like this one!

  • 132. Bolt  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:46 am

    Legal update: Legal "conservative" group seeks to force the state of California to defend 8.

    They're so desperate.

  • 133. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:49 am

    Looks as though they're pretty sure themselves that they have no standing to appeal.

  • 134. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:54 am

    Would love to see their actual complaint.

  • 135. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 6:58 am

    Let's take bets. "The Pacific Justice Institute" are you betting Catholic or Mormon? My bet is on the Catholics.
    Now I'll go check them out.

  • 136. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:24 am

    "Pacific Justice Institute is a non-profit 501(c)(3) legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties. Pacific Justice Institute works diligently, without charge, to provide their clients with all the legal support they need. "

    Um, PJI? What about the religious freedoms of those denominations that are inclusive? What about the civil liberties of GLBT people?

    I'm just asking …


  • 137. Carpool Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:26 am

    Interesting….they say they're a Civil Liberties organization!

    About The Pacific Justice Institute: Pacific Justice Institute is a non-profit 501(c)(3) legal defense organization specializing in the defense of religious freedom, parental rights, and other civil liberties….Through our dedicated attorneys and supporters, we defend the rights of countless individuals, families and churches… without charge."

  • 138. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:28 am

    Do. Not. Get. Me. Started. on the "Liberty Institute" out of Plano, Texas, which is helping the Texas AG prevent a couple from getting a divorce. They lived in and legally married in Massachusetts before one of their jobs was transferred to Texas, and now they want a divorce. Texas won't give 'em one. Some "Liberty" Institute, huh?

  • 139. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:35 am

    And let me know how many Southern Baptists you find on the BOD listing.

  • 140. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:20 am

    Haven't found the petition yet, but here's more info. This seems to be press release from PJI. Seems Meese is involved in some way.

  • 141. fiona64  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:28 am

    I guess that the "legal geniuses" at PJI haven't read the part of the oath of office where the Governor and the AG are required to protect and defend the Constitution of the US as part of their duties. When a law is clearly unconstitutional, it does *not* have to be enforced or supported by those in power.

    Fiona (who paid attention in civics class)

  • 142. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:44 am

    I'm glad to hear this, Fiona. I always think the sky is falling when "they" file something like this. (And, while I paid attention in civics class, too, there weren't as many stars on the flag at the time. Only a slight exaggeration.)

  • 143. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:48 am

    Drumming fingers, waiting impatiently for Kathleen to find the petition………

  • 144. Carpool Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:10 am

    Well, this fits into the whole process (I think) as to "This Thing Should Never Have Been Allowed on the Ballot" etc.

    What body would actually screen the Propositions and stamp them okay to procede or not, on a constitutional basis? I think the Propositions just get on the ballot if they're turned in with the signatures etc…..and if they pass, THAT is when the protections of the Checks and Balances move into play. The Proposition is scrutinized at several levels after it becomes "real" (i.e., was voted in) and part of that would be whether or not the Governor and Attorney General want to defend it when it's under fire.

    Just thinking out loud here….

  • 145. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:14 am

    The petition isn't available at the court's website yet. I'll let you know if there's any activity on the case.

  • 146. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:17 am

    Kathleen, won't "they" just argue that it isn't unConsitutional until it's ruled (and appealed) as such and that Arnold and Jerry Brown can't rule it that way on their own? I mean, it's obviously unConstituional to folks with brains, but we're also not courts.

  • 147. Ann S.  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:21 am

    I have to say that I would kinda agree with their position, if I didn't think our whole proposition system was so meritless to begin with.

  • 148. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:22 am

    Who knows what crazy-ass shit they'll argue. For all I know, god speaks to them through their electrical supplies.

    I would think there's even less obligation for the Gov and AG to appeal the district court's decision, than there was for them to defend it in the first place.

  • 149. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:03 am

    No, no Kathleen, not the appliances — the PLUGS.


  • 150. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:04 am

    Withdraw. You didn't say appliances; I just READ appliances….

  • 151. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:44 am

    This case is going to leave a rich trail of jurisprudence that may be useful, even if it does not legally set precedent, elsewhere.

  • 152. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:10 am

    do any of these assclowns really understand how the 3 branches work?

    I do….maybe I can be a lawyer. 🙂

  • 153. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:17 am

    they make it sound as though WE got to choose the judge!!!

  • 154. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:20 am

    But we did get to choose……didn't u get the memo? It was in the monthly newsletter of my Homo Handbook.

    Side note…..Only 5 more recruits to go and I win a Miata.


  • 155. Carpool Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:23 am


  • 156. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:24 am

    aw, heck; I must have been out of town. Glad the rest of you made such a good choice without me! (Incidentally, how was he chosen? Is it random as with the 9th court judges?)

  • 157. Carpool Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:29 am

    I think it was actually the ones at The Celebrity Center in the Gay Community that chose the judge. They're really full of themselves, always push to the front of the line, etc. Don't EVEN try to argue with them.

  • 158. Kate  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Cookie, I expect to see the opposition quoting you and believing it.

  • 159. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:26 am

    Oh look, PJI (see their home page) is using the same stock photo as DC's anti-gay Delano Hunter:

  • 160. Richard A. Walter (s  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:39 am

    I see, said the blind man! Another head on the Hydra that is called NOM!

  • 161. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:49 am

    Not necessarily. It's just a lack of imagination, mixed in with a bit of laziness. If you go to iStock and enter "black family" into search, it's the first image that comes up. 🙂

  • 162. Ed  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:26 am

    Yes, a totally random drawing

  • 163. Joel  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:46 am

    Does anyone happen to know offhand what the status of the Gill et al case in MA? Has the DoJ appealed? Are they going to?

  • 164. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:52 am

    The judgment was officially filed August 18. I haven't seen any news on whether or not the feds have filed notice to appeal yet. They have 60 days from Aug 18.

  • 165. Joel  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Have you even heard any "rumors" about whether the Feds plan to file an appeal? Anything on the grapevine? Even a dried up li'l ole raisin?

  • 166. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:28 am

    Not a thing. But I expect that they will appeal. It doesn't seem likely that the feds want to see a situation where a federal law is unconstitutional in only one state.

  • 167. Steven  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:57 am

    A conservative legal group is trying to force Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown to defend California's gay marriage ban in court

  • 168. Steven  |  August 31, 2010 at 7:59 am

  • 169. Sagesse  |  August 31, 2010 at 8:50 am

    Focus on the Family is at it again.

    Focus On The Family: Anti-Bullying Efforts Are A Gay Front

  • 170. Straight Grandmother  |  August 31, 2010 at 9:04 am

    and that pacific justice instituit we were talking about above says the same thing.

  • 171. Michael  |  August 31, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    Perhaps shrill anti-gay activist Brown will now try to tell us that promoting the fraudulent "ex-gay" therapy is a "civil right" for his side?

  • 172. Kathleen  |  August 31, 2010 at 1:33 pm

    I'm sure he already has. Anyone want to find the quote?

  • 173. Keith  |  September 2, 2010 at 3:38 am

    This guy is a peter puffer, through and through.

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