Watch: Four Engaging Videos from NOM’s Hate Rally in Raleigh


Yes, the National Organization for Marriage’s rally is still continuing, and stopped in Raleigh, North Carolina. NOM Tour Tracker is doing an excellent job of covering it, and reports that 61 NOM supporters were met by 255 equality activists in Raleigh.

Among them was our friend, blogger Pam Spaulding. Pam has a full report here.

Below are four videos shot by NOM Tour Tracker.

In the first, Arisha Michelle Hatch has a civilized debate with anti-gay Pastor Olden Thornton. Pam Spaulding is interviewed in the second video.

On the bottom row, NOM tour Tracker talks to nutty NOM supporter Joann Beckman, “who spouts incredibly offensive stereotypes about the ‘black community'; cites debunked NOM-affiliated Ruth Institute ‘research’ on how children of same-sex parents are ‘unhappy children’ who are products of “genetic manipulation”; and more.”

The final video features Tony and Gary Kierkegard with their adopted children Austin and Britney.


  1. formerraleigh says

    the gay disco and a dirty bookstore are a block from that site. I wonder if Miss Bryan Brown slipped in for happy hour or some squat thrusts?

  2. Alhamr says

    Faux News is even on changing their opinion, people don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.

  3. Robert in SF says

    I think that the debate/discussion around marriage should *not* use the term “rights”, unless it’s in terms of equal treatment under the law or due process, not marriage as a right in and of itself.

    Marriage is not a right, per se, IMHO. It’s recognition of a civil contract in the eye’s of the State.

    The right in question, to emphasize once again, is the equal treatment under the law and due process, with certain privileges and responsibilities assigned.

    So we should point out that aspect first and foremost.

  4. Rob says

    @Formerraleigh – So true! I find it too funny NOM held their rally only steps from one of the gayest neighborhoods in NC.

  5. Alhamr says

    @Robert in SF, There have been numerous cases going to the supreme court, where they have ruled in such a way where marriage has become a defacto fundamental right.

  6. Fenrox says

    FOr fucks sake stop protesting their rallys! 255 protesters is a crowd of 300 to them. They don’t care about being protested and never will, They will just lie and manipulate whatever they want, however they want because the people they reach don’t care about the truth. This is a game you can’t win, that’s why they started it.

    You want a protest, HOLD A RALLY.

  7. Robert in SF says

    I appreciate the comments on my post, and would like to elaborate and clarify:

    When we discuss the topic with others, *outside of the courtroom*, we should emphasize the aspect of the legal issue in terms of the right to equal treatment under the law and due process, not a right to marry in and of itself.

    The laymen we are discussing the subject with will not usually agree that marriage is a right in and of itself granted by the State (which is how most view “rights” as a concept, something they get from the State).

    They do not know usually the rulings and findings of the Supreme Court about marriage being a fundamental right.

    They see marriage as an institution, where 2 people go to Church and get married, not a civil contract recognized by the State. They don’t phrase their objections that teh gays shouldn’t have protection under the law for inheritance, legal entanglement of persons, or medical directive defaults…in fact a common expression is “just arrange all that with a legal contract”…

    But with the emphasis on the rights of equal treatment and due process, perhaps we can frame the debate about the legal side, not the “go to *your* church and insist on your marrying us”…

  8. pete says

    pls add cites for credible sources that debunk Ruth Institue. I need them in a dbate i’m having. thanks.

  9. Didgeridont says


    Maybe boxturtlebulletin would be a good place to start. However for your debate, you might say that the Ruth Institute doesn’t follow the scientific method, isn’t peer-reviewed, and doesn’t use meta-analysis. When they say Social Science, what domain are they referring to anyway? That’s vague and not very meaninful (of course, because their side is substanceless).

    Your question though is kind of funny, to me it’s like asking for credible sources that debunk statements like, “Clean cup, clean cup, move down, move down, move down,” and “twinkle twinkle.” – How does one address nonsense and irrationality anyway?

  10. Dr C. says

    Hey Joann Beckman- My mom is a lesbian- she has three children. I have a PhD, my brother is a geophysicist, and my sister is an award winning illustrator. Hummmm- seems your racist and heterosexist theories are as idiotic as your views.

  11. JT the original says

    Everytime I see fat Pam Spaulding I think her her and Andrew Towle with that gang in Durham, NC, actually joining with that black hate group to lynch the Duke lacrosse guys (even though Towle only wanted to go after the Irish Catholic one).

  12. nicholasg says

    It seems Joann has caught too many rays at that gig. She almost as dehydrated as her comments.