Comments

  1. ny says

    Not sure about that headline… I think Brown was the best debater. Sharpton was pretty good, and Roberts was a hack. Not to say that I agree with what Brown was saying.

  2. HadenoughBS says

    The NOMbie leader speaks and, as usual, nothing but NOMbie crap falls out of his mouth. What a disgusting person and a disgusting organization!

  3. John says

    I love it when Al says, “I do not have the right nor the insensitivity to say, ‘People have to believe what I believe.’ We’re not a society built on one religion or one set of moralities.” This principle couldn’t be any clearer, and yet anti-gay marriage people will equivocate in their defense until they’re blue in the face to avoid saying they’re actually just bigots.

  4. verbocity says

    How does same sex marriage damage marriage more than divorce? No answer.

    and what were these civilizations that failed after adopting same sex marriage?

  5. Brad says

    No way. Brian brown and his ilk are full of logical inconsistencies. He kept trying to draw illogical analogies. Sharpton made the best point by far. Do we have the right to legislate our morality on others when there is no discernable harm to society? No.
    What does procreation or polygamy have to do with it? Nothing. They’re just fear words that side loves to throw out. Be afraid, this will harm your children! Be afraid, this will harm your marriage! It’s boring rhetoric, not good debate. I could debate brian or mags into the ground. They, like the defenders of prop 8, have no rational leg to stand on. Just stupid analogies and fear tactics. I love what one of the lawyers who decimated prop 8 said. It’s easy to get on CNN and spout lies and half truths, nobody will fact check you or call you on it. But it’s a lonely place to lie in court under oath.
    They spout fake or suspect statistics, unrelated fears and BS, but when it comes down to it, they’ve got no reasons but being angry A holes. Not all Americans are stupid enough to take their idiocy at face value. Some want actual facts and real arguments.

  6. Clay says

    Brown didn’t debate at all. He simply repeated canned slogans and veered off topic throughout. If NOM’s concern is the family/marriage breakdown, logic dictates that they start at the core causes, not at the so-called last symptom.

    And if that guy’s not a closet case, I’m the King of Kashmir. Jesus, he talks like the bitchy queer character in an old black and white movie.

  7. Beef and Fur says

    Bri only complains about backroom deals under the cover of the darkness when they aren’t his own deals. It’s just a scare tactic to scare his base into giving up more money.

  8. JoesBrat67 says

    IMHO – The last 2 minutes of the discussion was the most telling. Brian Brown was asked if approves of civil unions and the answer is NO! So – even if the GLBT community is given less than equal, it’s still not right in his view. The bottom line is that he doesn’t want us to have ANY legal legitimacy whatsoever. I have to applaud the Rev. Sharpton for getting Brian Brown to re-iterate the conclusions about NOM that have been obvious to so many of us. This is the reason why the battle for equality needs to continue.

  9. Joetx says

    “Not all Americans are stupid enough to take their idiocy at face value.”

    31 amendments to state constitutions prohibiting SSM say otherwise.

  10. John Patrick says

    Marc C, I agree with you. Brian Brown kept changing the topic. He was like a greased pig or a slippery snake that kept trying to slide away from the questions at hand. He has no regard for the relationships of gay and lesbian couples, he has no regard for their children, he has no concern about divorce or poverty and economic hardships that often lead people to divorce, he has no concern for the serial polygamy of people like Newt Gingrich, he has no regard for the beliefs of other people or other religions or the separation of church and state. NOM has as its sole mission to outlaw same sex marriages and civil unions and dissolve those same sex unions and marriages that already exist in law. And they will try to do that by any means they can, including changing the topic, making wild accusations and lying through their teeth.

  11. jomicur says

    If memory serves, DOMA and DADT were passed–and signed into law by Bill Clinton–“under cover of darkness.” Somehow I think that was okay with Brian. HIS darkness is the darkness of “God,” after all.

  12. says

    “sham…done under the cover of darkness.”

    Really, Brian? Wouldn’t that better describe NOM’s funding sources? How I love seeing that loser sheen on his fat head.

  13. says

    It’s not that marriage equality opponents are “somehow bigoted and discriminatory” — they are bigoted and discriminatory. Why don’t they just own up to it?

    Furthermore, if marriage is such a “unique and special” institution as they claim, how is it that, as they repeat, everyone has been getting married for aeons? So special that everyone does it????

  14. RyanInSacto says

    Would someone please tell Thomas Roberts that the Obama administration is, indeed, still “enforcing” DOMA? What the administration announced was that they would no longer defend DOMA in court. This is different than refusing to enforce the law. The enforcement meme is a right wing talking point. I would think Roberts would know that. Jeesh.

  15. MichaelD1026 says

    I always thought marriage was the joining of two people who love each other in a legal contract validated by the state with a marriage license. Mr Brown is talking about the religious rite of marriage that is a celebration of that legal contract. One does not have to be married in a church or by a minister to have a legal marriage. One does have to have a license issued by the state. Apples and oranges, Mr Brown?

  16. the_woodrow says

    NOM does nothing to protect opposite sex marriage. If they openly sought to make divorce illegal not one of their contributors would give them a dime and they know it. They exist solely to stop same sex marriage.

  17. walter says

    under the cover of darkness never has there been more coverage of a bill in albany. the real undercover is the sources of noms finances. time for the attorney general to investigate where all this money is coming from. if it is from organized religion then they should be taxed as political parties. time to tax the religious bigots who want to put their nose into everyones business.

  18. Brian says

    How is it that so many people argue that just by teaching intolerance and trying to keep a group of people down, their opposition is wrong to call them bigots? Mr. Brown, look it up in a dictionary. You are a bigot, according to Merriam Webster. If you don’t like being called a bigot, then don’t be a bigot. It’s pretty simple.

  19. Pete n SFO says

    I object to them even giving Brown the forum to speak.

    And why Rev Sharpton? Why not Socareides or Wolfson… someone that could call bullshiz.

  20. Brad says

    @joe. I never said no Americans take their idocy. Just not all. 6 states with marriage equality and a slew of others with civil unions supports my original statement.

  21. Ishaq says

    “sham…under the cover of darkness.”

    Whaaa?

    Is he casting a spell or something?

    I was eagerly waiting for Brown to finish with: “By the power of Grayskull!”

  22. gb says

    Questions:
    1. What legislation is there now pending to outlaw divorce…anywhere?
    2. Does NOM support this legislation?
    3. Will there be support for legislation of “One Marriage One Divorce”, to mean as long as the other spouse lives, the divorced partners cannot remarry.[“Till death do us part”]
    Present NOM with the questions for defense of marriage.

  23. melvin says

    Stick to basics. Expanding civic marriage to include gays does not change the definition of marriage any more than expanding suffrage to women changed the definition of voting. There is no change of definition, merely and enlargement of the number to whom it is available.

  24. Michael says

    It is UNAMERICAN to infringe upon another human beings rights.These CHRISTIANS are total hypocrites in more ways then one.They dont preach love all they ever do is preach HATE nothing else.Then they cover that hate up with polite smiles and expect people to believe that what they are doing comes from a place of LOVE? Hypocrites.

  25. pdxblueyes says

    Brian Brown tipped his hand when he included “civil unions” in his hate rhetoric. It used to be just “marriage” now he includes this other tangible. Tell me you hate me for being Gay. that is a concrete ideal I can work with – and although, i find it offensive, I can respect you for FINALLY being honest.

  26. says

    And why Rev Sharpton? Why not Socareides or Wolfson… someone that could call bullshiz.

    Posted by: Pete n SFO | Jun 28, 2011 12:40:01 PM

    Pete what’s wrong with Sharpton? Or would you rather us African Americans stay homophobic so you can spill you justifiable racism?

  27. RedOnTheGreg says

    I am glad Al Sharpton was their for this debate. Rev. Sharpton knows a thing or two about the struggle for civil rights and equality. I think the gay community needs as many allies like him as possible. Thank you, Al.

  28. MAP says

    It’s very obvious that Brian Brown are being coached..They consistently go off topic when they can’t answer the question asked,they continue to talk over the other person so to run the time out,they try to talk about this matter of factly..the only difference between Maggie and Brian is…he can’t control his emotions…. Maggie on the other hand can..she has no feelings. But you just once I would love for the interviewer to ask Maggie about her marriage to Raman Srivastav..

  29. says

    Brown says we’re trying to redefine marriage for everyone. That is a red herring. There is not one iota of change to heterosexual marriage as it exists in the real world–unless it is to give the beleaguered institution an increased legitimacy in a culture where the failure rate is around 50%

  30. Jerry6 says

    How about some of these Religious types reading something about the History behind some of the laws that they say are “Natural”.

    Marriage laws were created by Men to legally Bind a woman to one man for LIFE. In some cultures, a man could have all the wives he wanted, along with concubines, if he chose. A man could “Put aside” a wife at will. A woman’s right to divorce is a recent right. The only reason the religious types are against Gay marriage is because they know that few such couples will produce children to be brainwashed into going to church one day a week and put money in a collection plate so the priest, minister, or rabbi does not have to do productive work for a living.

Leave A Reply