2012 Election | Brian Brown | DOMA | Gay Marriage | News | NOM | Supreme Court

Brian Brown Hopes Against Hope Anthony Kennedy Sides With Hate

KennedyAnthonyWith marriage equality wins in three states this week, supportive activists are increasingly confident that the Supreme Court, less than two weeks away from a decision on whether to review California's Proposition 8, will rule one way or another on discriminating against same-sex nuptials.

"The court can't live in a world where the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional in the Northeast and constitutional everywhere else," ACLU lawyer James Essex told Reuters.

And the momentum toward inclusion across the states creates an even more urgent situation for the Court, says New York Law School professor Arthur Leonard: "It becomes much more urgent to get an answer whether the federal government can continue to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage"

Despite the writing on the wall, Brian Brown from the National Organization for Marriage, an increasingly isolated group of people with nothing better to do than meddle, soap opera villainess style, in other people's relationships, seems to think all this inclusion will spur one justice in particular, swing voting Anthony Kennedy, to stand for hate.

"Kennedy will look at this and think, why create a new culture war and bypass the democratic process to impose gay marriage on the country when this is being worked out on a state-by-state basis?"

But that probably, actually, most definitely won't be the case, as reporter Terry Baynes explains:

In 1967 the court ruled that Virginia could no longer ban interracial marriage, reversing a ruling that had stood since 1883, after several states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. And in 2003 the court found that Texas could not ban sodomy, noting that the number of states with laws banning homosexual conduct had dropped from 25 to 13 since it had made the opposite finding in 1986.

"Every time it becomes clear marriage equality is more accepted and popular, that helps us in the Supreme Court in some hard-to-quantify way," said Paul Smith, another lawyer who represents people who are challenging the Defense of Marriage Act.

Good grief, Brian Brown.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Absolute equality, nothing less.......the justices know that by now.

    But then again Scalia and Alito are Italian Catholics......they follow a higher law......which is exactly where all our troubles bagan.

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | Nov 8, 2012 8:38:26 PM

  2. I suppose I'd get desperate too if my the things my paycheck was dependent on were vanishing right before my very eyes.

    Brian Brown used to have his own version of 'facts,' but people meeting us and countless studies have proven him wrong. Brian Brown used to have "God," but more people are either leaving religion or practicing a much more tolerant form. Brian Brown used to have the courts, but now even Republican judges are ruling against him left and right. Brian Brown used to have the majority of people to vote away our rights, but they're turning on him every minute.

    He's desperate and pathetic. And obviously doesn't know his history on equality.

    Posted by: kp05 | Nov 8, 2012 8:40:10 PM

  3. Brian Brown has 7 (or 8?) children and how the hell is he going to feed them once the anti-gay gravy train dries up? Hope he saved a bunch of that hate money.

    Posted by: homer | Nov 8, 2012 9:09:24 PM

  4. "soap opera villainess style" - Nice turn of phrase...though many soap opera villainesses have a male sidekick played by a gay actor...

    Posted by: Johnny | Nov 8, 2012 9:15:01 PM

  5. how great will it feel to catch up with the dozens of other countries that consider gay people full human beings

    Posted by: t | Nov 8, 2012 9:16:54 PM

  6. The 2nd Circuit ruling in the Edie Windsor case was groundbreaking because it held that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation warrants heightened scrutiny, not rational basis review. Even Anthony Kennedy would have to weigh this on bigger scales. You might want to re-read Ari Ezra Waldman's article:


    Posted by: robert | Nov 8, 2012 9:17:26 PM

  7. ...says Paul Smith, the attorney who argued Lawrence v. Texas before the Supreme Court.

    Posted by: mike8787 | Nov 8, 2012 9:19:25 PM

  8. Justices Anthony Kennedy and Sonia Sotomayor are also Roman Catholics.

    Posted by: andrew | Nov 8, 2012 9:38:19 PM

  9. Clarence Thomas is also Catholic.

    Posted by: kit | Nov 8, 2012 9:42:21 PM

  10. I hope Kennedy keeps DOMA in place. Real freedom is won with real work and suffering. Not a wave of some magic wand. This is a society changing ruling - we've survived without legal gay marriage, regardless of a bunch of self -indulgent, law twisting, group of arrogant brats. After this Obama victory, we need a good dose of law based on primal responsibility. I pray no.

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 8, 2012 10:25:50 PM

  11. "Real freedom is won with real work and suffering. Not a wave of some magic wand."

    And which of those do you think the gay community is lacking, @ss? Not that suffering is a competition and rights are awarded after a quota has been met. Black people don't have rights BECAUSE of slavery. Jews don't have rights BECAUSE of The Holocaust. They, and WE, have rights because our Constitution says we are BORN with them.

    But even if rights WERE earned via suffering we've paid our dues. So f*ck off.

    Posted by: Caliban | Nov 8, 2012 10:45:23 PM

  12. Why is disagreement always "hate?" Your manipulation of the word -- You may hear a child tell their parents they "hate" them because they can't get what they want. You may not either. If not, let's work on being ourselves, not "equal" to whatever illusion we are so frantic to validate.

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 8, 2012 10:46:55 PM

  13. Brian Brown is truly clutching at straws. Franck Schubert has a business and can find another meal ticket--he's clever that way (although I detest him). Brian has put all his eggs in the NOM basket and that basket is crumbling right now. I feel like I am watching rats scuttling off the ship...

    Posted by: LHN | Nov 8, 2012 10:54:58 PM

  14. Kennedy will look at it and say, "wtf is up with NOM and their propaganda?" It's not NOM vs Gay people.

    Posted by: NeverEclipsed81 | Nov 8, 2012 11:08:22 PM

  15. Did I use the word "hate," Gary? No, I didn't. So WTF are you going on about?

    I did suggest you f*ck off though. I realize it's unlikely a contrarian troll such as yourself would actually DO that, but what can I say? Since the election I'm feeling very optimistic.

    Posted by: Caliban | Nov 8, 2012 11:13:27 PM

  16. If you insist on defending yourself with dated cliches like "troll" sorry you are a dim bulb. Since the election I'm feeling like nothing has changed, but if you want to be all inspired with the same thing, run with it - same won't win you any rewards in the bedroom though.

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 8, 2012 11:28:12 PM

  17. ". . . a bunch of self -indulgent, law twisting, group of arrogant brats."

    Well, that's a nice, respectful, tolerant statement, now isn't it? Just dripping civility.

    The "magic wand" is known as the 14th Amendment. Look it up.

    ". . . we need a good dose of law based on primal responsibility."

    That's completely incoherent. Is that anything like a primal scream? The kind we're hearing from the "Christian" right these days?

    Posted by: Hunter | Nov 8, 2012 11:32:45 PM

  18. I think people are writing off Roberts way too quickly. He surprised everyone with the healthcare ruling and he might do it again. The thing with DOMA is that it is very black and white, and it's not even about the rights of gays and lesbians to get married. If Scalia, Thomas and Alito are the textualists and state-rights advocates that they claimed to be, then even a unanimous decision striking down DOMA Section 3 (in a perfect world) is not completely out of the picture.

    Posted by: gayalltheway | Nov 9, 2012 12:19:11 AM

  19. Got to keep you guys on your toes. Descriptive writing is not your forte. One meaning of primal -" having existed from the beginning." Then the Court's responsibility would be to that. Primal responsibility - men and woman creating children. If you read more than back of a shampoo bottle....the conditioner is better.

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 9, 2012 12:23:17 AM

  20. @ CALIBAN: "suffering is a competition and rights are awarded after a quota has been met"... sounds pretty catholic to me.

    Posted by: my2cents | Nov 9, 2012 1:36:16 AM

  21. @Gary
    I'm sorry, is there a shortage of people in the US? Is making babies what marriage is really about? No, it's not. Descriptive writing doesn't seem to be your forte either as you've failed to give any coherent argument against having the court rule gay marriage constitutional, just the same oft-refuted tripe homophobes use. Judging by your insults and condescending manner I'd say you're either a troll or an extremely self-hating homosexual.

    Posted by: Alan | Nov 9, 2012 1:40:19 AM

  22. @Gary: Disagreement is not hate. Disagreement while lying/defaming/etc is hate. That's the point the SPLC makes with its "hate group" designation.

    Posted by: Diogenes Arktos | Nov 9, 2012 1:48:24 AM

  23. "@ CALIBAN: "suffering is a competition and rights are awarded after a quota has been met"... sounds pretty catholic to me."

    Did you miss the "NOT" that started that sentence? "Not that suffering is a competition and rights are awarded after a quota has been met."

    Gary, if you're not a "troll" in the widely accepted internet definition of the word- one who posts things just to get a reaction- you'll do until one comes along. I've never noticed any posts by you here before. Did I miss them or did you just show up two days after an election that is widely seen as a major victory for gays to "grace" up with your presence and share your fascinating opinions such as DOMA should be reaffirmed? (That alone screams TROLL, btw.)

    If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...

    Posted by: Caliban | Nov 9, 2012 2:07:51 AM

  24. @GAYALLTHEWAY-- Roberts' decision on healthcare was allowed by the people who own him, because the Court was looking like a republican tool. They figured on winning the Presidency and likely getting rid of it the next term, but Citizens United and overturning Roe are where their hearts and dollars lie.

    Posted by: Bob | Nov 9, 2012 2:23:04 AM

  25. To anyone wanting to donate to help the Ali Forney Center recover from Sandy, here is the address.
    Ali Forney Center/ATTN: Andria Ottley,
    224 West 35th St,
    Suite 1500
    NY,NY 10001
    Helping homeless gay kids that have been tossed out on their ear by hate filled, homophobic parents would be a wonderful way to celebrate winning marriage equality in three more states.

    Posted by: ***** | Nov 9, 2012 3:02:11 AM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Malawi Minister Now Claims Nation Not Reversing Anti-Gay Laws« «