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Virginia could no longer ban interracial marriage, reversing a ruling that had stood since 1883, after several states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws.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. In a world where Newt Gingrich can get "married" to a woman he earlier paid, with taxpayer money, to have sex with him, and murderers like the Menendez brothers can get
    "married" to their prison pen pals, there can be no rational argument against marriage equality.

    However, given the squeamishness of the SC in getting ahead of the public, I think the best result would be a refusal to hear the Prop 8 case, so marriage equality returns to California, and a decision to overturn Section 3 of DOMA, so the feds recognize all relationships in states with marriage equality. We will likely have to wait until another case to overturn the anti-gay hate amendments of 2004 and 2008.

    Posted by: CPT_Doom | Nov 9, 2012 7:36:51 AM

  2. @ Gary
    "Why is disagreement always "hate?""

    It isn't.

    Disagreement is "I disapprove of the nature of your relationship because of my religious beliefs. I wouldn't be in that sort of relationship, and if you ask me for my opinion, I will give it to you."

    Hate is lying and manipulating, using known false data and conclusions, lying about the consequences of a law, and firing up people's fears so that you can pass laws and change Constitutions to take away other people's right to make choices that work for them.

    Disagreement is "I think your furniture is ugly." Hate is burning down the neighbor's house because you can't stand their furniture.

    I'm perfectly happy if someone says "I agree with my religion that your civil marriage is not sacramentally blessed by God the way that mine is." That's disagreement. But when it goes to "I am going to use civil law to ensure that you have to conform to my religious view of marriage" that moves into hateful.

    That cannot be this hard for you to understand.

    Posted by: Lymis | Nov 9, 2012 8:19:21 AM

  3. "This is what I think about marriage, per a writer, who was a famous gay historian, Canadian -- Rick Bebout (1950-2009) Aids

    "Marriage: This grand struggle over one word has ever put symbolism over substance, sentiment over sense, "respectability" over true self-respect. What might have been an effort to win legal respect for a range of human relationships was instead made a "gay issue." By gay people themselves -- finding it "strategic" to play oppressed victims" (love that last line)

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 9, 2012 2:22:24 PM

  4. "They love each other, sure, but their love is of a quotidian 'honey can you pick up some bread on the way home from work' variety that's launched a billion midlife crises. But it's important to read about these particular bores because they are the apotheosis of the modern drive toward same-sex marriage...."

    "Gay" was once seen as a nice little word abducted by perverts for immoral purposes. It has now been adopted by nice couples hoping to trot it out in "respectable" drag. And by marketers hawking it, wrapped in rainbows, as a glamorous consumer "lifestyle." Maybe the rest of us need to find a new word." RCB

    Posted by: Gary | Nov 9, 2012 2:42:56 PM

  5. « 1 2

Post a comment


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