National Organiztion for Marriage Warns of a “Gathering Storm” of Gay Rights

With the recent marriage equality victories in Iowa and Vermont, anti-gay bigots are quite understandably freaking out — what with the impression they’re getting that maybe people in this country are coming around and at least starting to very slightly see the error of their ways. Well, bigots can’t have that! So NOM has launched this new advertisement, which is called “Gathering Storm.” And it’s, well, wow.

Transcript via Renee:

“There’s a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong and I am afraid. Some who advocate for same sex marriage have taken the issue far beyond same sex couples. They want to bring the issue into my life. My freedom will be taken away. I’m a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job. I’m part of a New Jersey church group punished by the government because we can’t support same sex marriage. I’m a Massachusetts parent helpless watching public schools teach my son that gay marriage is okay. But some who advocate same sex marriage have not been content with same sex couples living as they wish. Those advocates want to change the way I live. I will have no choice. The storm is coming. But we have hope, a rainbow coalition of people of every creed and color are coming together in love to protect marriage. Paid for by National Organization for Marriage which is responsible for the content of this ad.”

Oh noes!  I’m a doctor who can’t legally refuse to treat people . . . because they’re, uh . . . married?  What?  Oh, actually I just want to be able to refuse to see LGBT patients at my leisure.  I’m a parent whose school is teaching my child not to hate people!!!!!  Even worse, I’m a member of a church group, and the government is punishing us because . . . oh wait, separation of church and state.  Actually, the government can’t do anything about what me and my hateful little church group do, so long as we’re engaging in private activities, so I’m just making stuff up now.  (The actual events that are behind each and everyone of these lies can be found here.)

And seriously?  A rainbow coalition?  They have a rainbow coalition?  Yay, co-opting the language of your opposition!

Anyway, the fact is that ridiculous though it sounds to those of us who know better and aren’t as susceptible to hate-mongering, this kind of thing actually worked in California.

And interestingly, with the knowledge that ballot initiatives will likely be the only chance for marriage equality in California, that’s exactly where the ad seems to be getting a whole lot of airplay. The Courage Campaign in California is therefore encouraging you to donate as a part of a campaign to raise $25,000 in matching funds.

One Iowa is also fighting back with a petition against the use of out of state funds to attack the rights of Iowans.

Pam has more. If you know of any other groups who are taking action or launching rebuttals, leave the information in the comments.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

This entry was posted in Advertising, Discrimination, GLBTQ, Marriage, Media & Media Literacy, Politics and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

52 Responses to National Organiztion for Marriage Warns of a “Gathering Storm” of Gay Rights

  1. James says:

    My desire is to copy the entire ad with new voices saying “My rights are more important than yours”, “My job is more important than yours”

    I want to define the issue as “My rights are more important than American Rights for all Americans not just ME”

  2. James says:

    Or “My rights are more important than “Liberty and Justice for All”

  3. Courtney says:

    Wow that was disturbing. I can’t believe people can say that shit and actually show their faces. They are not even ashamed of their hatred and stupidity.

  4. Chris says:

    You ain’t seen NUTHIN’ yet, folks. I grew up with people like this. I know just the kind of evil that they are capable of in the name of God’s Love.

    I say, BRING IT ON! Keep doing what your doing, NOM, and those who share your views.

    Ads like this ‘out’ you for who and what you really are, and, in the end, will only help to further the casue of marriage equality.

    They are right in 1 area, though. A storm IS coming. And when the storm is over, they are ALL invited to my big gay wedding.

  5. Magis says:

    And yea verily there was wailing and gnashing of teeth. :)

  6. Becca says:

    Can anyone else also not take this seriously because their name makes you think of Cookie Monster going “NOM NOM NOM!!!”

  7. Elyssa says:

    What?

    This is just ridiculous.

  8. Herr K says:

    I saw this ad yesterday and was SO mad, esp at the “Rainbow Coalition” — WFT?!?!? It makes me want to puke. I want to show it to my students as an example of empty rhetoric — it’s so deliberately vague. Blech. My “favorite” part is about teaching kids that gay marriage is ok — well, it is, and not just because it just is, but also because it’s legal in Massachusetts. If you don’t like Mass, no one’s going to miss you if you leave.

  9. qvd says:

    I think this commercial should have very loud farting noises inserted whenever the words “cloud” “wind” or “storm” are spoken. That would really improve it.

  10. Cara says:

    Can anyone else also not take this seriously because their name makes you think of Cookie Monster going “NOM NOM NOM!!!”

    Yup :) The link in the post to “NOM” is working off precisely that sort of joke . . . I assure you, I wouldn’t like to their actual website.

  11. Zula says:

    I’ll give them a rainbow coalition. >:[ *shakes fist*

  12. Josh Spinks says:

    Tangential question, but it seems to be widely accepted, even among liberals, that churches shouldn’t be forced to marry same-sex couples. Insofar as marriage is a contract administered by the government, when a church performs a legally binding marriage, it is acting as an agent of the government. If the state forbids discrimination in marriage on the basis of sexual orientation, then why shouldn’t churches, to the extent that they are wielding state power (by perfoming legal, not just ceremonial marriages) be bound be the same rules as the state?

  13. Cara says:

    If the state forbids discrimination in marriage on the basis of sexual orientation, then why shouldn’t churches, to the extent that they are wielding state power (by perfoming legal, not just ceremonial marriages) be bound be the same rules as the state?

    For the same reason that the Catholic Church has every right to not marry me due to the fact that I’m an atheist? Even though there are laws which forbid discrimination on the basis of religion?

    The fact is that they have the right to not marry anyone they want, not just same-sex couples. I suppose that we you can easily argue against that as well, but it seems only fair to take the full picture into account.

  14. Josh Spinks says:

    Of course they can refuse people, but my question is why? I think religious organizations should be barred from using any government power, but to the extent they can, they should have to marry anyone they government marries.

  15. ACG says:

    Wow that was disturbing. I can’t believe people can say that shit and actually show their faces. They are not even ashamed of their hatred and stupidity.

    It’s worse than that – they don’t even believe it themselves. Someone approached them and said, “Hey, want to be a bigoted asshole on camera and get paid for it?” And not only were they willing to do it, they auditioned for the opportunity.

    Now there’s a good one for your audition reel. “I also have exposure in a national ad campaign, Mr. … Van Sant, is it?”

  16. prairielily says:

    I’m sorry, but…

    Om Nom Nom Nom

    Also, this is terrible.

  17. Ista says:

    You know what, little lady? I am afraid. I am afraid you guys are completely and utterly full of shit and boy is it starting to stink.

    I mean, Jesus, how dare we try to use gay marriage to take your right to think that gays are teh evilz. Oh, wait, that wouldn’t work!

  18. The Opoponax says:

    Josh – my best guess is that it is the way it is because if we understood private religious organizations as acting as agents of the government, that would very heavily suggest that there truly is no separation of church and state.

    I’m quite happy to let the Catholic church not marry divorced people if it means that they’re not actually considered formally a part of the US government. Because to be perfectly honest with you, looking at the political reality right now, I can tell you that if we decided that churches are formally a part of the US government, the outcome would be pretty bad for people who are not religious. I don’t think it’s something we want to argue just to make a neat little point about government and religion.

  19. ACG says:

    Of course they can refuse people, but my question is why? I think religious organizations should be barred from using any government power, but to the extent they can, they should have to marry anyone they government marries.

    The line between church and state does get blurry in places, especially when a church receives funding for some of its programs, but piling a lot of restrictions on religious organizations is a great way to start encroaching on First Amendment rights.

    I’m with you: In an ideal world, we’d have government “marriage” on one side and religious “marriage” on the other, and couples could do one or the other or both and have their marriage recognized accordingly. Until that happens, though, there has to be a compromise, and letting churches choose which marriages to acknowledge – while requiring state entities to do so – is the least-bad one, as far as I can see.

    Make no mistake, I’m still kind of ticked that the church I belonged to for nearly three decades won’t marry me to my Buddhist boyfriend. We could choose a different, more open-minded church, but we can also elope to a JOP. I think the important thing right now is to ensure that everyone, gay or straight, has those same rights, and then concentrate on expanding those rights for everyone. Not that the two things can’t happen at once, of course.

  20. William says:

    People of all creeds? Really? ALL creeds? Hmm…something smells fishy….lets go to the dictionary:

    – any system of principles or beliefs
    – religious doctrine: the written body of teachings of a religious group that are generally accepted by that group

    I wonder how many Thelemites they have. Or unitarians.

    Also, theres gotta be some terrible meme waiting to happen to a group named NOM.

  21. Cara says:

    What kind of storm is gathering? This YouTube video has just answered the question. I may make you feel slightly better.

  22. Cassie says:

    Seattle’s The Stranger has a fun rebuttal of the ad’s arguments here.

  23. Misspelled says:

    I love how vaguely they have to describe each of these “threats” in order to create the impression that they’re making any kind of sense.

    Seriously, “a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job”? What? Where?

  24. Miss Nomered says:

    Now people of all races and religions can unite in their hate of people like me! Yipee!

    (Are these people aware of the fact that they’ve become caricatures of themselves?)

  25. Bagelsan says:

    Cara, that video was the best thing ever! That is a storm I am *totally* on board with. :D

  26. UnFit says:

    I love th erainbow coalition, and also I love how fucking vague they are about anything that actually concerns them.

    Bring me one specific example of how gay marriage is affecting *you* in any way.
    No?
    Didnt think so.

  27. Pingback: Proper Talks » Blog Archive » The Gay Storm is a Comin’!

  28. Pingback: There’s a storm a brewin « Feminocracy

  29. A rainbow coalition of bigots are coming together in love to protect marriage even though in the beginning of the commercial we didn’t have a problem with gay marriage but with the big gay storm of tolerance that has affected our lives somehow by no longer being able to implement our bigotry legally.

    Woe is them.

  30. Sara says:

    I still don’t understand how any straight married couple’s freedom would be taken away when same-sex marriage is legalized nationwide. Their marriage will still be recognized by the government.

    The ‘every creed and color’ line was unintentionally humorous simply because it is in a commercial to exclude people. The fact that this is serious is scary.

  31. Douglas Vogt says:

    My Bible says: “Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.” Sounds like these “christians” are doing just that. No way are we affecting their lives.

  32. Courtney says:

    Someone correct me if I’m wrong but churches can’t perfrom legally binding marriages without the government. Everyone has to get a marriage liscence from the state first. When I got married that is what I did then I went to a magistrate for the ceremony. I didn’t go to a church because I am an athiest. As far as I’m concerned the churches can do what they please, because I didn’t want any part of that nonsense to begin with. And like an above commenter said I don’t want them to have anymore power than they already do.

  33. Alex, FCD says:

    Seriously, “a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job”? What? Where?

    The quote refers to a California Supreme Court ruling that a doctor who specializes in fertility treatment cannot withhold care from a patient simply because she is a lesbian. This ruling came down before the marriage equality ruling in Cali, so it’s a complete red herring.

    Anyhow, plenty of people in the health services have to “choose between their faith and their jobs” all the time, and nobody really thinks it’s a bad idea. Seventh Day Adventist and Jehovah’s Witness doctors have to transfuse when it’s necessary, Orthodox Jewish doctors have to respect a DNR order, Baptist, Mormon and Muslim doctors have to give booze to people who have methanol poisoning, Scientologist pharmacists have to dispense psychiatric medication… Is anybody really opposed to this?

  34. Kwachie says:

    And they’ve named their grassroots campaign “2 Million For Marriage” … the official acronym? 2M4M.

    Nom! I can haz cheezeburger?

  35. UnFit says:

    Why two million? That seems to be a pretty meager slice of the American population. Or is that the amount of money they want for that bullshit?

  36. Berg says:

    A storm brewing…talking heads…doctors, and churches, and parents, oh my…with a “Rainbow Coalition” that smacks of the Lollipop Guild? I see an anti-gay rights “Wizard of Oz” on the horizon. And guess what happens to the ‘Wicked Dick’ at the end of the movie Damon Owens?

  37. Butch Fatale says:

    I wonder how the Rainbow Push Coalition feels about NOM stealing their name for this horrible ad?

    Clearly NOM fears mandatory same-sex unions. Like the lady says – she won’t have a choice.
    http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30475

  38. Xenophon says:

    Dear Fellow Anti-fascists,

    Just a little encouragement and inspiration for those gathering on the 15th to fight the fascist criminals.

    Let’s party like it’s 1773!

    Watch the whole thing:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvpRhkikKh8&feature=PlayList&p=81105B02B66CD892&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=4

  39. Rebecca says:

    2M4M does not sound like a campaign against marriage equality so much as an abbreviation in a personal ads section by a gay couple looking for a third gentleman.

  40. Gina says:

    It is a sad day when people will pool their money to support ignorance of this magnitude. This ish is not limited to the US..it is worldwide.

  41. hermes says:

    co-opt THEIR language right back! start a pro-gay-marriage group called the National Marriage Organization (NMO). I talk about it at http://hermesjourneys.blogspot.com

  42. The Opoponax says:

    OK, now that I’ve finally seen the video (yay three day weekends for random holidays I don’t believe in and know very few people who actually celebrate!), I have to say one thing.

    These actors look like they REALLY don’t want to be there. Like they’re totally ashamed to have to show up and say these words and are wincing in anticipation of this being on TV for the entire country to see. But they need the money, sooooo…

    Also, on a completely different note, I’d love to see a slickly produced nationally televised commercial with various religious minorities saying real true facts about how they are actually discriminated against in everyday life. You could have some Jewish people saying, “I have to use my sick days to practice my religion.” A Khalsa Sikh saying, “As a New York City cop, I have to choose between my religion and my job*.” A Muslim girl in a headscarf saying, “It has been a challenge to practice my religion without being taunted in school.” A Wiccan soldier saying, “If I die in combat and have the honor of being buried in a military cemetery, my religion’s symbols may not be put on my headstone.”

    You know, ACTUAL religious discrimination. As opposed to trumped up bullcrap.

    *(It’s the NYPD that said that turbans and other religiously required headwear constituted an unacceptable dress code violation, right?)

  43. Bushfire says:

    That Onion article had me howling with laughter. Thanks for posting it.

  44. evil_fizz says:

    These actors look like they REALLY don’t want to be there. Like they’re totally ashamed to have to show up and say these words and are wincing in anticipation of this being on TV for the entire country to see. But they need the money, sooooo…

    Have you not seen the footage from the audition tapes, which were apparently leaked. They’re very funny. Plus, it’s Rachel Maddow showing them.

  45. hermes says:

    co-opt THEIR language right back at them! someone should start a pro-gay-marriage group with a very similar name, such as the National Marriage Organization or the American Organization for Marriage. more at http://hermesjourneys.blogspot.com/2009/04/redefining-marriage.html

  46. Bakka says:

    Here is an interesting video that asks Canadians how legalizing same-sex marriage (about 4 years ago) has changed their lives http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z08DWTOW8s the answer from most, “not at all.” Why would things be different in the USA?

  47. cathy says:

    I wonder if they realized that their name NOM sounds like NAM (at least with some accents). Everytime I hear it I think NAM? I thought that ended decades ago….

  48. Alyssa says:

    The anti-gay marriage campaigns use the tactic of fear to convince people to be against gay marriage and it works (read: Prop 8 in CA). People really do think that allowing gay marriage will somehow affect their lives. We need to clear the air and let people see for themselves that this isn’t true, and these accusations are just using scare tactics.
    Their common arguments are:
    1. “Allowing gay marriage will destroy marriage”
    How? Please give me one example of how someone else’s marriage affects your own?
    2. “My church shouldn’t have to marry gay couples.”
    We need to make it clear that no one is asking this. Just as churches can refuse to marry people outside of their faith (or members of the church), people who are not baptized, people who have been divorced, etc., churches can still refuse to marry gay couples if the state legalizes gay marriage.
    3. “I believe that homosexuality is wrong, and I don’t want my child’s school teaching my child it is okay.”
    Schools are not required to teach that gay marriage is okay. Every state has a set of standards (usually based off of national standards), and I have not yet seen a standard that mentions gay (or even straight marriage). This means that schools do not teach kids about gay marriage. Say it with me now: schools do NOT teach anything about gay marriage. If your kid’s teacher says starts teaching your kids about gay marriage, you have the right to complain to the principal and the right to have your child placed in a different class.
    The idea that schools are teaching kids about homosexuality is a myth. Next time anyone tells you they don’t want schools teaching their kids about gay marriage politely ask them to show you the standard that would require that. You may not win over the person that you are talking to, but you might just get the point across to anyone else listening.
    4. “Homosexuality is a sin”
    You have every right to think this. However, you do NOT have the right to take away other people’s right based on your sense of morality. Voting for gay marriage is not an endorsement for homosexuality. It is just a statement that you shouldn’t be telling others how to live their lives.

  49. someone says:

    When the Nazis came for the communists,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a communist.

    Then they locked up the social democrats,
    I remained silent;
    I was not a social democrat.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    I did not speak out;
    I was not a Jew.

    When they came for me,
    there was no one left to speak out for me.

  50. Ryan says:

    Here’s how this would’ve read in 1860:

    “There’s a storm gathering. The clouds are dark and the winds are strong and I am afraid. Some who advocate for anti-slavery have taken the issue far beyond African couples. They want to bring the issue into my life. My freedom will be taken away. I’m a California doctor who must choose between my faith and my job. I’m part of a New Jersey church group punished by the government because we can’t support anti-slavery. I’m a Massachusetts parent helplessly watching public schools teach my son that slaves have rights too. But some who advocate anti-slavery have not been content with freed slaves living as they wish. Those advocates want to change the way I live. I will have no choice. The storm is coming. But we have hope, a rainbow coalition of people of every creed and color are coming together in love to protect slavery.”

  51. Angela says:

    The moment the governor of RI (Don Carcieri) decided to uphold the values of NOM and stand against gay marriage for RI, I started to see these commercials on my TV. I’m sorry, but this poor vulnerable victimized MA mom doesn’t want her children to be taught that gay marriage is OK? Well, I don’t want to be enjoying my favorite television show only to have your hate mongering brain vomit thrown down my throat. Considering I stand for equal rights, who seems to be the victim now?

    Honestly, and most unfortunately, there is really NO reasoning with people who are this lost. My own father, who is honestly a very reasonable and normally decent man, is against gay marriage. And when I tried to understand why, his reasoning was this: “Why should some guy I work with who is married to a man be able to share his pension and health insurance with that guy?” And I said (biting my tongue): “Because Dad…..you are able to share those very things with mom, it’s absolutely NO different – other than genitals. The love is there, the commitment is there, and they deserve all the same rights that you and mom are able to have.” And his response? “I just don’t agree with it.”

    I don’t doubt that any of these right wing assholes HAVE NO IDEA WHY they are so opposed to this. I’ll tell you why, BECAUSE IT’S DIFFERENT. This lack of reasoning pisses me off to no end.

  52. Pingback: Some Facts/What This Means for You

Comments are closed.