Guess who is NOT showing up at NOM’s rallies

Timothy Kincaid

July 29th, 2010

Today in St. Cloud, Minnesota, the National Organization for Marriage’s President Brian Brown told his ralliers, “This is a civil rights question. It’s about our civil rights.”

Brown speaks this line at every single tour stop on NOM’s Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas. Usually he invokes Dr. Martin Luther King.

In Annapolis, Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor at Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Maryland, told the crowd that “The major civil right, for those of us who went through the civil rights movement, is the right to vote . . . .”

Here he is:

And here is his audience:

Yesterday in St. Paul, Bishop Robert Battle, Senior Pastor of the Berean Church of God in Christ (a predominantly African-American church), told his listeners that “The African American church is firm on the biblical truth that marriage is one man and one woman.”

Here’s Bishop Battle:

And here’s another view of his audience:

Today Battle was scheduled to come to St. Cloud to be the black speaker. I’m not sure if he made it – the speakers’ chairs seem to be mostly empty and NOM’s blog makes no mention – but if so, he spoke to this crowd about the commitment of African Americans to the cause:

Now perhaps it’s just me, but it just seems that on average, NOM’s ralliers have had a distinct pale hue. Even in places with significant AfricanAmerican populations.


July 29th, 2010

Religious African Americans don’t troll the internet for activism.

If they are to be mobilized, it’s through their pastors. And especially a black head; they’re not gonna get riled up by some white man.


July 29th, 2010

“The major civil right, for those of us who went through the civil rights movement, is the right to vote . . . .”

Hey, I sure do agree with that. But you weren’t given that right for the purposes of mischief, toward which you intend to use it.

If you possess the historical perspective that you pretend to have, you’ll admit the foolishness of your disingenuous little quote.

Mike Tidmus

July 29th, 2010

How old was Harry Jackson during and what role did he play in the civil rights movement that he claims to have “went through?” He didn’t get out of high school until the mid-seventies.

If I recall, he went to exclusive predominantly white schools and preferred the company of affluent white families, according to the obsequious glamour shot he got in the Washington Post last November.


July 29th, 2010

This whole “right to vote” thing is a new NOM meme. Correct me if I’m wrong, but different states have different ways of voting amendments into their constitutions. Some states, like Iowa, make it harder to have their constitutions changed at the whim of the public. It seems like NOM is less intersted in voting to “protect marriageâ„¢” than changing the way states legislate based on their personal agendas.

Timothy Kincaid

July 29th, 2010

Thanks, Mike.

The African-American Civil Rights Movement is considered to have stretched from 1955 to 1968.

In 1968, Jackson was 15 years old, attending an almost-all-white private high school where he was “the black kid at Country Day who stayed in the houses of wealthy white people.”

I’m sure that Jackson has experienced discrimination first hand, but I am certain that he never ever had to fight for his right to vote.


July 29th, 2010

There’s no such thing as a civil right to vote on and deny other people their civil rights.

Regan DuCasse

July 29th, 2010

Tim, let’s please get together soon!

And I wasn’t sure if I should say something, but I was wondering where the black folks were too.

That lady with the accent who felt under attack because she was breast feeding in public looked black Hispanic. Puerto Rican or Cuban, but she was it.

You’re right. No one of color representing.
I’ve always suspected that Brian Brown doesn’t really know any black people except H. Jackson. And I’m sure that’s enough for him.

I might wonder if some black folks might have taken issue with the analogy to what these rallies are to civil rights. Folks sure enough lashed gay folks for it, even though there is actual legitimate parallels to point to, oh like discrimination and systemic bigotry and SEGREGATION.

Chris Buttars of the LDS was a new low in doing so. But hey, whipping up hysteria is what NOM is trying to do, right?

Timothy Kincaid

July 29th, 2010

Yes, I would like to do that, Regan. :)

Emily K

July 29th, 2010

But I thought (and forgive me if this is wrong) that the Black community was in general more homophobic, and more conservative religiously in church. I’ve heard from many black folks in internet comments or wherever how resentful they are that the gays have hijacked “their” movement (as if civil equality can be owned by any one group).

So I would think that they would not hesitate to show up to a cause they support – one-man-one-woman marriage.

And on the flip side, this is why I always take special notice whenever I see Black Queer voices raised, especially in a religious setting, because I know first hand the pain it brings to have your own “brothers and sisters” turn on you.


July 30th, 2010

Radical anti-gay activist Brown wants us to believe that it’s a “civil right” to vote away rights from other Americans. It’s not, it’s unamerican, unchristian and immoral. A moral wrong can never be a civil right.


July 30th, 2010

Wait a minute. I’m APPALLED that Jackson is trying to pretend that segregation and discrimination were not MAJOR aspects of the Black Civil Rights Movement! I’m offended by that – not as a gay man – but as a Black man. It’s clear this man grew up around privileged whites, b/c he’d never utter something so ridiculous as that otherwise. Don’t get me wrong, suffrage would arguably be considered the cornerstone of the Movement, but that is NOT the totality of what civil rights was – or ever has been – to Black people!

Emily K

July 30th, 2010

the major right is the “right to vote?” I know about voter intimidation of Blacks, but legally, black men were given the right to vote before even white women were.

If all it were about is suffrage, there would have been no need for sit-ins at “whites only” lunch counters.

Mihangel apYrs

July 30th, 2010

why isn’t NOM (FRC) agitating to remove the right of divorce for those who undergo a marriage before a clergy person?

After all marriage is one man, one woman, FOR LIFE!! (“let no man put asunder…….”)

Indeed that’s the sort amendment to tack onto proposals like prop8.


July 30th, 2010

I’m sure that since it’s a civil rights matter, they’ve gone to the ACLU for help… ;-)

This whole “right to vote” thing is a new NOM meme. Correct me if I’m wrong, but different states have different ways of voting amendments into their constitutions. Some states, like Iowa, make it harder to have their constitutions changed at the whim of the public. It seems like NOM is less interested in voting to “protect marriage™” than changing the way states legislate based on their personal agendas.

Oh, it’s part of the process of moving of goalposts and moving down the political pyramid as the anti-marriage side loses its arguments in each state.

Phase 1: gay people are immoralists who want special privileges that will destroy The Christian Family

Phase 2: those judges are judicial activists who don’t ‘get it’ that Western Civilization is at stake

Phase 3: the state legislature and governor have been bullied, blackmailed, conned, are themselves gay, or are delusional Liberals full of atheist mind poison

Phase 4: the people of State/Country X have fallen away from The One True God and will be overrun and enslaved by brownskinned Muslims as they contracept and abort themselves into extinction.

The “let the people vote” stage is most intense at stages 3 but often begins in stage 2. But it’s also magical thinking: so far the anti-marriage side hasn’t lost a marriage referendum. (In part because Massachusetts and New York haven’t had any.)

They will lose a popular referendum in 2012 in California. But so far the lack of losses is something they can cling to as rationale for hope now that no respectable court will accept their theory anymore. Elected politicians are treating them as nuisances because they all know the trend lines show that legalization is going to have popular majorities in favor everywhere that matters in the next 10-15 years. Major churches are turning cold to them.

It gets worse: I hadn’t (and few people outside it had) realized what a problem the RCC in particular has in the form of the amount of gay men in the clergy ranks. From Italy there’s a sense lately that some sort of implosion is in the making, has become inevitable in the foreseeable future. The Vatican is in a bind: liberalizing the rules undoes in essence the re-orthodoxification that JPII and Benedict have tried to accomplish. Tightening enforcement or purges might collapse the RCC as an organization in the West (and maybe elsewhere). And doing nothing means that the average congregants continue to walk out the door at an unbearable rate.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.