NOM’s Mandatory Anti-Gay Discrimination Initiative

Rob Tisinai

February 2nd, 2013

2012 was a tough year for the National Organization for Marriage. Will they react by pulling back to moderate their goals, or will they thrash about, careening desperately into greater and greater extremism?

Now we know.

NOM does not want the Boy Scouts of America to allow gay scoutmasters. What this has to do with promoting a healthy marriage culture, I can’t say. But NOM prez Brian Brown is emphatic:

…the Scouts are considering a proposal to abandon their longstanding national policy, and instead leaving the decision of allowing homosexual scout leaders to each individual council.

As we know from the marriage battle, capitulation is not a strategy for preserving our cherished values. When homosexual activists demanded “rights” and “benefits” many well-meaning policymakers responded with “civil unions” and “domestic partnerships,” believing that this “compromise” would preserve marriage while providing tangible benefits for same-sex couples. Though many in the gay community lobbied for these changes, once enacted they quickly adopted a strategy of condemning them as “second class” and used them to successfully file lawsuits redefining marriage.

Even though their supporters have relentlessly pressured the Boy Scouts to admit openly homosexual men as scoutmasters with the responsibility of mentoring America’s youth, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) now says the “compromise” the Boy Scouts are considering does not go nearly far enough.

They will settle for nothing short of capitulation – homosexuality-affirming troops in every locale across America, tolerating no exceptions, period. Any parent or young man who holds a traditional Judeo-Christian view of sexual morality will be attacked as bigoted and accused of discriminatory conduct. You can imagine the lawsuits that will follow.

The BSA Board of Directors will be voting very soon on this new policy proposal — perhaps as early as Monday — and they are seeking public input into their decision. We need to make it clear that compromising honorable values is no path to organizational victory.

Actually, I can’t imagine the lawsuits that will follow. Despite NOM’s victim project, it’s never shown us a lawsuit in the U.S. based simply on someone holding a traditional Judeo-Christian view of sexual morality. This is their great fundraising fiction. Perhaps that explains why they have such money problems.

Let’s be clear on why Brian’s all a-flutter.

The Boy Scouts are not being required by law to stop discriminating.

They are not instituting a national non-discrimination policy.

They are not recommending that any local council stop discriminating.

They are merely pondering whether to let local councils decide for themselves.

And Brian Brown is freaking out. He’s drawing a battle line here and we should note it. I’ve searched for anything that would make Brian’s argument unique to the Boy Scouts, and I can’t find it. He’s made a case, right or wrong, that it’s a threat to religious liberty for private organizations to have no official policy on anti-gay discrimination. Brian’s reasoning — and correct me if I’m wrong — implies there is only way to protect religious freedom: make sure everybody out there implements and enforces a mandatory policy of discrimination against gay and lesbian people.

This is Dark Ages stuff. In Brian Brown’s utopia, no one will dare sue for anti-gay discrimination because no one will dare reveal themselves as gay. No one will come out to their friends. No one will acknowledge their partner. Because every group, every charity, every employer will have a mandatory no-gay policy. Anything less is “compromising honorable values” and opening good people up to lawsuits just for holding a belief.

And he wonders why we worry about second-class status.

 

Joseph Singer

February 2nd, 2013

Of course it doesn’t have anything to do with marriage equality. It has to do with the geh. As long as it has anything to do with the geh it must be eeeeevil!

StraightGrandmother

February 2nd, 2013

Rob,
I had not thought about it quite this, but you are right.

David in Houston

February 2nd, 2013

“They will settle for nothing short of capitulation…”

That’s funny. I was going to describe Mr. Brown the exact same way. He is intent on forcing his religious ideology on every one else (including those living in other countries), without ever acknowledging that we don’t live in a Christian theocracy, and that you don’t have to be religious in order to get married. Hypocrites don’t come much larger than Brian.

Richard Rush

February 2nd, 2013

“And Brian Brown is freaking out.”

It’s no wonder. He’s in the persecution business which is apparently paying him a half million dollars a year, and he’s supporting eight children. The lesson of the November elections was that he’s in a business catering to a rapidly declining market. So where does he go next when his resume shows his most recent job was the persecution of gay people, and he was a failure.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2013/01/fred-karger-reports-noms-brian-brown.html

iDavid

February 3rd, 2013

Richard,

Glad I read your post before I hit my Publish button…..

Hunter

February 3rd, 2013

Brown has lots of company in the shrill department — it guess that’s what happens when your cash cow starts to dry up.

gsingjane

February 3rd, 2013

I am very sorry to make this prediction, and I hope like heck the events of the coming week prove it incorrect.

I think the worst thing HRC could be doing right now is trying to pressure BSA into adopting a nation-wide non-discrimination policy. Yes, I understand the idea that it’s better to have one policy for everyone, and of course every boy should be able to be in an equality-minded troop. However, insisting on a “one size fits all” solution, right now, completely ignores BSA’s culture and the fact that they’re trying to please most of their constituencies here and preserve themselves as a going concern. (It also gives the very strong sense that HRC doesn’t understand much at all about BSA and way it operates.)

The fact is, if BSA institutes a nation-wide policy, they will lose probably a third to half their Scouts, right off the bat. It’s not reasonable to ask BSA to do that. And, they will also be seen as “caving” to the “homosexual lobby,” and believe me they don’t want to do that, either.

Kicking the issue to the councils is splitting the baby for sure, but in this case a split baby really is better than none. And what also really concerns me is that, when National does go to vote on this, it’s going to be really easy for the more conservative voices to say, look, the pro-gay people are telling us, “it’s got to be all or nothing,” and we’re not ready for “all.”

And, we will wind up with nothing.

Boy do I ever hope I’m wrong.

Ben in Oakland

February 3rd, 2013

Poor poor BryBry.

Your about 6 Inches away from joining and a few martinis Generalissimo Delgaudillo in the Department of Hysteria.

Homosexuality affirming troops in every locale in America, tolerating no exceptions? Shades of Little Rock, Miz Scarlett! Oh, you don’t mean the military, you mean Boy Scouts. Jack booted Boy Scouts, I’m sure.

I Don’t intend to be mean, but YOU’RE SUCH A DRAMA QUEEN! What with your obsession with homosexuality, and your dramatics, I’m starting to wonder a little about you.

All right, I did intend to be mean.

JohnAGJ

February 3rd, 2013

@gsingjane: Agreed. I’m willing to split the difference on this one and wait for the culture to catch up to bring about further change. Opening up BSA fully isn’t as important to me as ending DOMA or enacting ENDA and I’m concerned this side matter may negatively impact those efforts. Pressure can still be brought to bear against those councils which keep the ban, while those councils allowing gays will help bring about the needed change through example.

Markanthonydog

February 3rd, 2013

They need money. All their supporters are anti-gay, so they are just following their customer wishes. I was always supprised they didn’t get more in to the DADT issue.

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)
(Required, never shared)

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

 

Latest Posts

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

FBI Reports Massive Surge In Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes in 2015

Baptist General Convention of Texas Warns Churches in Dallas and Austin Over LGBT Inclusion

Trump Selects Alt-Right Nationalist As "Chief Strategist and Senior Counselor"

WITNESS: Bean Blossom, Indiana

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.