Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

NOM quotes Laurie Higgins; claims it’s Chicago Tribune

Timothy Kincaid

October 8th, 2013

Once a voice for those who opposed marriage equality in a somewhat civil tone, the National Organization for Marriage is racing down the fast lane towards anti-gay extremism. In the past few months, as it has became unavoidable clear that equality is the near future, NOM has abandoned all pretense of principled opposition on the issue of marriage and has been edging towards becoming just another of the shrill voices screaming about the homosexual agenda and ranting about what the evil radical homosexual lobby is trying to do to destroy America and harm Christians (as they define them).

Today is another example: (NOMblog)

Same-sex ‘marriage’ radicals are at it again… the latest example comes from Chicago.

In what the Chicago Tribune rightly called “a stunning public admission” openly homosexual Democratic State Representative Greg Harris of Chicago, outright admitted in a public debate that the proposed law in Illinois redefining marriage did NOT provide religious liberty or conscience protections for individual Christian business owners.

The article continued, saying that “it was clear that both he and homosexual Chicago Alderman Deb Mell (a former state representative and co-sponsor of SB 10) oppose any such protections.” (emphasis added).

That seemed odd to me, as the Trib hasn’t referred to someone as “homosexual Chicago Alderman” since the 90′s. This is the rhetoric not of reporters or even editorial boards, but of anti-gay activists. So I did a little searching and, sure enough, this didn’t come from the Chicago Tribune’s reporters or editorial staff at all.

It came from Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute, one of only 34 groups listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an active anti-gay group (a “hate group”). And that “stunning public admission”, yeah that was only Laurie being “stunned”.

Now most of us can pretty easily distinguish between raging bias-based ranting and news coverage. But it is becoming increasingly evident that Brian Brown and others at the National Organization for Marriage live in a world where anti-gay epithets and paranoid raging against gay Americans seems normal and ordinary.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

homer
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

I’ve noticed that since Thomas Peters’ accident that NOM has just gone crazy. Wonder if there is a connection.

markanthony
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

I would go back further. Since the votes in 2012, NOM has been gone further and further down the rabbit hole. That is when they started to comment on issues like the BSA policy change.

I think its a calculated, if unspoken, decision to pander to their supporters. Today the majority of anti-SSM people are also anti-gay. They seemed to have significantly up’ed the religious element too. The rally in DC was populated entirely by religious groups.

Ben In Oakland
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

“I think its a calculated, if unspoken, decision to pander to their supporters.”

We’ve always known that there was NEVER any principled opposition to marriage equality coming form NOM. It has always been window dressing on their basically antigay positions.

But here, I think you’re right. What it is now is an attempt to keep the gravy train rolling for a few more stations.

Michael Smith
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

Has someone contacted the Chicago Tribune and/or the reporter to notify them they’re being misquoted? Theymight want to send a cease and desist order.

Nathaniel
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

When has a court order ever stopped them from doing what they want?

I agree that this has really picked up since their first major losses of the popular vote. They are no longer winning the popularity contest, so they are increasing their public use of vindictive, underhanded tactics.

TampaZeke
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

NOM never had a “principled opposition” to marriage equality. They lied and mislead from the very beginning. Their “civility” was nothing more than a planned, focus-group-tested campaign strategy that went contrary to everything in their nature. Fortunately, just like homocon Colton Cumbie on Survivor they could only hold their breath for so long before their true, Scott Lively, nature came crashing through.

Richard Rush
October 8th, 2013 | LINK

Now that NOM is reduced to focusing on their core group of contentedly ignorant supporters, they don’t have to worry so much about them thinking for themselves, considering alternate views, or asking embarrassing questions. Nom just needs to supply a steady stream of lies and delusion to keep them fired up (and writing checks).

If their supporters weren’t contentedly ignorant, they wouldn’t be NOM supporters.

bill johnson
October 9th, 2013 | LINK

Equality maters reported that the Chicago Tribune was notified and that the Chicago Tribune would contact NOM to get a correction. The post on NOM’s blog has been corrected and has this note: [An earlier version of this message misattributed statements on the Illinois Family Institute blog to the Chicago Tribune. These errors have been corrected. - Ed.]

So good job everyone, drawing attention to NOM’s misrepresentation ended up forcing a correction.

Soren456
October 9th, 2013 | LINK

Just one note on vocabulary. Beware of the term religious “protections,” as used in the fake news story; the real term would be “exemptions.”

If we ever accept the word, and argue about “protections,” we are arguing on their terms, and their terms are false. The law does nothing from which they need protection.

What they actually seek is exemption from the law, on the basis of their religion, and that is how we ought to keep the arguments framed.

Priya Lynn
October 9th, 2013 | LINK

Thanks for that Soren, I’ll be remembering it.

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.