Box Turtle Bulletin

NOM’s Louis Marinelli’s blogsite goes ‘invite only’

It now appears that the National Organization for Marriage has silenced their loose cannon, Louis Marinelli. While he is likely still driving the bus for their Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas, his blogsite can now be seen only by invitation. As Marinelli’s existences seems to revolve around expressing his contempt for gay men and women, that must frustrate him immensely.

NOM supporter advocates hanging gay couples

The National Organization for Marriage had this supporter out in Indianapolis today:

That’s Larry Adams. When the Trial Trackers interviewed Mr. Adams, a NOM staffer advised him not to say “anything inflammatory” but seemed to have no objection to Mr. Adams’ signage.

In order to punish people for doing the wrong thing, you’re stopping sin like this here. If homosexuality was against the law, if it was punished like it’s supposed to be, there wouldn’t be so much homosexuality out here.

Bil Browning has additional photos at the Bilerico Project

And one more time with the solution:

UPDATE: To date (7/27) I’ve not seen any renunciation of the sign or its message by NOM or anyone affiliated with NOM. However, here’s the discussion that occurred when an equality supporter posted the sign on NOM’s Facebook page:

Eva Kurilova: Nice.
Although I fully understand that not all of you, not even a majority of you, want to hang/kill gays.
Unlike your failure to understand that most gay people have been peacefully protesting. That two people storming a podium does not equal an entire movement or an entire segment of the population, and so you constantly gripe about troublesome gay activists that the rest of us should answer for. Well, answer for this then. [picture of noose sign posted]

Dustin Brian Lee Tenney: The fact that nobody stopped them, and nobody on their side apologized for it doesn’t help your case Eva.

Nick Jones: Does peaceful protest also include women making out in front of the podium trying to make a mockery of the rally. If they were really peaceful protesters they would leave their megaphones at home as well as their lifestyle.

Theresa Preece: That depends on the meaning behind the picture and the verse. Not that I agree with the choice of “art” but it could be argued that when people willingly chose to live in sin- as in the case the sin of homosexuality- that they are chosing death over life. As in death to eternal life- and that the choice (the choice of death, which is represented in the two nooses) is on them. Again, I don’t agree with the choice of artwork, but as is the case – it is open to interpertation and that is one interpertation that differs from yours, Eva.

Shannon Williams: One can’t hold the conservative movement reponsible for what that scripture says. God, himself, wrote that verse, as well as all verses in his holy Word. If that verse bites, your beef is with the Creator of the Universe, not with any human.

I don’t see any disagreement with the sign’s message that gay couples should be executed.

Some Hallelujah testimony from Durango, CO

This is a letter to the editor in the Durango Herald which just speaks for itself:

The 4 Corners Pride Festival held June 26 at Rotary Park was far more successful than anyone could imagine. God used the park and pride event for his silent pulpit to touch all who attended.

Unknown to the attendees, everyone received a blessing and permanently was touched by God’s Holy Spirit. This included straight and homosexual people.

While the pride fest participants were indulging in their prefest party at the Lost Dog Bar & Lounge on the evening of June 25, a group of dedicated Christians met at Rotary Park for prayer and physical anointing of the park with God’s holy oil. The oil has extreme spiritual power to overcome Satan’s grip on those who are not Christians. Because of this, the Holy Spirit will remain with each individual as long as believing Christians continue to keep it activated with prayer.

Escape from homosexuality is possible with God’s help. The Wednesday evening prayer chain for salvation is still alive and active. It was established to bring homosexuals to Jesus for eternal salvation and for deliverance from their lifestyle.

Any individual or community that continues to accept and condone homosexuality is going against God’s teachings and will suffer severe consequences. This is explained in the King James Bible, which accurately has predicted mankind’s future for more than 2,000 years.

Everyone is welcome to join the prayer chain by simply asking Jesus to include you in the many prayers going to God on Wednesday evenings.

Vi McCoy, Durango

Let’s just say that Vi doesn’t speak for all Christians. Or most Christians. Or anyone with even the vaguest knowledge of either history or the King James Version of the Bible. Or for King James. Or anyone with a high school education. Or anyone whose TV gets the History Channel. Or for the prayer-chain members in Durango. Well… maybe for the prayer-chain members in Durango.

First hand report from NOM’s rally in Indianapolis

Reader Lindoro Almaviva has provided this first hand report of the National Organization for Marriage rally and the counter protest.

NOM had a “good day” here in Indy compared to the abysmal attendance that has plagued their tour. Bill Browning and I counted about 37-40 people who came in to Support NOM, in contrast, the count for Marriage equality supporter rose to about 200-225 (someone said 250) .

Maggie was the main speaker and it is my understanding that Bill Browning has a video of the whole thing, he told me once it is up on YouTube he will send you the link.

For the most part, there were no incidents except for the same guy who comes to the side of the protesters to incite them and throw insults. A couple of people engaged him (which I am sure they will use to support their victim status) but that was it. Latter during lunch I head that he shoved some lady, but did it in a way that the police didn’t see him and the lady was asked to move. I guess it is OK for them to shove people around but not Ok for us to protest them, the ironies of the world.

The counter protesters were a rowdy bunch. They consistently drowned the speakers with the usual chants of “We want marriage equality”, No equality no peace” and the such, but also they shouted slogans like “We love you NOM” and “Welcome to Indianapolis.” Interestingly enough, while there were about 7-10 police officers walking around, there were no fences to separate both crowds. For the most part, those os us with Cameras and even some people with signs co-mingled with those attending the rally. Except for the shoving incident (which I didn’t see) there was no incident to speak about, just the usual remark like “even the protesters showed up to our rally” to which the protesters responded to “we want you to see what a real majority looks like.”

After the rally was over, people attending it left the area like someone committed a party foul while the people attending the counter demonstration stayed and held an actual protest demanding marriage equality, we also had a photo op at the bus (seems like the bus is becoming more of a celebrity than the speakers in the tour) and needless to say, the chant of “Move that bus!” was quite popular (Thank you Ty Pennington!).

Later on, I was talking to someone and we were saying how interesting it is that NOM has spent thousands of dollars and spent months preparing, promoting and booking venues for this tour for no one to show up, yet a small page put by someone on FaceBook in Indianapolis grew to over 3000 invitations and over 200 attendees in a matter of days. We were saying that it will be impossible to claim this tour has been anything else than a complete failure. We were also wondering if NOM, in booking these stops on weekdays, were trying to show how powerful their message is because they thought at the sight of a stop in their city, people would sacrifice their lunch hours or schedule a day off from work just to be at the rally; only to be confronted with the fact that people are NOT leaving work, or their homes, or their lunch hour to come and hear their message. I personally wonder what is going on in their staff meetings and how they are spinning the situation to volunteers and staffers who are questioning where the crowds went.

I’m trying to download some pictures and will add them when I succeed.

Nom tours a mostly-empty plaza in Indianapolis

The National Organization for Marriage rolled into Indianapolis on their Summer for Marriage Tour and the welcome was decidedly underwhelming. As has been the case in most of the stops on their Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas, the crowd was sparse and the counterprotest had more size, creativity, and energy.

The Courage Campaign’s Tour Tracker posted tentative preliminary attendance at the start of about 29 (though this picture shows more) and the protest at about 95. If we see updates, we’ll let you know.

It seems that equality supporters stayed back in their designated area and chanted. In one of the strangest comments so far, NOM’s Maggie Gallagher said “… not even the noisiest protests could drown out the voice and values of Indiana’s majority.” Because having no one show up means that you speak for the majority, I guess.

Maggie spent much of her time in town speaking to politicians. I hope they glanced out the window and saw how truly ineffective and uninspiring that she and NOM really are.

I believe at some point today we will have first hand comments and pictures from a regular BTB reader.

Rob Tisinai takes on Molotov Mitchell

Anti-gay activists hate it when you use the word “hate” so I won’t say that WorldNetDaily’s Molotov Mitchell hates you. He just wants to love you to death.

But publicly calling for the execution of all gay people is a little extreme – even for WND – so Mitchell and crew have revised their call to execution of some gay people and limit it, for now, to overseas. In this way Mitchell and WND can support Uganda’s “kill the gays” bill but pretend that they only want to kill the really bad gays. But to do so, Mitchell has to lie through his teeth about what is really in the bill.

But Rob Tisinai isn’t letting him get away with it. Rob, whose videos never cease to make me smile, has an ability to cut through the bullpoop and distill the position and logic of anti-gays into easily understandable – and easily mockable – concepts.

But that assumes that there is some logic to distill. And in this case, it seems that Mitchell is just saying anything that serves his argument of the moment regardless of fact, consistency or logic. Molotov Mitchell is quick to condemn others of “a deliberate disinfo campaign” for posting the actual bill which was presented to the legislature and for explaining what it says, in English, while his opinions are based on, well, something else.

• Mitchell’s comments on the bill were based on some new secret version that he can’t share because he hasn’t read it, but he’s had some really nice telephone conversations with someone (who’s not a member of the Uganda parliament).
• When he told his viewers, “This isn’t my opinion…This is what’s in the bill,” he failed to tell them he wasn’t talking about the real bill that’s been introduced, but some altered future hypothetical version. Which he hasn’t seen.

And, no, to date there has not been any new bill presented to the legislature. That “new bill” seems to exist only in the imagination of people who want to support horrific human rights abuses in Uganda but know that public calls for execution of gay “repeat offenders” makes them seem primitive and amoral.

And Rob gets to the heart of the reasons why Mitchell’s diatribes are confusing and contradictory.

I’m going give this kind of messy thinking a name, because I run across it so much: the argument ex contradictio, or “argument from contradictions.” It happens when you defend a statement by uttering another statement that contradicts the one you’re trying to defend:

* I can tell you exactly what’s in the bill…even though there are multiple, conflicting versions of the bill.
* A deliberate disinformation campaign has led us to take out the material that our opponents falsely said was there.

The argument ex contradictio is hard to refute precisely because it’s such a mess. Your listeners have a to juggle conflicting statements, experience confusion, and then rise above the confusion to recognize that confusion is exactly what your opponent is trying to sow.

And yet again, Rob has made me smile.

Zimbabwean LGBT Advocate Found Not Guilty of Porn Charges

Ignatius Muhambi, an accountant for Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ), who was arrested with fellow GALZ advocate Ellen Chademana during the raid last May, was found not guilty of possessing pornography. Muhambi’s lawyer Jeremiah Bamu, told AFP. “The prosecution failed to establish a case against him at the close of their submissions on Friday and the magistrate acquitted him.” Prosecutors have never described the nature of the allegedly “indecent material.”

Buhambi and Chademana were arrested in May and held in police detention for a full week before they were finally released on bail. The two allegedly suffered torture while in policy custody. Initially the pair was also accused of insulting Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe, but that charge was never formally filed.  Chademana is expected to appear in court separately on Monday.

NOM’s Louis Marinelli denies speaking for NOM

The National Organization for Marriage’s Louis Marinelli is currently driving the bus for NOM’s Tour of Mostly-Empty City Plazas. Marinelli was a natural selection after his organization One Man, One Woman was brought under the NOM umbrella and his Facebook page became the one that NOM touts as their own. Or, as Marinelli said on March 17th, “We are now working directly for the National Organization for Marriage.”

But Marinelli’s own personal blogsite is not NOM’s blogsite – they have their own – and we have been careful to distinguish between NOM’s blogsite, NOM’s Facebook page (which is owned by Marinelli), and Marinelli’s own personal blogsite which shares the same name as NOM’s Facebook page. Nevertheless, Marinelli has now issued this “clarification” on his blogsite.

A statement of clarity
I would like to take this opportunity to state that the opinions and statements made in this blog reflect only the opinions of myself, personally, not the National Organization for Marriage.

I am not an employee of the National Organization for Marriage. I am a third party who is directly involved as a partner with the Summer for Marriage.

Therefore, positions I take and statements I make do not reflect the positions or opinions of any other person, entity or the National Organization for Marriage as a whole.

This statement of clarity has been added due to the heavy attention our opponents give to this blog and the great lack of understanding of who or what I represent. Let this stand as a clarification to all.

This is an effort on the part of the National Organization for Marriage to speak out of both sides of their mouth. They wish to have NOM – which makes statements that are palatable to the secular public – but also be able to have Louis/One Man, One Woman – who can say the fiery things that horrify the public but which are required to motivate the rabble.

I’m not buying it.

Of course Louis may not be an “employee” of NOM – in the sense that he receives a paycheck with their name in the corner. But let us not pretend that Louis is an independent third party, either.

And, of course he doesn’t “speak for” NOM any more than those persons who NOM invites to stand in front of their microphone and address their (tiny) crowds speak for NOM. But let’s not pretend that Louis’ opinions and statements are entirely independent of those of NOM. It’s his website that bears their LOGO. It’s his butt sitting in the bus’ drivers seat.

Perhaps the best way to view Louis is to consider the relationship between a political candidate and his campaign strategist. A strategist is not the candidate and he may not “speak for” the candidate officially, but his public positions are associated with the candidate and – if not retracted or renounced – can safely be assumed to be the same as those of the candidate.

So too are Louis Marinelli’s opinions and statements a reflection on the opinions and statements of the National Organization for Marriage. The “distinctions” between the two are meaningless. And unless and until NOM officially denounces his statements and re-separates their commingled organizations, it is disingenuous to argue otherwise.

Schwarzenegger appoints a moderate female Asian Republican for Chief Justice

Governor Schwarzenegger has nominated Tani Cantil-Sakauye as replacement for retiring Chief Justice Ronald George. And while she is being closed lipped on controversial issues (as Judicial nominees tend to be), her history suggests that she is not an enemy of our community. (LA Times)

She resolutely refused to state her position on same-sex marriage, saying only that she married a gay couple — “acquaintances” — during the six months in 2008 when such marriages were legal, and that she would follow precedent.

“I perform hundreds of weddings, and they included one same-sex marriage,” she said. She said she did not hesitate to marry the couple, whom she declined to describe, “because it was the law.”

Her nomination is believed to have been, to a large extent, the choice of Justice George.

UPDATE:

The AFA seems encouraged that Cantil-Sakauye is active in her church, the Sacramento Japanese United Methodist Church. While it is not a hard and set rule, often the doctrine of one’s community of faith speaks to one’s acceptance or rejection of gay people.

But I think that they fail to take into consideration that the United Methodist Church in California is proactive in its support of gay and lesbian Methodists (the district voted to oppose Proposition 8). I was unable to identify on the church’s website whether it is a supportive congregation, but I did find that at her previous church the pastor, Motoe Yamada, had organized a screening of In God’s House: Asian American Lesbian and Gay Families in the Church.

It would appear that the Justice nominee is not subjected to a steady stream of anti-gay preaching.

NOM’s policy on babies

The National Organization for Marriage has interesting criteria for whether a baby is cute.

Here’s Maggie Gallagher:

I spoke with one young couple who showed up with the most adorable baby in tow.

Okay.. This baby is adorable.

Here’s Louis Marinelli:

Moving on. There was one couple (one of those bolder couples who came into the rally itself) who were particularly disappointing. The two men decided not to just attend the rally but they brought a baby with them. Notice I said ‘a baby” because it isn’t “their baby”. It was clearly adopted. They were white the baby was not.

And this baby is not white.

So… let’s see if we can figure out their policy. Hmmm, first baby: adorable; second baby: not white. Hmmm.

Can you imagine the accusations if we said that?

NOM tours a mostly-empty parking lot

It’s getting harder for the National Organization for Marriage to spin their Summer for Marriage tour into a success. No one is showing up.

Today they went to Lima, Ohio, a metropolitan area of about 100,000. Lima is heavily Republican and Jim Jordan, their Congressman who they sent back to Congress in 2008 by a 65% vote, is one of the most dedicated anti-marriage legislators in Washington. It’s Saturday.

And today’s turnout was pathetic. As NOM’s Maggie Gallagher tweeted

MG: Met 25 or so new friends at Lima rally,thks!! Tiny,well behaved counter protest. See u Monday in Indianapolis!

NOMtastic!

The Courage Campaign’s tour trackers had a different count

In our most rural tour stop to date, the NOM bus tour has taken us to a parking lot, in front of a closed-down grocery store in Lima, Ohio.

A hand-count of 22 NOM supporters (many of whom were staff) gathered into a cavernous parking lot while 19 equality supporters stood quietly to the right of the rally holding handmade signs in silent, but powerful, protest.

I guess 22-25 is, in Maggie’s terms, “successful” but 19 is “tiny”.

Monday they will be heading to Indianapolis and I wonder if anyone will show up to stand in the heat and humidity. If the attendance trend continues, soon they’ll be able to hold their rallies inside the bus.

UPDATE: One of the counter protesters lists his count of the NOMbies at 32, including the organizers.

Elderly Gay Man Forcibly Separated from Dying Partner Awarded Damanges In Settlement

The Mercury News reports that Clay Greene, 78-year-old Sonoma County, California man who was forcibly separated from his dying partner and whose house and belongings were sold by social workers, has won a $600,000 settlement from Sonoma County:

Greene accused social workers of denying him hospital visitation rights to see his partner, Harold Scull, despite signed wills, medical declarations and powers of attorney naming each other as spouses. The couple was not married nor registered as domestic partners.

The lawsuit also alleged that after Scull’s death, social workers forced Greene into a nursing home and sold the couple’s property, including art and heirlooms. The county’s lawyer, Gregory Spaulding, denied the discrimination claims but admitted mistakes in selling the couple’s property.

Under California law, property worth $5,000 or less can be sold by officials to cover medical expenses. But the couple’s property brought in more than $25,000 at auction. The Public Guardian’s office has revised its policies, according to Spaulding.

Judge Blocks Arizona’s Termination of Domestic Partner Benefits

Among the first policy changes pushed by Arizona’s legislature as soon as Republican Janet Brewer succeeded Janet Napolitano (D) as governor was to pass House Bill 2013, which changed the definition of “dependent” to specifically exclude domestic partners and adopted children of gay individuals, effectively ending insurance coverage for the families of gay state employees. This move came despite denials from Arizona’s Prop 102 promoters that they would seek to remove domestic partner benefits if the amendment banning same-sex marriage was added to the constitution. Prop 102 was approved by Arizona voters in 2008.

This week, U.S. District Judge John Sedwick granted a temporary injunction against the state of Arizona from implementing the new law:

“Because employees involved in same-sex partnerships do not have the same right to marry as their heterosexual counterparts, Section O has the effect of completely barring lesbians and gays from receiving family benefits,” Sedwick wrote. “Consequently, the spousal limitation in Section O burdens state employees with same-sex domestic partners more than state employees with opposite-sex domestic partners.”

Sedwick dismissed the state’s argument that exempting gay employees would make the benefits program “much easier to administer” and that “scarce funds for employee benefits are better spent on employees and dependents as defined in the new statute.”

Gov. Brewer claims that the state cannot afford to provide domestic partner benefits. But the annual cost of domestic partner benefits make up only about $3 million, or less than one-half of one percent of the $625 million spent on benefits for all employees. The elimination of domestic partner benefits would affect more straight families than gay. Gay and lesbian couples are believed to comprise a small fraction of the 893 domestic partners who have signed up with the state. The injunction against the elimination of domestic partner benefits applies only to families of gay- and lesbian-led employees because, as Judge Sedwick noted, heterosexual couples have the option of marrying.

Mean-Spirited Tweet of the Day

You know a counterfeit is a counterfeit when the happiness and freedom it initially promised ends up leading to deeper bondage.

— Exodus International president Alan Chambers

“Counterfeit” is ex-gay code-speak for gay people getting together, falling in love, forming families, and living the American dream. “Bondage” is ex-gay code-speak for just going about your life — that is if you’re gay. If you’re straight, then the term is just “living.” But whatever.

Alan Chambers will spend next week taking his counterfeit message to Brazil. He will be speaking for six days at a Summer Institute next week at the Igreja Bautista Central in Magé, near Rio de Janero. Here’s the Google translation:

We are glad to realize another Institute. This time, in partnership with Exodus International. Exodus International is the largest evangelical institution that works to restore and evangelization of the world’s homosexuals. Together, we are bringing the topic: “Grace That Makes Reborn.”

Our purpose is to show the grace of God as the unconditional and sole agent that enables a real transformation in the lives of those who struggle with homosexuality and who are often marginalized by society and the Church of Jesus Christ.

The instrument used by God to bless us in these days will be Mr. Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International. He will minister every day talking about the emotional and spiritual causes of homosexuality, will speak about the myths we create about homosexuality, the importance of a Christian attitude toward homosexuals, and speak of the structure of this ministry to be applied in the Church to bless the lives of people living this conflict.

We have no doubt that these days will mark our history and our lives, for this reason we invited you to join us. We believe that, as a church, or simply, individuals must have an attitude of love and compassion for those who also loved Jesus. After all, the cross of Christ is not for a privileged few but for all, including homosexuals. God has no favorites when it comes to saving people from their sins. His love and grace are the essential ingredients for a sinner can be reborn. Therefore, we believe this can make FREE qualqur again sinner.

Sign up and receive this blessing.

LCR v. DADT closing arguments go well

Closing arguments in the Log Cabin Republicans’ challenge to the Military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy finished up today. Judge Phillips had announced that the Witt precedent would be used to determine what level of proof would be required and Dan Woods, for LCR, presented evidence and testimony accordingly. (National Law Journal)

Last month, Phillips set forth the standard of proof that both sides had to meet. She based it on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit’s 2008 decision Witt v. Dep’t of the Air Force — that the policy is necessary to advance a legitimate governmental interest.

On Friday, Woods maintained that the policy served no such interest.

“Lawrence established that Americans have a constitutional right to engage in private, consensual homosexual conduct,” Woods said, citing the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling in Lawrence v. Texas, where the court found that state’s criminalization of private, consensual sodomy unconstitutional. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell infringes on that right, punishing individuals who engage in a constitutionally protected activity.”

During the trial, Woods introduced numerous reports and expert witnesses who concluded that the policy has done little to maintain troop cohesion. In fact, he said, the evidence showed that the policy disproportionately harmed women and noncombat service members. He noted that service members work alongside foreign militaries and private contractors, both of which permit open homosexuality.

“Our military will give a convicted felon a gun, but will not give a gay guy a typewriter,” he said.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Freeborne, defending the policy, decided that arguing with the judge was a better way to make his case.

Freeborne responded that the due process and First Amendment claims fail “as a matter of law” because the Log Cabin Republicans brought a facial challenge to the constitutionality of the policy. That requires both parties to focus on the face of the statute and its legislative history — not the experiences of individuals, he said.

Phillips interrupted, disagreeing about the scope of the court’s review.

“The government’s argument it has made throughout this case and on which it has relied to contest the admission of nearly every exhibit, and most of the testimony, overlooks that the court is directed to look at the effect of the challenged statue,” Phillips said.

Freeborne said he would “respectfully disagree” with that analysis. He also disagreed that the Witt standard, which dealt with the circumstances of a single service member and not the statute as a whole, was appropriate in a facial challenge.
…
In defending the statute against First Amendment claims, Freeborne used the example of a witness who was not discharged even after coming forward about being hazed and harassed about his homosexuality.

“After enduring it for months,” Phillips replied.

While this sounds encouraging, we cannot assume that the judge will rule in our favor. But by all accounts, the testimony and arguments went well.

Log Cabin has asked Judge Phillips to impose an injunction halting the military’s unconstitutional “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and, if appealed, to suspend the policy during appeal. That would be the best possible outcome of the trial at this level.