But Rep. Blumenauer wasn't having it.
He responded in a piece in HuffPo
Last year, internal National Organization for Marriage (NOM) strategy documents were leaked, stating that the organization seeks "to drive a wedge between gays and blacks" by promoting "African American spokespeople for marriage," thus provoking same-sex marriage supporters into "denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots," and "to interrupt the assimilation" of Latinos into "dominant Anglo culture" by making the stance against same-sex marriage "a key badge of Latino identity."
Does this sound like social welfare to you?
Social welfare organizations should work in the public interest -- not to divide, exploit, and conquer.
When I brought this up at the hearing today, Dr. Eastman, Chairman of the Board of NOM, angrily groused, "To say that defending traditional marriage doesn't qualify for defense of the public good is beyond preposterous."
To Dr. Eastman, I say that it is the denial of my constituents, and all Americans, the right to marry the person they love is preposterous. To exploit racial and religious differences so you can fundraise for and enforce your specific worldview is preposterous.
But your right to be preposterous should not extend to taking political positions under the guise of a social welfare organization, raising money and campaigning.Yes, NOM has no case and this public hearing makes them sound... preposterous
1 comment:
Eastman is out of his gourd!
Boycotts are legitimate forms of expression and not criminal, or intimidating. They simply mean your bigoted ways don't fly with your customer base.
And Chick-Fil-A gives lie to the boycott damage that Eastman tries to claim.
Post a Comment