Gay marriage foes sought to split gays, blacks

In this July 14, 2010 file photo, Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, speaks at a rally for opponents of same-sex marriage, in Augusta, Maine. / AP Photo

(AP) The leading national organization opposing same-sex marriage has sought to split the Democratic Party base by pitting African-Americans and Hispanics against gay-rights groups, according to confidential strategy memos made public by court officials in Maine.

"The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks — two key Democratic constituencies," says one of the memos. It also suggests "interrupting" the process of cultural assimilation for Hispanics in hopes of curtailing support for same-sex marriage.

The documents, dating from 2009, were written by the National Organization for Marriage and had been kept from the public until Monday, when they were unsealed by court officials in Maine.

They were part of a two-pronged legal challenge of Maine's financial disclosure laws. Still unresolved is whether the NOM will have to release the names of donors to its successful 2009 campaign to ban same-sex marriage in Maine.

The Human Rights Campaign, a major gay-rights organization, first circulated the documents Monday night, and its president, Joe Solmonese, assailed the strategies that they detailed.

"With the veil lifted, Americans everywhere can now see the ugly politics that the National Organization for Marriage traffics in every day," Solmonese said. "While loving gay and lesbian couples seek to make lifelong commitments, NOM plays racial politics, tries to hide donors and makes up lies about people of faith."

Pope denounces gay marriage lobby to US bishops
Celebs raise $2M and show support for gay marriage
Largest LGBT advocacy group names new president

Through the Human Rights Campaign, veteran civil rights leader Julian Bond also condemned the NOM strategy.

"NOM's underhanded attempts to divide will not succeed if Black Americans remember their own history of discrimination," said the statement from Bond, a former chairman of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "Pitting bigotry's victims against other victims is reprehensible; the defenders of justice must stand together."

NOM's president, Brian Brown, was unapologetic, issuing a brief statement hailing his organization's collaboration with other black and Hispanic leaders, including Bishop Harry Jackson, a Maryland church pastor, and New York state Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr.

"Gay marriage advocates have attempted to portray same-sex marriage as a civil right, but the voices of these and many other leaders have provided powerful witness that this claim is patently false," Brown said.

"Gay marriage is not a civil right, and we will continue to point this out in written materials such as those released in Maine," Brown added. "We proudly bring together people of different races, creeds and colors to fight for our most fundamental institution: marriage."

The NOM documents depicted Democratic Party leaders as "increasingly inclined to privilege the concerns of gay rights groups over the values of African-Americans."

"Find, equip, energize and connect African-American spokespeople for marriage; develop a media campaign around their objections to gay marriage as a civil right; provoke the gay marriage base into responding by denouncing these spokesmen and women as bigots," one memo said.

The memos stressed the pivotal political role of Latinos as a swing constituency.

"Will the process of assimilation to the dominant Anglo culture lead Hispanics to abandon traditional family values?" one NOM memo asked. "We must interrupt this process of assimilation by making support for marriage a key badge of Latino identity ... a symbol of resistance to inappropriate assimilation."

The NOM strategy also called for portraying President Barack Obama as a "social radical" and seeking to cast same-sex marriage in a negative light by linking it to other issues, such as pornography and sexualizing of children.

Evan Wolfson of Freedom to Marry, a national advocacy group supporting same-sex marriage, said the memos suggest the NOM "will stop at nothing to push its agenda, pitting American against American, minority against minority, family members against family members."

"These smoking-gun documents show how NOM has sought, in the most cynical ways imaginable, to bait the gay community in hopes of provoking a hurt response that would further divide," he said.

The NOM is playing an active role this year as battles over same-sex marriage unfold in several states.

In Maryland and Washington, the organization and its allies are gathering signatures to place measures on the Nov. 6 ballot that would overturn recently passed same-sex marriage laws.

In Maine, it will be seeking defeat of a measure already placed on the November ballot that would legalize same-sex marriage. In North Carolina and Minnesota, the NOM is supporting ballot measures that would amend the state constitutions to define marriage as only between a man and woman.

The unsealed court documents illustrated that the NOM sometimes falls short of its goals. The memos said a priority for 2010 was to repeal gay-marriage laws in New Hampshire, Iowa, and Washington, D.C. But same-sex marriage remains in effect in those three jurisdictions along with Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and New York.

The memos contained extensive details about NOM's finances, but they do not identify individual donors, including three who had given more than $1 million apiece as of late 2009.

In Maine, the group leading the campaign to legalize same-sex marriage — Mainers United for Marriage — announced the appointment of Matt McTighe as campaign manager. He had been the state public education director for Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, a Boston-based gay-rights law firm.

McTighe said he was reviewing the NOM documents Tuesday, but was troubled by what he saw on first take.

"We try to focus on telling the positive stories on why marriage matters to all committed loving couples in Maine, and here they are trying to use fear and scare tactics to turn people off," he said.

[MaryWaterton]

Exactly how is it "driving a wedge" when 75% of blacks oppose "homosexual marriage"? NOM is doing nothing more than appealing to their constituents on this issue. It's not like black people are in favor of moral perversion and NOM is trying to prevent them from voting. No sir. The crux of the accusation is that the blacks are demonstrating that they have better morals than these nasty white people who favor "homosexual marriage". That upsets the liberals who think they can keep blacks chained to the liberal plantation ... especially the those liberals in the news media.

[honestabe8]

Mary: You feel that homosexuality is a moral perversion? I guess everybody needs a ni**er, including black folks. Now, B, get back on your knees

[honestabe8]

"The crux of the accusation is that the blacks are demonstrating that they have better morals than these nasty white people who favor 'homosexual marriage'".

Really? So the 72% of the black babiess are born out of wedlock. Does that stike you as good morals?

This is about EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW. And, before you start bloviating about liberals, I am a life long conservative.

[raymailhot]

The idea that the gay redefinition of marriage and American civil rights are different shocks many liberals? I wonder if it shocks bIack America?

[honestabe8]

If you feel that marriage is sacred, get it's licensing out of the hands of government. Civil unions for all. That would hold the legal status. Churches can have whatever ceremony they want. It would be entirely ceremonial, holding NO legal standing. That way the government is not involved in "marriage". So, St. Pedophilia down the block can choose to "bless" whomever they wish (or not).

[pbaird2]

Gay marriage is not a civil right? Then what is it? A religious perrogative? If so, then it preventing Gay marriage based upon religious perrogative is also unconstitutional. How sad that people who support NOM fail to make the effort to improve male/female marriages. Quicky marriages and divorces are commonplace and prove no sanctity for the institution. Add to that the increased infidelity of male/female marriages and we see how hypocritical these people behave.

[rightontarget]

It's all about superiority. The "better than" mind set. Sure, some people say it's ok to give gays the same "legal" rights but just don't call it "marriage" because they want "real" married people to be considered "better" than those in a gay relationship. GET OVER IT! Just because a couple has a legal "marriage license" it does NOT mean that the "marriage" has to be recognized by any particular church. Your religious beliefs are your right but you do NOT have the right to impose those beliefs upon others! You also do NOT have the right to determine what you want to be "socially acceptable". What are you afraid of? That your kids might turn out "gay"? That they might make gay friends or find out that most gay people are NOT the perverts and deviants society would like to make them out to be? There are perverts and deviants that are heterosexual as well as homosexual. I am NOT gay but I have known several gay couples, professional people, educated and who have been in a LONG TERM, committed relationship for many years. In my experience most of them are more loyal and faithful to their "partner" than many who are in heterosexual relationships. So where is the loss of "morality" in that? I have the perfect solution. If you don't believe in gay marriage: Don't marry a gay person! Problem solved!

[factsplease1]

The reason there is a male and female difference is: because when Adam was lonely god wanted to create a partner for him but saw how badly he had f_____ up with Adam he didn't want to create another person who too often used his wrong head to think. Sooooo he created Eve with only ONE head with a super, improved brain!!!! LMAO

[cntrygirl3]

For workamerican. The state in proposition 8 didn't "sanctify" anything, a government cannot sanctify anything. All the government can do is make something illegal, you know like people of different races marrying, black people having to sit in the back of the bus that sort of thing. After all the fact that so many organizations want to make same sex marriage illegal tells me that it already is legal. I am talking strictly civil here. What a church does or does not do is up to them. There are many Baptist churches that refuse the sacrament of marriage to one of their members if they are marrying a Roman Catholic. I would think that in any state that has not written this discrimination into law any same sex couple could apply for a marriage license. There is a reason for almost every law that prevents people from marrying, either because of age(too young), disease or mental impairment. What precisely is the reasoning behind this one, what "evil" will befall society if same sex couples marry. These NOM folks are no different from the people that preached "segregation forever". After all married people are more stable, more productive. and live longer. All of these things bring benefit to society. So how is getting married a bad thing? Like any bigoted group NOM believes the ends justify any means to achieve them. All they look at is their own narrow belief, they never ask themselves what good for society they will have accomplished if gay marriage is illegal in all of the US. Because the answer is like segregation this discrimination does harm not good. I wonder how they find it in their hearts to hate so many people that have never done them any harm, have never done anyone any harm. I wondered the same thing about racist. Since marriage is a legally binding contract, if one partner changes gender the marriage stands so there are a number of perfectly legal same sex marriages in this country and there is not thing one NOM can do about it. And I bet that really toasts their cookies.

[Transatlantique]

Proposition 8 was worded to confuse the unaware voter into thinking it was FOR gay marriage, so many who wanted gay marriage voted for it. Those who knew it was against gay marriage, namely the religious freaks who worded it deceptively, didn't have to read it because they knew what it was about. It was a campaign to deceive the voters who would have voted against it to vote for it and that is why it passed. Many people wanted to rescind their votes when they found out, and by then it was too late. This was another typically deceptive practice by the right wing, like the ones of NOM, to deny basic human rights in a supposedly free country where gay people pay taxes like everyone else.

European countries, including England, are laughing at America because of the heehaw mentality holding it back. Marriage is a legal issue, and a state of mind, and nothing more. People made it all up to control others, the same purpose for why they invented pathological religions.

[Jon-in-Canada]

Hey now, don`t forget us Canadians. We`ve had SSM for alomost 10 years and I`m still waiting for the apocalypse to happen......still waiting.....

[My_Opinion_7]

I wonder what would happen if the LGBT community formed a new religion so they have the freedom of religion like Chipsmydog thinks he has.

[vsmit]

Why form a new religion. Most main stream Christian religions have no issue with Gay Marriage. Anglicans and Presbyterians as an example.

The fundamentalists want people like you to believe their sects are true Christians. They are not.

[workamerican]

Talk about stereo types:

1.Not all Democrats or liberals are for same sex marriage.If that were true than California would not have voted for proposition 8 sanctifying marriage between a man and women.
2.Not everyone who voted against same sex marriage is a bigot, they are just exercising their right to vote for what they believe is best for the country.
3. No one really wants to know your sexual preferences no should they because it's none of their business. So why make your sexual orientation everyone's business?

[Thomasi10]

1. You're correct about this one. No group--especially one as large as the Democratic Party or all liberals-- is going to be uniformly of the same mind on any issue.

2. This argument makes no sense. Who says a bigot can't vote for what he or she thinks is best? Bigots do that all the time. So does everyone who has a right to vote.

3. No one's making their sexual orientation your business. Gays and lesbians simply want equal treatment under the law, and to not be required to HIDE their orientation. Just like straight folks.

[gabwood]

Sorry, your logic is flawed, like many who do not take the time to read and understand facts.

#1 - Proposition 8 was rejected by 70% of Democrats. Sadly, 90% of registered Republicans voted for it. That led to it's passage, by a very slim majority.

#2, it was proven in court that the sole purpose for Prop 8 was an animosity, disgust, towards gays. People who voted for it were in fact driven by a repulsion (bigotry) towards gay people, and a desire to lesson their relationships. (bigotry)

#3 Wrong, again! Heterosexuals make their preference known every day, all around the world. They hold hands in public, kiss in public, etc. How dare you tell gays that they should not be free to let the world know who THEY love, by expressing their affection freely in public, just like you do, and millions of other heterosexuals do.

[hardsnow]

"Marriage was invented by God Almighty..."

But WHOSE god, oh chipper one? Why is it that Christians feel so absolute in their beliefs? The more I hear from them the more abhorrent Christianity sounds.

Let the Rainbow shine!

[bilrobi1]

Marriage was invented by God Almighty? That begs the question,who invented God? Nothing wrong with a myth until or course it become a delusion.