NOM’s “shocking” video of mother “harassed” at Albany tour stop

July 19, 2010 at 4:00 pm 125 comments

By Eden James

“Shocking video from mother harassed by gay marriage activists at Albany rally”

Yep, that’s the title on this NOM blog post today:

Here’s the shocking video of our interview with the mother who was harassed by the gay marriage activists at yesterday’s rally in Albany. An amazing woman: “This is what they are doing to our traditional families is intimidating so we can back off, and I wasn’t going to back off. . . . We need to stand for our families and we are not going to back off.”

Judge for yourself and share your thoughts in the comments:

And then check out the post we put up after the Albany event along with several pictures of the event.

For more on how anti-gay organizations like NOM play the victim card — pretending to be harmed or intimidated by gays to gain mainstream sympathy — read Mark Hefflinger’s in-depth report at Karen Ocamb’s LGBT POV.

If you’ve seen other posts on this video today, share them in the comments with the community.

Entry filed under: NOM Tour Tracker, Right-wing. Tags: .

Open Thread: Where the NOM tour is going next New NOM tour videos: We report, you decide. Loving families or lunatic fringe?

125 Comments Add your own

  • 1. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    Thank you for informing us about their lies!

    Reply
    • 2. Kathleen  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm

      Oh, poor woman – she had to be near a bunch of scary gay people–who were standing passively in a line well out of arm’s reach. (roll eyes) When people come after her with a baseball bat because she’s walking down the street holding hands w/her spouse… she can come back and tell me all about it and I’ll be all ears.

      Reply
      • 3. fiona64  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:16 pm

        Ditto when some yutz from the neighborhood stops by her house to threaten her with grievous bodily harm for refusing to remove a campaign sign *from her own lawn.*

        Or when she has to get law enforcement involved because of some right-wing nutjob stalker.

        I’ll be right there with you, Kathleen.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 4. David Kimble  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:10 pm

        Hi kathleen, I just spent the past week in the hosptial. I fell at home and couldn’t get-up – send me an e-mail and I will tell you all about it. Not at the top of my list of things to do!
        <3 David

        Reply
      • 5. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:15 pm

        @David Kimble: ‘just spent the past week in the hosptial.

        Ahh!

        I hope you’re doing ok. Best wishes!

        Reply
      • 6. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:17 pm

        @Kathleen: ‘When people come after her with a baseball bat because she’s walking down the street holding hands w/her spouse… she can come back and tell me all about it and I’ll be all ears.

        Yeah.

        Of course, were she wondering around by herself in Arizona these days….

        :(

        Reply
    • 7. Mike  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:31 pm

      Did anyone noticed that this “traditional” family…as 4 babies, and each one of a different color ?!

      Her family is soooooo traditional…..it makes mine look like the Beaver’s !!!

      I bet she has had two boyfriends…one black, the other latino…and now is in bed with some white dude (probably the guy who holds the American Flag behind her)

      And this woman is lecturing us about “traditional” families ?
      What bunch of crap

      Reply
      • 8. G  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:15 pm

        Mike,

        While I think this video is beyond ridiculous, I can’t help but be a bit offended by your comment. My first thought when I noticed that was that she was married to the white guy, but they had adopted the children. Your presumption about her boyfriends, is it because she has an accent? Or because she is Latina? Hopefully you thought that only because the woman is obviously mentally challenged.

        Reply
      • 9. Paul  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:01 pm

        Mike…although I don’t like the way you put it, I couldn’t have said it better myself. She’s a poor mentally challenged immigrant, taken advantage of by the white trash with the flag behind her. I feel sorry for her, but only a little !

        Reply
  • 10. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:05 pm

    I have seen this posted around the web. 99% of the people commenting on that video thinks she’s a whack-nut. I personally think she will ride on the curtails with NOM on this — until she realizes the world thinks shes a whack-nut and that there is no one to SUE for her pain and suffering.

    Reply
  • 11. Chris  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:08 pm

    Haha. Classic.

    Reply
  • 12. Michelle Evans  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    Yeah, she and all those that support NOM are definitely the victims, being intimidated by all those colorful umbrellas.

    Gee, when’s the last time her or anyone in her “traditional” family was physically threatened? How about knowing a person who was attacked and had the word “IT” carved into his chest, or was beaten and tied to a fence to die, or had their spouses turned away at a hospital, or told that they would be unable to marry the person they love?

    Yeah, I really “feel” her pain.

    Reply
  • 13. Jeff Baily  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    This commercial is priceless. It shows how weak the NOM movement is now. I recall back in 2003 when Massachusetts first legalized gay marriage. Their side had so much zeal, and so much fuel to try to nip gay marriage in the bud. But it didn’t happen. Sure, Prop 8 was a set back, sure Maine Prop 1 was a set back. But it’s clear their side will eventually lose. And lose bad. This advertisement is sloppy, weak and indicative of the strength the NOM movement has. If it weren’t for the music and the cheesy powerpoint intro..I’d be confused as to whether or not this lady really hated gays or just hated big umbrellas.

    Reply
  • 14. Bob  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:15 pm

    shocking, how well NOM put that spin on it, also very obviously a set up, very clever how this poor mother had to Protect Her Family (from what) FEAR (of what) RIGHTS=RIGHTS the only place that spin won’t hold up, is if that same mother would come in to court to testify, under oath, they can only do it in bts, sound bites , and spins.

    Reply
  • 15. Bertrand  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:17 pm

    So I see that she can barely speak English, so I assume her husband is sponsoring her under to be here. What about my family and the fact that I can not sponsor my husband because we are in a same sex marriage here in Mass. It’s just sickining.

    Please don’t take this as a racial issue because I am far from racist, my husband is from Latin America and speaks both English and Spanish, however my family is being torn apart because I can not sponsor him like she is being sponsored by her MARRIED husband.

    Reply
    • 16. Gregory in SLC  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:36 pm

      Ditto – I cannot sponsor my Hispanic partner either. For 3 years we live constantly in fear regarding this. I’m usually optimistic but the injustice overwhelms me sometimes. Wish you the best Bertrand.

      Reply
      • 17. Franck  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:50 am

        Bertrand, Gregory, it seems we’re on the same boat here. Except I’m the non-American half in my couple and we cannot even see each other yet, even less get married…

        – Franck P. Rabeson
        Days spent apart from my fiancé because of DOMA: 1124 days, as of today.

        Reply
      • 18. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  July 21, 2010 at 2:35 am

        And I am the Russian partner to be sponsored.
        Looks like there are lots of us out there…

        –Kirill, 150+ days without my partner

        Reply
    • 19. Straight Grandmother  |  July 20, 2010 at 2:55 am

      Bertrand and everyone like Bertrand, I feel the most sympathy for you. You, along with children who are not allowed to have 2 legal parents are gravely impacted by the lack of SSM. But at least he children have 2 parents in the house, you dont’ even get that, you are physically and by law, legally seperated from the one you love and the only reason is because they are of the same sex as you. The contrast between the latino woman shown in the video and your similar stories with far different outcomes is dramatic. In fact I think there is a good video to be made here. Make a video slicing her comments into a video that shows you and your loved ones, also latino, being seperated.

      That video would absolutly make the inequality of the current laws perfectly clear.

      Reply
      • 20. Franck  |  July 20, 2010 at 3:26 am

        That would be an excellent idea, SG. Taking their claims of injustice and showing them in parallel to our own plight would be the perfect way to go.

        And this is off-topic – unless I’m mistaken, you live in France? Would you happen to talk French, too? (People don’t often realize that I am actually and primarily a French speaker. English is only my third language.)

        – Franck P. Rabeson
        Days spent apart from my fiancé because of DOMA: 1124 days, as of today.

        Reply
  • 21. Polydactyl  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:20 pm

    The blindly privileged always kick up a fuss when the playing field begins to even out.

    Reply
    • 22. PamC  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:27 pm

      awesome! exactly.

      Reply
    • 23. G  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:21 pm

      Poly,

      While I love your comment, this is in no way evening out. Nothing whatsoever happened to this woman. I mean she is crying because there were people standing inf front of her while she wanted to breast feed IN PUBLIC!!! It makes me uncomfortable to see women do that but it’s her right. So if it makes her uncomfortable to be watched, then she can turn around or put the blanket over her head for the brief moment that she has to fully expose the breast and the lower it once the child starts feeding. She would have to suffer a lot more pain and agony in order for it to even begin to look like it will even out.

      Reply
      • 24. JT1962  |  July 19, 2010 at 9:49 pm

        I watched the video early Monday morning and all I kept thinking was, what the heck were you scared of? And if you wanted privacy to breastfeed your child, why were trying to breastfeed in the middle of a public area? It just didn’t add up at all to me. Intimidating, having people with umbrellas stand a few feet away from you? Poor thing. My heart just bleeds for her…NOT!

        Reply
    • 25. Sarah  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:11 pm

      Love this take on the whole thing. Well said.

      Reply
      • 26. Sarah  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:18 pm

        Oops, I did not see that second response when I posted this for some reason. “Blindly privileged” has a nice ring to it… and we are all living as such on so many fronts in our lives. Being the underdog in (at least) one area of my life has certainly given me a different perspective in others. Some sort of extra sensitivity and empathy towards other people who struggle in an area of their lives. Funny thing is, this slightest movement towards equality causes such a stark reaction. I felt like this woman was trying to find more things to say, and more ways to say the same thing. Odd.

        Reply
  • 27. Scott  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    God I love the weepy piano music. If I didn’t know better, I’d think someone added that to the original interview as a satirical joke. Seriously? This is the best you got? They stood there blocking your view, and I’m supposed to be bawling over this tragedy? Good lord.

    Reply
    • 28. Gregory in SLC  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:38 pm

      LOL Scott! Exactly my reaction to the piano music … I really cannot understand what these NOM people are after in general, but this “commercial” is just weird.

      Reply
  • 29. Straight Ally #3008  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:27 pm

    Wow, gays are apparently scarier than the Piranha Brothers from Monty Python.

    “He used… sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and… satire. He was vicious!”

    By a combination of violence and sarcasm, the Piranha brothers by February 1966 controlled London and the Southeast of England….

    Reply
  • 30. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    Oh boy.

    …we are going to stand for our families… we’re not going to back off…

    Neither are we sweetie. :)

    But – you see what this is for them – PR. Fund raising. Of course anyone who sees the pics and the video can see there’s no intimidation going on, so I can’t see whether this is very effective for the nomo’s other than to their base.

    I’d love to see a gay family at one of these stops, and a video about the evil nomo’s intimidating us.

    If I had a family and a job, I’d do it :)

    Reply
    • 31. Gina  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:19 pm

      Let’s make the exact same commercial from the other side at the next rally. Any breastfeeding lesbian mamas willing to put their family in a video? Lol.

      Reply
    • 32. Dave in Maine  |  July 20, 2010 at 5:01 am

      Hey, JonT!

      At their first stop here in Maine, EqualityMaine held a preemptive press conference that included the governor, a lesbian couple with their son, a business leader (lesbian lady pregnant with twins), and a person of faith to round it out.

      You can see them here on this clip of the local news on my Flickr page covering the rally and press conference: http://ow.ly/2dRDv. They are the ladies and the little boy near the podium near the beginning.

      Dave

      Reply
      • 33. JonT  |  July 20, 2010 at 5:49 pm

        Excellent! Thanks :)

        Reply
  • 34. Elsie  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    This illustrates my point about not having control over whether we “give” them anything by our actions. I concede that I am in the minority about direct action vs. peaceful protest. But although I may feel a particular way I would like to emphasize that we need EVERYONE, those who feel the pull of Dr. King’s methods as well as those to hear the call of Malcom X. This cause will not be won or lost by whether we choose one method over the other. It was not the case in the ’60’s and it won’t be now. Just get out there but respect each others methods.

    Reply
    • 35. PamC  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:57 pm

      Well said, Elsie; we’re seeking respect, we need to model the respect we seek.

      Reply
  • 36. Bolt  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    I like how she moves here from another country to tell everyone else whom they may, or may not marry.

    Somebody lied to her!

    Reply
  • 37. Ann S.  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:38 pm

    Assuming that is her husband wiping the baby’s face, it looks to me as though her marriage to her husband would have been illegal in many states before 1967. I wonder if she even knows. It seems rather ironic to me.

    Reply
  • 38. Tim  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:39 pm

    How much do you want to bet that this woman was PAID to speak for NOM? Seriously! She can barely speak English!! The protesters were 20′ away.
    Just more of their LIES!!! I do not believe her story.
    I know gay men, they are more respectful than most people I know, even my family.
    If a woman desires privacy to breast feed her infant than she should NOT attend a fear rally when the probability of more than two persons(her and one other) will be present! Lies! Not falling for it !
    NOM another word for NOT a clue!
    $$$$$ Talks!

    Reply
  • 39. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:45 pm

    Is it just me, or did she sound as though she were being prompted from somewhere either behind the camera operator, or from somewhere else off-camera, possibly even by way of a hidden earpiece? Even BZ said it sounded as though she were being prompted, and wondered out loud how much B is paying her for this video clip.
    And if she could not see, why didn’t she move? If she was that uncomfortable sitting there with marriage equality supporters in front of the podium in her direct line of vision, who were NOT harming her, then she had plenty of space to get up and move. It isn’t as though the crowd were all that large.

    Reply
  • 40. Ronnie  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    I find it interesting that the NOMrades try to play the victim card with this mother & some LGBT & probably even a Heterosexual (or 2 or more) silently protesting with Rainbow colored umbrellas while 2 Gay guys were beating just a week or two ago in NY at a White Castle just for being Gay….hmmmmm…semantics i guess….. > ( …..Ronnie

    Reply
  • 41. VRAlbany  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:52 pm

    Those protesters didn’t “bully” or “harass” her anymore than she bullied and harassed them to move, using her children, boobs, and status as a mother as leverage.
    Complete BS. The video is getting destroyed in ratings on YouTube.

    Reply
    • 42. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:58 pm

      Thaks for reminding me – I hadn’t thought about going there and voting/commenting :)

      Reply
  • 43. Sagian  |  July 19, 2010 at 4:59 pm

    ‘The evils gays were blocking the view of MY agenda with THEIR agenda!’

    Um… get up and move… maybe?

    Reply
  • 44. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:00 pm

    The woman couldn’t have seen the podium from where she was NOT because of the scary gays with umbrellas but because beyond them there was Brian and his followers.

    you can see here
    IMG00102-20100717-1445

    and here
    IMG00099-20100717-1443

    I sent Eden the pics together showing where the woman is…but you really don’t need it to see in IMG00102-20100717-1445 you can see her stroller to the right of Brian Brown on the grass.

    Reply
    • 45. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:10 pm

      Dammit LLB! You know that that ‘logic’ and ‘fact’ stuff doesn’t matter! :)

      And it’s true, the video on YT is getting ripped big time :)

      Reply
    • 46. Rhonda  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:24 pm

      In the beginning, she even says they were sitting there “listening” NOT watching.

      <3 Rhonda

      Reply
    • 47. Sarah  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:32 pm

      I honestly find it hard to believe that the protestors arrived and decided to position themselves in front of a NOMer, separating her from the “crowd”. Unless they had a tape measure and figured out a certain distance they wanted, I bet she arrived after they were set up or had staked their location. Anybody know?

      Reply
  • 48. Owen  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    I just have one thought on this:

    Are.you.serious.

    I have to be imagining this. This is a big joke, right? If the Supreme Court rules in our favor, Brian Brown is going to pop up from behind the curtain and yell, “HAHA, got ya!”

    Right???

    Reply
  • 49. David  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:09 pm

    If that’s harassment and/or intimidation, then I was beaten and manhandled today when someone on the escalator kicked my heel.

    She’s rambling and trying to find a point to make along the way as she does. Even without the protectors there or a camera in her face, if this person is truly anti-equality, I doubt she can really explain why.

    Most noteworthy, I think, is how empty the area was. The views of the opposition are strong, but the opposition itself is rapidly weakening. Even the most adamant hatemonger out there would watch this “interview” and think “that’s it? that’s what you call intimidation?!”

    Reply
  • 50. Tony Douglass in Ca  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    You sure she’s even a mother at all?? She looks more like a “baby sitter” to me!! Might account for all those different looking kids, and aren’t they just a little too close together in age??

    Reply
  • 51. eDee  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    My YouTube Post:
    OH GIVE ME A BREAK!!! She wasn’t harassed in anyway.

    I want to make sure I have this straight (so to speak)
    The woman brings her kids to a hate rally supported by NOM and she’s scared by peaceful protesters with messages of LOVE on their shirts?

    If you don’t want people to watch you nurse, then don’t nurse in public! I always bring a bottle – why? Because I respect others.

    PS Lady, stay out of Arizona, no question – you‘ll be asked for your papers and get a taste of your own medicine

    Reply
  • 52. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 5:52 pm

    Leveraging the Ignorant.

    If she would allow us our equality, we wouldn’t be there supposedly making her feel intmidated.

    Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

    Reply
  • 53. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:09 pm

    I learned alot being involved in the Providence Ri protest last Sunday…

    There is diversity among our opinions as to how we can overcome.

    One faction is “in your face” agressiveness and intimidation.

    The other is using the legal tools that have been presented to us by our current laws and founding fathers.

    Do I want to win my equality using those civil tools?

    Or do I want to win my equality using intimidation and aggressiveness?

    Hard to decide.

    Their approach seems so unfair and under handed, that to some, our knee jerk reaction is to push for our side using whatever means possible.

    However, if we follow the laws of the land, we win on two fronts:

    1. We win our equality.

    2. We show them that we are more intelligent and more sophistiicated than them and worthy of our place in society.

    … A Difficult choice.

    Reply
    • 54. eDee  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:27 pm

      What you’ll show them and what they will see are two different things.
      They hate you simply because you are you and hate me because I support you.

      You are right, we don’t want to use intimidation and aggression, that would be dropping to their level.
      Sadly, in the end, they will not see us as intelligent, when we win they will only hate us more.

      Reply
      • 55. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:43 pm

        In their hearts, maybe not ‘better’, but I’d settle for ‘equal’ at this point… your’s is a good point.

        Reply
      • 56. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:46 pm

        If they hate us afterwards, it shows that they are further away from what they claim to be… a “loving” people. It would amplify our point.

        Reply
    • 57. eDee  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:00 pm

      @Ray in MA,
      You are right, they are far far far away from what they claim to be – these are not loving people, but they will never see it.

      We (collectively) will never be equal in their eyes, we will always be the evil that won, proof that the end is near, an abomination. They will never see us as intelligent, only cunning.

      My point, the fight will not stop once the supreme court allows gays and lesbians to marry. Someday they will all die off (as will we) and hopefully WE (gays/straight allies) will have left this world a better place for all.

      Your original statement is correct, we must fight the good fight.

      Reply
  • 58. Ron  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:25 pm

    The lazy cow couldn’t be bothered to move herself because of that gut she’s got! Did you guys see that?!? Looks like she’s got an inner tube under her shirt. Geez! Don’t you feel just so sorry for the pathetic bigot!! If this is the best NOM can do, I am very encouraged. This is the corniest, stupidest thing I’ve seen in ages.

    Reply
    • 59. eDee  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:31 pm

      @Ron, lol I thought that was the baby she was nursing. lol

      Reply
    • 60. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm

      Heh, Ron – I have difficulty attacking her personally.

      She’s a pawn for the nomo’s PR exercise. NOM is the problem, not her. She being exploited for their purposes.

      My opinion of course.

      Reply
  • 61. Straight Ally #3008  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:30 pm

    You know what that clip needs? Auto-tune.

    We’re having a conversation
    about the implication
    of sexual orientation
    a silly allegation
    of extreme exaggeration
    and pointless information
    when it comes to confirmation

    Reply
    • 62. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:52 pm

      Oh SA3008,
      That was f’in great.

      Sent it to many friends,
      that don’t h8.

      Thanks!

      Reply
  • 63. Jaymax  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    Perhaps these NOM Marriage = One Man One Woman supporters need to be reminded that NOM was started by the Mormons in 2007. So shouldn’t the REAL message be:
    ONE Man…and his MANY wives.

    Rather ironic don’t you think?

    http://www.mormongate.com/

    Reply
    • 64. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:37 pm

      Yes, exactly! :)

      Reply
  • 65. Harold  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:35 pm

    Is this lady kidding me? So people standing in front of you is intimidating? How did these peaceful protesters intimidate her family? I am very confused.
    Also if you want to feed your kids in public then go for it. But do not start telling people what to do b/c of your personal choice…to feed the kids in a public space.

    I would have turned around just so I would not have to look at her saggy boobs. Gross!

    Reply
    • 66. eDee  |  July 19, 2010 at 6:44 pm

      @Harold, my first thought was something I didn’t think I should say – ‘I see a bunch of gay guys in the picture, the last thing they want to see are boobs!’
      But that’s probably not very politically correct of me. lol

      Reply
  • 67. Brad  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:09 pm

    I just want to say that we all really need to be humanistic about this woman. Sure she is stretching the reality of the situation and sure NOM is spinning as much as possible. But it is not okay to make comments about her immigration status, the fathers of her babies or her ability to speak English. Many of us have partners that are immigrants or from immigrant families. Just because she is against Gay Marriage does not give us the right to ridicule her for being Latino. That my friends is called racism.

    Reply
    • 68. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:20 pm

      Agreed… we can call her ignorant, but not Latino.

      Reply
    • 69. Mark M  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:49 pm

      Agreed! She actually speaks similar to many of my husbears family

      Reply
  • 70. Ray in MA  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:27 pm

    I see a conspicuos absence here of the original PP8TT Community after the Providence RI controversy.

    Have we been bruised? Let’s clarify our feelings.

    Reply
    • 71. Mark M  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:51 pm

      No, go back and read the earlier posts…many of the original core group is still here Ray.

      Reply
    • 72. JonT  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:59 pm

      I’m here Ray!

      I think what’s different is the fact that this community originally revolved around the Prop 8 trial. A common interest, that did not require a specific course of action, other than seeing the day’s events and commenting on them.

      Now we’ve got the nomo’s doing their tour. And apparently a lot of conflict regarding the best way to address that. This is new to me, at least.

      I must admit to being discouraged over the vitriol on both sides (in-your-face vs. passive-silent) protesting methodologies. We are, after all, on the same fraken side.

      I do not have the answers of course. I see the merits to both methodologies.

      I watched the QA videos on previous actions in a link posted last night, and thought “Yes! Right On!”. I support that!

      I saw the Albany protest. Quiet, powerful, beautiful. Again – right on!

      But with the nomo/QA shouting match in RI…

      I was uncomfortable with the impression that made, but I could not really argue against it or condemn it. These are haters, and personally, I would like to stand in BB’s face myself, and tell him what a POS I think he is!

      So as Ray in MA (you) mentioned in another post – it is a difficult choice. What works? What’s appropriate for a given situation?

      There doesn’t really appear to be any kind of state-wide LGBT ‘coordinator’ who can can decide on the appropriate action for a given situation in a given state.

      And – no indication that if there was, such instructions would be followed by all of the involved parties.

      That’s an advantage the nomo’s have – a coordinated, singular message, and a coordinated support infrastructure to push it.

      Rambling now I guess, but I see that as a weakness on our side, though I do not know how to address it. Maybe it should not be addressed. To each – fight the way they wish…?

      I would at least ask that we avoid attacking people personally, especially people that are on our side.

      That’s at least a start. We can disagree, but it kinda sucks to read posts of allies and friends here attacking each other personally.

      I think that needs to stop.

      Reply
      • 73. Bob  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:24 pm

        @JonT, great summary of where we are at, actually excellent, and it’s really appropritate for us to take stock of all this, cause you’re right this part calls for action

        I posted on the other thread, similar to you, it’s time to stop the passionate discussions about how to act in a counter protest, and focus on what message we want to send, one point we want to make, through all this,

        this is a very steep learning curve, already people are doing a great job, but quickly we got to circle the wagons, and focus on a message.

        also now we’re in with some organzed activists, and somehow it would be good if we could work with them, not argue about how they do things, they have already said there’s room for both kinds of action.

        for those who want non violent approach, there is plenty opportunity, as we see in the video’s the silent action, was not phased by the screaming match.

        everyone just has lto decide what they feel more comfortable with, and do that,

        it sounds like the activist groups have some knowledge and training, which they are willing to share,

        maybe we need an organizer, cause the other point you make is very valid, and part of the difficulty, that each state is doing it’s own thing, and people on here are even saying we should respect the wishes of each state, but what if that state has no pror experience wth this type of action.

        I’m all for organizing nationally around one point or messge we want to send. through our actions,

        Reply
    • 74. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:49 pm

      I’m still here, Ray. This has been a very busy week for us, so have not been able to post as often as I usually do. Vet trip, taking my mother-in-law to her checkup in Durham, making the bill run while they were gone, trip to check on the Kinston branch of the family, all on top of the normal amounts of confusion caused by domesticity. We have been running around like chickens with our heads cut off the last couple of weeks. I still have over 200 comment posts that I haven’t had a chance to read yet, in my P8TT folder.

      Reply
  • 75. AndrewPDX  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:32 pm

    OMG! SHE’S RIGHT! I mean the signs are right there: the UMBRELLAS! Of course! The Gay Agenda is really a front for the Penguin! Oh, where’s Batman when you need him?

    Love, Andrew

    Reply
    • 76. Mark M  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:55 pm

      LOL

      Reply
  • 77. Jonathan  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:42 pm

    Wow is that the best they can do, did not make a case for me, and let me tell you, the music in the video sounded like the same music that was played at Sara Palin’s prom.

    Reply
  • 78. Paul  |  July 19, 2010 at 7:57 pm

    Well…this is sure thought provoking shit…si or no? My gut reaction would be to ask her for her proof of legal status in this country. Then, I would ask her about her own “tradional” hodge-podge of a family in the background and how she came to create that “traditional” family.
    Then, since she seems like a sincere person and probably someone I could embrace if I could find her true self, I would ask her how she let herself be brainwashed by that white, male, hetero male with the flag blowing in his wind behind her? There’s the real problem…hiding behind her.

    Reply
  • 79. Dave  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:14 pm

    This woman averaged the word “family” or “families” once every 15 seconds in this video because she’s been coached that same sex MARRIAGE is “anti-family.”

    Reply
  • 80. Mark M  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:17 pm

    My next poster/sign

    familyvalues

    Reply
    • 81. cabooklover  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:04 pm

      very nice sign!

      Reply
  • 82. Mark  |  July 19, 2010 at 8:55 pm

    Check the video at 1:20. It looks like this woman chose to put herself and her children directly in the sun when shade was available about 20 feet away. I call BS on this, this woman was a plant from NOM.

    Definitely shows how weak they have become.

    Reply
  • 83. cabooklover  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:02 pm

    I was watching the video and thinking what a whack job but at the end was a bit emotional and then I realized it was the music that they have playing in the video that got my teary-eyed. Sneaky bastards!

    Reply
  • 84. Matthew  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:08 pm

    Yeah seriously. You are totally intimidating me by facing my general direction while I pull my boob out in public. I could get off my fat ass and move 10 feet to the right. I mean omg there are 7 of you, SEVEN! But I’m not gonna back down from my principles of umm…sitting with my family. Besides those umbrellas will give me some nice shade in a few hours when the shadows from them actually reach us. PLEASE stop intimi-gay-ting me!

    Reply
  • 85. Ed  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:17 pm

    Hey guys….I live in South Bend, Indiana…..but I’m always off on mondays……Soo…..Im really considering driving down to Indy, its a 3 hour drive….Anyone intersted in getting together let me know.
    Ed

    Reply
    • 86. Billy  |  July 20, 2010 at 5:28 am

      So far, there’s at least 6 people I know personally attending, and two facebook groups set up for it. You definitely won’t be alone. I’m driving over from Eaton OH, so it’s a 1.5 hr drive for me. Hope to see you there :D

      Reply
  • 87. Ed  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:19 pm

    Going to Indy for the NOM rally, (in opposition of course). had to clear that up LOL
    Ed

    Reply
  • 88. Cassie  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:30 pm

    This video makes me so angry!!!!! Being stood in front of (quite a few feet away!!!!) during a rally and having to look at signs talking about LOVE is not harassment. Harassment is walking down the hallway of your high school on Day of Silence and having 3 football players yell awful phrases at you, call you a dyke, make fun of you, physically block your path and push you multiple times for wearing a GSA shirt that says “Support Love” on the back. THAT’S harassment. Get your definitions straight. (Pun not intended. :P) It seriously makes me so angry! What do these people think it feels like to be afraid of physical violence for kissing your gf/bf!? What do they think it feels like to be threatened for LOOKING (not checking out, just looking) at a member of the same sex when you cross paths in the hallway? Do they not understand what harassment truly is? But all this anger is going to be used for good. I’m going to be one of the people at these rallies. I’m going to all the protests, pro-gay rallies, I’m going to write letters to my legislators, I’m going to be active in my college’s GSA, I’m going to become an activist and a teacher to help kids going thru what I am right now.

    Reply
    • 89. PamC  |  July 20, 2010 at 6:59 am

      Cassie, you have my full support, and that of the P8TT’s who post here as well. I’ve worked in high schools and middle schools most of my adult life, and I’ve seen first-hand the harassment & bullying towards gay kids and their allies. We’re doing a better job of building supports and taking steps towards consequences (most states have laws against bullying in the schools), but I know that many adults in schools either ignore gay insults/bullying or minimize its impact on kids. I would have been amazed to find a GSA in my school, growing up, but even with those clubs, people’s attitudes haven’t changed much, by & large. No one should have to put up with that kind of harassment, ever. Adults are failing our gay children daily by turning a blind eye.

      btw, I never ever let students get away with even casual use of “fag” or “that’s so gay” (or “retard”, for that matter). I call them on it, even when just passing in the hall–it doesn’t take much to stop, say “That’s an insult; we don’t tolerate that here; this is a warning.”

      Reply
  • 90. Gina  |  July 19, 2010 at 10:34 pm

    Interesting… She’s not wearing a wedding ring. Would love to find her and hear the real story…..

    Reply
    • 91. fern  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:01 am

      She’ll get it back from the pawn shop as soon as the check from NOM arrives.

      Reply
    • 92. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  July 20, 2010 at 7:23 am

      Or maybe she is borrowing a trick from MagPIe. As has been pointed out before, MagPie does not wear a wedding ring either, and has anybody ever seen her husband at one of these things?

      Reply
      • 93. Fluffyskunk  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:52 pm

        Shows how much they really care about the sanctity of marriage…

        Reply
  • 94. fern  |  July 19, 2010 at 11:59 pm

    I can understand this woman’s fears when you know what Haggrid can do with an umbrella as seen in the sorcerer’s stone, and no police to protect to protect this terrorized woman.

    Reply
  • 95. MaineDave  |  July 20, 2010 at 4:41 am

    Girl just sat there, whining about not being able to see the rally because a bunch of homos were in here way? Girl’s got a pretty easy life if that’s “harassment.”

    I do like the American flag being held in the background. At first I though that this was from Providence, Mozambique, but the flag set me straight.

    I wouldn’t want that crusty old man touching MY baby! But at least it makes him look less like a hater-you can’t go wrong wiping the spit of a strange baby’s face!

    I hope the thinking people can see the blatant manipulation of this poor mother.

    Dave

    Reply
  • 96. Rick  |  July 20, 2010 at 5:48 am

    ‘…we are going to STAND for our families… we’re not going to back off…‘ [she said as she SAT in the grass.]

    Reply
  • 97. Sagesse  |  July 20, 2010 at 6:02 am

    ABA Delegates to Consider Policies on Same-Sex Marriage

    “Fourteen groups represented in the House of Delegates have combined forces to sponsor the measure on same-sex marriage. It would urge state-level governments to eliminate all legal barriers to civil marriage between two persons of the same sex who are otherwise eligible to marry and build on a 2004 ABA policy opposing a federal constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and prohibit states from allowing same sex couples to enter civil marriage. The new proposal is sponsored by state bar associations in Massachusetts, New York, Vermont and Washington; local bar associations in Beverly Hills, New York City and San Francisco; ABA sections on individual rights and responsibilities and on tort law, and the ABA General Practice, Solo and Small Firm Division; as well as the National LGBT Bar Association.”

    The ABA will consider this draft policy statement at its annual meeting in San Francisco in August.

    Reply
  • 98. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  July 20, 2010 at 6:07 am

    Today’s The New York Times article “Looking for Time Bombs and Tea Leaves on Gay Marriage” analyzes Christian Legal Society v. Martinez Supreme Court decision (as well as some other gay-related SCOTUS previous decisions) and its impact on future gay marriage cases that the Justices will have to deal with sooner or later.
    ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
    Let’s look at some memorable words written by Justices of the Supreme Court.
    ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

    «Our decisions have declined to distinguish between status and conduct in this context.»
    –Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (writing for the majority in CLS v. Martinez, 2010)

    To which NYT adds: “Calling sexual orientation a status may not require the conclusion that being gay is immutable rather than a choice, but it certainly suggests it.
    ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

    «Texas’s sodomy law is targeted at more than conduct.  It is instead directed toward gay persons as a class.»
    –Justice Sandra Day O’Connor (writing in a concurrence in Lawrence v. Texas, 2003)

    Here Justice O’Connor identifies gay persons as a class, which, by itself, does not say anything about immutability of homosexuality, but there is a slight suggestion of that, just like there is one in CLS v. Martinez decision.
    ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

    «[O’Connor’s] reasoning leaves on pretty shaky grounds state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples . . .  “[P]reserving the traditional institution of marriage” is just a kinder way of describing the State’s moral disapproval of same-sex couples.»
    «If moral disapprobation of homosexual conduct is “no legitimate state interest” for purposes of proscribing that conduct . . . and if, as the Court coos . . . “[w]hen sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring,” . . . what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising “[t]he liberty protected by the Constitution”?  Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry.»
    –Justice Antonin Gregory Scalia (writing in a dissent in Lawrence v. Texas, 2003)

    In these words not only does Justice Scalia acknowledge there is no good reason to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry persons of the same gender should they choose them to be their partners in life, but he also shows his real fears deeply rooted in his moral and religious views and values — by trying to scare other Justices (into denying any ways for homosexuals to openly express themselves) with the prospects of marriage rights and all other kinds of rights for gays and lesbians that will put an end to the era of homophobia- and religion-driven discrimination of those persons.

    Reply
  • 99. Elliot  |  July 20, 2010 at 8:13 am

    I can’t help but wonder why someone who is okay with breastfeeding in public would be outraged that someone might see her breastfeeding her child.

    Reply
    • 100. Dave in Maine  |  July 20, 2010 at 8:46 am

      And gay men watching her, no less. Maybe there was a lesbian there, but really! I doubt anyone there was looking for a peek-a-boo show.

      That old white guy behind her-now HE looks intimidating…

      Reply
    • 102. Dave in Maine  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:02 am

      Thanks for the link, Billy! I hadn’t heard this yet!

      Dave

      Reply
    • 103. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:24 am

      And like Constance said, she will never get her prom back, but hopefully this will help the students who come after her at that school.

      Reply
    • 104. Kathleen  |  July 20, 2010 at 11:53 am

      Great news! I just got on my computer and it’s nice to be greeted by this story.

      Reply
  • 105. Sam  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:17 am

    It wasn’t that she intimidated by the line of “scary gay people” as Kathleen says. It was a line of MEN (only one woman) that singled out a woman and her 3 children, blocked her off from the crowd and all but surrounded her. Guess what? That was intimidation and I don’t blame her at all for being nervous. If you were at a peaceful Gay Right Rally and a group of men surround you in this way when you were alone, you would be nervous too! I notice throughout all the videos out there that the activists that attended this event tended to choose women and children to intimidate. There are even some people yelling at children (way to get the point across). This is not how it is done and I for one am ashamed!

    Reply
    • 106. Dave in Maine  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:31 am

      Do we know that they singled her out? Was there anyone else nearby? Who was there first? Was she alone? Weren’t there a lot of gay supporters standing in a silent line there?

      Was she really intimidated when there were obviously NOM people all around, some of whom were taking photos of the “incident.” There is a person on the park bench behind her, a person on the walk near her, and numerous people nearby. How was she being bullied?

      These still photos do not tell us completely what’s going on, but if she felt intimidated and bullied by these men (and I do see the woman now), then that’s not their problem. Perhaps they should have gone elsewhere where there weren’t any women and children and stood there?

      I just don’t get it…

      Dave

      Reply
    • 107. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:53 am

      How is standing in front of her…in a ‘straight’ line deemed ‘surrounding her’????

      Reply
    • 108. Kathleen  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:00 pm

      Sam, I think you might be misreading what was going on there. Look at all the pictures of the event, not just the ones focusing on this woman and the people near her.

      It appears to me that the demonstrators were surrounding the NOM speaker (at the podium) and the major portion of the group that was listing to the speaker. And they were surrounding them with their backs to the group, as part of their message.

      In other words, these people weren’t standing there in order to face, and certainly not to surround, this woman. She just happened to be off and away from the main group, so the demonstrators, in turning their backs to the NOM group, happened to be facing her.

      Reply
    • 109. Jaymax  |  July 21, 2010 at 6:08 am

      Did anyone notice that the video switched between the protestors standing on the steps beside and behind the podium and the protestors standing TO ONE SIDE of the woman. In the video they showed the woman seated on the grass quite a long distance from the steps where the NOM speakers were. She wasn’t even looking in that direction so the protestors could not have been blocking her view.
      I’m guessing she may not have even been in the park to watch the NOM speeches at all but was seconded afterwards by the NOM spin doctors.

      Reply
  • 110. Ғĕłỹҳ  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:20 am

    I find it hilarious she felt intimidated at gay men looking in her general direction while she was publicly breastfeeding….as if any of those guys really wanted to see anything she might have had!

    Felyx

    BTW I support Traditional Marriage too, I just include all the traditions from all of the marriages from all over the world from throughout recoded time.

    Reply
    • 111. Ғĕłỹҳ  |  July 20, 2010 at 9:23 am

      Kirill pointed out that I said ‘recoded’ time….

      Hey, if the D-I’s can do it then so can I!! :P

      (Meant to say recorded.)

      Felyx

      Reply
    • 113. Kathleen  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:05 pm

      Wow. Lindsey Graham voted for her.

      Reply
  • 114. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  July 20, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    Yes. And there are more Republicans in the full Senate who are going to. It was reported that there are enough votes to confirm, with or without John McCain.

    Reply
  • 115. Morgan  |  July 21, 2010 at 9:11 am

    I agree with everything, except when a mother needs to nurse her baby as she seemed to need and she asks you to turn for a moment, please have the decency to do as she asks and turn your backs as she nurses her baby.

    Reply
    • 116. Kathleen  |  July 21, 2010 at 12:11 pm

      I completely disagree. If she wants to nurse in public, she should; there’s nothing wrong with that. But if she’s too modest to expose her breast in public, then she should find a more secluded spot to nurse.

      Reply
      • 117. Sagesse  |  July 22, 2010 at 6:08 am

        I’m with Kathleen on this one. As any woman who has ever done it knows, it is easy to nurse a child in a way that absolutely nothing shows, except for maybe a fraction of a second (and no, you don’t have to drape your child in a blanket). Nothing wrong with nursing in public (and it’s much preferable to letting the adorable little beast whom you love dearly scream ’cause he’s hungry), but if being in a public place makes you uncomfortable, find somewhere private.

        Reply
  • 118. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 21, 2010 at 9:18 pm

    Vito Oliver: Here is a quick response to the lies Brian Brown and NOM have been saying about me.

    Reply
    • 119. Ronnie  |  July 21, 2010 at 9:34 pm

      I love it…Good job Vito…& as a matter of fact I do say that to myself every night before I go to sleep & the first thing I say when I wake & look in the mirror…

      I am somebody & I deserve full Equality…Right here, Right now…I demand full Equality…then I add I am a Beautiful & Strong person no matter what other people think, do, or say…F@#K EM!!

      <3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 120. Adam  |  July 22, 2010 at 8:22 am

    I love how she worked in the word “agenda”. So I guess she got in the talking point. Somehow that word just rolling off her tongue seems unlikely. Just saying as they say.

    Reply
  • 121. Philosopher  |  July 22, 2010 at 1:39 pm

    Most interesting post was the one from “lesbians love boies” which had a link to this pic http://www.flickr.com/photos/couragecampaign/4802085703/ in which you can clearly see that this wasn’t a group of men that singled her out to block her view. It was part of a formation, two lines of rainbow umbrellas on both sides of the rally. She claimed in the video that their intention was to intimidate her when it obviously had nothing to do with her. Its like trying to make the royal guards chase you. If anything the intention was on the part of NOM to break up the peaceful formation even going so far as to get a mother to flash them. They have never been above exploiting kids and family for their own fear and hate.

    Reply
  • 123. Ann S.  |  July 22, 2010 at 5:49 pm

    This video has gone viral (as the saying goes) on http://www.buzzfeed.com/rebeccae/dont-you-hate-it-when-people-block-your-view.

    Most of the viewers ranked it “WTF” or “Trashy”.

    Reply
    • 124. Lesbians Love Boies  |  July 22, 2010 at 5:51 pm

      There are quite a few parodies on it on youtube (nothing of taste that can be posted here.)

      Educated people see it for what it is…and I thank G-D everyday for educated people.

      Reply
  • […] man, one woman" marriage message.  NOM is being met with protesters along the way.From the Courage Campaign, which has been following NOM and blogging about its activities, we learn of a "shocking […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to prop8trial@couragecampaign.org

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.

Categories

TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,297 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...