NOM protects sanctity of electoral bullying

March 9, 2011 at 2:24 pm 93 comments

Last ditch efforts. Make those calls! -Adam

Cross-posted at Good As You

By Jeremy Hooper

Predictably vindictive:

The National Organization of Marriage (NOM) today announced that it will form the “NOM PAC Maryland” in the state. Nom Logo-5NOM pledges to spend at least $1 million in Maryland to support Democratic State Legislators who cast their votes to defend the traditional marriage and oppose any Republican Legislators who vote to redefine marriage.

“It’s become quite clear in recent days in Maryland that the Democratic leadership and the same-sex ‘marriage’ lobby will resort to any tactic, including threats and intimidation, to coerce Democratic legislators to support their agenda,” said Brian Brown, President of NOM. “We want to be sure those courageous Democrats who cast their vote of conscience in favor of marriage will have a strong supporter if the radical gay activists come after them in their next primary election.”

The NOM PAC Maryland is similar to a PAC formed in New York by NOM, which successfully defended Democrats who supported marriage, despite a major effort by pro-gay marriage advocates to defeat several Democrats in their primaries who had stood up for marriage. In fact, NOM supported candidates like state senator Ruben Diaz, won by larger margins than before their votes against same-sex marriage.

NOM PAC Maryland will also oppose in their primaries any Republicans who support gay marriage. The PAC announced that it will target for defeat State Senator Allan Kittleman in his expected race for Howard County Executive.

“We don’t question whether Senator Kittleman or any other Republican who might support gay marriage is voting so out of political calculation or are voting their true beliefs,” said Brown. “But we do question whether such a vote is consistent with the desires of their Republican constituents. NOM has defeated every pro-gay marriage Republican we’ve ever targeted, and we’re quite confident Senator Kittleman will be next.”

NOM Announces NOM MD PAC, Will Spend $1 Million to Hold Maryland Legislators Accountable [NOM]

Also, any teenager who sits crossed armed, callously chewing gum and dismissively rolling eyes during his or her relative’s same-sex wedding, will earn NOM’s backing in an upcoming student council race.

***

*We’ve already shown you two different NOM/MD domains:

201102211234

Screen Shot 2011-03-04 At 12.01.27 Pm

The latter has launched, the former’s still inactive.

Entry filed under: Marriage equality, Right-wing.

EDGE profiles Ed and Derence Efforts to make it better for bullied LGBT kids

93 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Madjoy  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:29 pm

    To be fair, I’m totally in support of spending money to help out the campaigns of Republicans who vote pro-marriage equality and against Democrats who vote anti-marriage equality!

    Reply
  • 2. Kathleen  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:34 pm

    Reply
    • 3. Ed Cortes  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:53 pm

      √√

      Reply
      • 4. JonT  |  March 9, 2011 at 6:12 pm

        ☮☮☮

        Reply
  • 5. Evan  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:41 pm

    It’s become quite clear in recent days in Maryland that the Democratic leadership and the same-sex ‘marriage’ lobby will resort to any tactic… so we’re resorting to bribery! That’s right! You vote our way, and our PAC will be sure to support your candidacy next election cycle. Nothing sinful about that!

    Reply
    • 6. Phil L  |  March 9, 2011 at 6:17 pm

      I was JUST about to post something along those lines.

      I suppose political bribery is suddenly in the “gray area” of legality?

      Reply
    • 7. MarriedinMaryland  |  March 10, 2011 at 10:53 am

      Why in the world are they letting NOM set up camp in Maryland when they are still in appeals for loosing cases for not providing required donor disclosure in several states? They should be told no, or asked to provide the info up front before allowing them to form their PAC here in Maryland. If they aren’t willing to hand it over they shouldn’t get to operate. If they didn’t play by the rules elsewhere it is logical to think they won’t do so here. Why should our state set itself up for some enormous legal costs when they fail to follow the rules here? Our state budget is tight, just think of what poor Maine is still shelling out! I have contacted the election board to point this out, it may make sense for others to do so too.

      mailto:info@elections.state.md.us

      Reply
  • 8. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    Of course, NOM is going to do all they can to protect all sorts of bullying when the targets of the bullies are LGBT people. They do not see us as people, but “things.” I say we begin to show them how it feels to be treated as “things” instead of people.

    Reply
  • 9. Michelle Evans  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:47 pm

    No new tactics here. The anti-equality people get a lot of money from a very few people, to destroy the rights of all of the rest of us. Different groups are doing all they can to take away the basic rights of everyone except the ultra-rich. These people have a basic agenda of eliminating things like unions and education. Without any power to bargain as a group, or to have enough education to know when they are being had, the people allow themselves to be more and more subjugated, and we all head closer and closer to a their ideal of a theocracy.

    Reply
  • 10. Michelle Evans  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:50 pm

    Wondering if anyone saw the Lisa Ling “Our America” show about Pray Away the Gay? She had some interesting interviews, but my personal opinion is that she was way too even-handed, and did not ask the really tough questions of groups like Exodus. The big thing she really missed was going after the financial side of things and showing how much money there predators make “praying” on gay people who have been told all their lives they are abominations.

    Reply
    • 11. Russell Manaois  |  March 9, 2011 at 3:35 pm

      http://gay.americablog.com/2011/03/head-of-exodus-tells-lisa-ling-you-cant.html

      Given this admission, Exodus is definitely a scam…

      Reply
      • 12. Michelle Evans  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:46 pm

        I’d believe his admission more if it were caught on hidden camera. He knew he was being filmed for national tv, so of course he’s going to try and sound as reasonable as possible. She was the only media invited to the conference, and she admitted it took her a long time, and lots of turn downs before she was able to get in. They had to make sure their house was in order before being exposed. It was a great PR move on their part because they sounded so reasonable and loving, etc.

        Reply
        • 13. Steve  |  March 10, 2011 at 10:56 am

          People being closely connected to Exodus (including the founders) made similar statements in the past. It’s not exactly a new revelation.

          Reply
  • 14. Sagesse  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:52 pm

    To read later.

    Reply
  • 15. Michael Adrian  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    I’d like to see the “threats and intimidation” that Brian Brown refers to coming from the marriage equality supporters, and how he feels this strategy from NOM is any different. I mean, he’s basically “intimidating” equality-minded Republicans by “threatening” to fund campaigns against them in their next primary election. The way these people talk out of both sides of their mouth while maintaining a straight face is impressive, I’ll give them that much.

    Reply
    • 16. Carpool Cookie  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:27 pm

      Re: “I’d like to see the “threats and intimidation” that Brian Brown refers to coming from the marriage equality supporters, and how he feels this strategy from NOM is any different.”

      I was wondering about that, too. What are the threats and intimidation they’re talking about, anyway? Is this about when Prop H8’s Dr. Tam came out and found he had a flat tire that one time, or what??

      Reply
      • 17. Rhie  |  March 11, 2011 at 4:45 pm

        He had a flat tire and blamed it on equality movement? Wow

        I think what they mean is that:

        People will correct them when they say something wrong, They are asked questions and expected to give a real answer and not just prattle on, They are called on their BS and illegal actions.

        Apparently logical and respectful discourse is oppressive and intimidating.

        Reply
    • 18. Ronnie  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:00 pm

      They don’t need to provide no stinking evidence….ROFL….Brian Brown= FAIL….maybe Brian Brown should check all the threats & more towards LGBT people posted on the NOM “Protect Marriage” Facebook page that is posted on a daily basis before he talks about “intimidating’ & “threatening”….just saying……<3…Ronnie

      Reply
  • 19. LCH  |  March 9, 2011 at 2:53 pm

    ♀♀=♂♂=♀♂=∑♡

    Reply
  • 20. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 9, 2011 at 3:10 pm

    Meanwhile….

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/148521-house-leaders-vote-to-intervene-in-doma-defense

    Reply
  • 21. Rhie  |  March 9, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    Saving for an after study dessert :)

    Reply
  • 22. AndrewPDX  |  March 9, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    OMG
    Brian’s two-faced hypocrisy knows no bounds. In the same message above, he talks about “if the radical gay activists come after them in their next primary election” — then goes on to bleeping brag about “NOM has defeated every pro-gay marriage Republican we’ve ever targeted, and we’re quite confident Senator Kittleman will be next.”

    Brian, we know you read these posts, so please stop insulting the intelligence of your followers; even they deserve better.

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
    Andrew

    Reply
    • 23. Nicole  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:22 pm

      I noticed that too.

      “It’s become quite clear in recent days in Maryland that the Democratic leadership and the same-sex ‘marriage’ lobby will resort to any tactic, including threats and intimidation.”

      “NOM PAC Maryland will also oppose in their primaries any Republicans who support gay marriage.”

      “NOM has defeated every pro-gay marriage Republican we’ve ever targeted, and we’re quite confident Senator Kittleman will be next.”

      Nom, ‘the hell? Exactly what do you call this?

      Also, am I the only one who noticed how diabolical that last sentence sounded?

      Reply
  • 24. PoxyHowzes  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:15 pm

    Y’know, in order to go after politicians in their other political campaigns (e.g., Kittleman in a (putative) run for Howard County Executive), NOM ventures from issue advocacy to candidate advocacy. The rules are different, both at the federal level and at the state level.

    Just sayin’

    Reply
  • 25. Russell Manaois  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:22 pm

    http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2011/03/audio-equality-confounds-noms-jennifer-roback-morse.html

    An equal sign without an equation doesn’t mean anything? NOMbies really can’t grasp the idea of equality.

    JRM is an adult with the mind of a child! Reminds me of Tom Hanks in “Big” when he raises his hand and says, “I don’t get it…”

    Reply
  • 26. fiona64  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:27 pm

    Brian Brown spewed: We want to be sure those courageous Democrats who cast their vote of conscience in favor of marriage will have a strong supporter if the radical gay activists come after them in their next primary election.”

    You mean, the way NOM went after the Iowa judges who ::gasp:: ruled in favor of the US Constitution.

    Love,
    Fiona

    Reply
  • 27. Carpool Cookie  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    I think they really have to strain for topics to spout-off on.

    And I like how they also comment over there that speaking of confusing symbolism, Roback’s Ruth Institute logo (with three nude couples entwined in some synchronized swimming move together?) looks weirdly polygamist.

    Reply
    • 28. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:46 pm

      Ditto!
      @ I think they really have to strain for topics to spout-off on.

      Reply
  • 29. Larry Little  |  March 9, 2011 at 4:55 pm

    Why is NOM spending $1,000,000 million to illegally discriminate against gay people? They spent 43 million to get proposition hate in California. This is pure “let’s” make the Church view dominate the state. This country is polarized because of religion and it’s insatiable appetite to punish and humiliate those who are not of the same belief, faith or sexual orientation.
    Religion had it wrong during the Spanish Inquisition and the same people are in charge today.

    Reply
    • 30. Carpool Cookie  |  March 9, 2011 at 5:39 pm

      Maggie and Brian have to come up with projects like that, or else they lose their paychecks.

      Reply
    • 31. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:15 pm

      There is also the fact that these idiots are doing everything they can to trample on mine and my husband’s freedom of religious expression. They are trying to make it so that no matter how badly he wants to, BZ will not be legally allowed to perform a chasunah for a Jewish same-sender couple. That is just so wrong on so many levels, and so unconstitutional.

      Reply
  • 32. be[4]marriage  |  March 9, 2011 at 5:41 pm

    I’m not sure why we don’t buy up every domain that we can think of that is 4marriage. That’s what I did. They aren’t 4 marriage, they are against marriage. Our side is 4 marriage. We should deprive them of the rights to register false domain names.

    Reply
  • 33. AB  |  March 9, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    I REALLY hope our people are motivated to show up tomorrow. We can’t be outnumbered! This is really scary.
    My humble opinion: we HAVE GOT to be more riled up in MD!

    Reply
    • 34. grod  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:45 pm

      @AB
      HAVE GOT to be more riled up.

      Who is our audience over the next 18 hours in MD?
      Are we not seeking to influence the movable middle to support the cause?
      And what does support the cause look like? Is it not contacting their own delegate, particularly wavering ones to encourage them to support equality.
      How: ‘You say be more riled up’. Would you settle for “more effectively visible? or spontaneously articulate?. Couples and families giving witness to be ordinary Joes and Jills sends a powerful message.

      Reply
      • 35. AB  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:56 pm

        Grod:

        You fundamentally misunderstand the function of political pressure. I am speaking from my post-graduate expertise in Political Science; that is where I come from. And the social science literature tells us that public discourse functions more as a pressure on lawmakers than does private pressure.
        Consider this, on this website, of the past 10 posts, only 3 mentioned Maryland—two of those three mentioned details on the legislative battle only in passing. If you search for ‘ “same sex marriage” Maryland’ on Yahoo News, you will find stories on the legislative battle, and each one of them mentions the opponents who gathered at the State Capitol, and in the House gallery, but there is NOT ONE mention of supporters of the bill.

        Certainly, you are right that “contacting [ones] own delegate, particularly wavering ones to encourage them to support equality” is important. The step that you apparently take, that I refuse to take, is that: because persuading legislators IS important, then persuading the public IS NOT. None of the Maryland delegates represents me, but I have contacted each of them; having done so does not make me think that it is not possible to also wage a public campaign. That is simply false.

        All credible studies of legislative pressure tell us that legislators will have to account to the public, so if they cater to private pressure, then their accounting to a public that sees the public pressure as opposing the interests in which they ultimately vote will be a wasted vote (this is most expressed in the work of Fenno). In other words, if the legislators feel that the public is seeing anti-marriage equality protestors, then they will be significantly (statistically significantly, in fact) more likely to respond to what they perceive the public as wanting, as opposed to what individuals have written them in private emails.

        To be honest, I am frankly very concerned. We all crooned when Ted Olson pointed out that we are fighting in the court of public opinion, yet we refuse to believe the same when it comes to what we say on here? How can that possibly be? We believe that minority rights should not be put to a plebiscite, and that is true. However, nothing about that theoretical argument suggests that we should give up on public persuasion entirely. And while putting out profiles of courage, and testimonies of the good that this website does (as this website has done in past days), is a worthy endeavor, it should be noted that there is a time and a place to invoke the humanistic element of this debate, and there is a time and place to make our arguments on SPECIFIC legislative battles more publicly visible. Now is a time for the latter; the former should be able to wait a week or two.

        (As an aside, I would mention that Patrick Egan’s work on Prop 8 suggests that public opinion shifts more BEFORE referendum campaigns are waged than during them. This means that, if Maryland were to come to a ballot initiative, what publicly visible work we do NOW will be most effective.)

        You ask: “How: ‘You say be more riled up’. Would you settle for “more effectively visible? or spontaneously articulate?. Couples and families giving witness to be ordinary Joes and Jills sends a powerful message.” But this critique necessarily misunderstands my argument; you presume “be more riled up” to mean “no one is riled up.” Indeed, the presence of the word ‘more’ indicates that I know people are petitioning the great state of Maryland already. The argument I made, however, was (and I feel that this was clear) that getting riled up in private correspondence does little if not met with equal energy in public discourse.

        In any case, I believed (and continue to believe) simply that we must be more publicly visible in this debate. I never said that individuals are not working hard, I simply pointed out that there is much more work to be done, and that the public debate in Maryland has atrophied enough to cause some delegates to equivocate. I maintain that, and I see no reason to revise that claim.

        Reply
    • 36. celdd  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:30 pm

      When I read “pro-marriage” I almost always think they’re talking about pro-marriage equality. It usually takes me a bit to figure out they are actually against marriage for all.

      Reply
  • 37. Straight Dave  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:48 pm

    OT: MA Governor Patrick Signs Historic Executive Order Protecting Transgender State Employees

    http://www.glad.org/current/news-detail/governor-patrick-signs-historic-executive-order-protecting-transgender-stat/

    Nowhere else to post this, so I just picked the current spot. Apologies if it’s old news. Apart from the actual good it does, I hope it also brings more visibility and sets a good example for others.

    MA has done such a good job on the equality front that we never hear anything about the marriage issue here anymore – except last year when those 2 lesbian Episcopal priests got hitched to each other, and that was nearly all positive. People really have gotten over it here and moved on.

    Reply
    • 38. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:52 pm

      Didn’t coach Sue from Glee and her wife get married in Massachusetts? But once again, Massachusetts is in the forefront of equality and doing the right thing.Waht a great bit of news for the second day of my 48-day birthday celebration!

      Reply
    • 40. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:04 pm

      Hope all is well with you and your family, Straight Dave! Hoping that we are able to do more traveling this year and meet more of the P8TT family.

      Reply
  • 41. CaliGirl  |  March 9, 2011 at 7:52 pm

    “It’s become quite clear in recent days in Maryland that the Democratic leadership and the same-sex ‘marriage’ lobby will resort to any tactic, including threats and intimidation, to coerce Democratic legislators to support their agenda,” said Brian Brown, President of NOM.

    Um, wow. Cognitive dissonance, much?

    Reply
  • 42. Douglas  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:33 pm

    My inner activist got the best of me. I had the idea to do it and the post above added fuel to the fire. Meet the proud owner of colorado4marriage.com.

    Thanks to all for letting me be a silent part here always reading , not much typing, but getting me really interested in equality for all.

    Douglas

    Reply
    • 43. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:56 pm

      Well done! Any news on the civil unions bill? Things are happening in so many states that it’s hard to keep track!

      Reply
    • 44. Kathleen  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:59 pm

      Well don, Douglas!

      Reply
    • 45. Mark M (Seattle)  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:26 am

      Excellent Doug!!!

      Reply
  • 46. Sagesse  |  March 9, 2011 at 8:36 pm

    One of Maggie Gallagher’s less shining moments. Still makes my skin crawl to watch.

    Maggie Gallagher ducks questions, insults young voters, and affirms gay marriage during interview

    http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2011/03/maggie-gallagher-ducks-questions.html

    Reply
  • 47. AB  |  March 9, 2011 at 9:06 pm

    I wrote an open letter to Brian Brown and to the heads of both parties in the Maryland Senate and House of Delegates, explaining why the Maryland poll, commissioned by NOM was flawed from the perspective of someone who analyzes and works with polling data.

    I am working on getting a pfd of it, and had hoped to share it with as many people as possible; if anyone here would like to read it, let me know.

    Reply
    • 48. Kathleen  |  March 9, 2011 at 9:17 pm

      Do you want me to create a .pdf? write to me: prop8tt at gmail doc com

      Reply
  • 49. june  |  March 9, 2011 at 10:48 pm

    Have you guys seen this video?

    I feel like if we could get more pro athletes taking a stand on this issue, we could really win a lot of hearts. This guy is adorable!

    Reply
    • 50. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:34 am

      And a football player, no less! Way to go Brendon Ayanbadejo!

      Reply
  • 51. Sheryl, Mormon Mother of a wonderful son who just happens to be gay  |  March 10, 2011 at 1:34 am

    This is so totally off topic of this post but I wanted share. A few weeks ago we discussed the Utah legislature who proposed a bill to prevent LGBT familes from receiving public funded aide, etc. Well, we discovered that Lavar Christensen is from Draper where my niece and husband live. Talked with her today and her husband knows and, even before this issue, had no use for him. Definitely might be in his constituency but don’t vote for him.

    Hoping all goes well in MD tomorrow. And, my first reaction to BB was “oh, you mean targeting politicians like you did the judges in IA” Cannot people see that what he is proposing is the exact same thing he accuses the LGBT community of doing?

    Sheryl, Mormon Mother

    Reply
    • 52. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 5:31 am

      Lavar Christensen is on my naughty list for certain!

      Reply
    • 53. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:37 am

      Actually, Sheryl, people are willing to turn a blind eye to what Brian Brown is doing because the LGBT population of this country is one of the last bastions of state-sanctioned, state-sponsored discrimination left to them that they can openly espouse and not face any consequences. People do not see us as human (remember AgainstSSM calling us cockroaches), so therefore, any bullying that is aimed toward us or our allies is justified in their eyes.

      Reply
  • 54. Owen  |  March 10, 2011 at 1:43 am

    DOWN goes NY State Senator Carl Kruger!

    http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Kruger-latest-senator-in-peril-1052578.php

    That makes for 5 of the 8 Democrats who voted against marriage equality in 2009 out of the Senate already. Just wow.

    Shirley Huntley and Ruben Diaz ought to be trembling in their boots.

    Reply
    • 55. AnonyGrl  |  March 10, 2011 at 6:40 am

      And on the UP side… in NY Governor Cuomo met with advocates yesterday, and said he is looking to have marriage equality in New York State by this June.

      Frankly, I don’t know if he has the support needed to get it passed, but I LOVE that he is behind it and pushing, not just letting it be a campaign promise that falls by the wayside!

      Reply
      • 56. Owen  |  March 10, 2011 at 9:08 am

        At this point, they should only need about 3 Republicans this time if they can get a pro-equality Senator to replace Kruger. I’d call it a toss-up, but things are looking much better than last year.

        Reply
  • 57. Sagesse  |  March 10, 2011 at 5:06 am

    Federal anti=bullying legislation to be reintroduced.

    Student anti-bullying, non-discrimination bills face uncertain path

    http://www.keennewsservice.com/2011/03/09/student-anti-bullying-non-discrimination-bills-face-uncertain-path/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+KeenNewsService+%28Keen+News+Service%29

    Reply
    • 58. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:42 am

      I see they just made a whole new post about this.. thanks for the advanced read early this morning : )

      Reply
  • 59. Sagesse  |  March 10, 2011 at 5:15 am

    On topic.

    Lax Internal Revenue Service rules help groups shield campaign donor identities

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/09/AR2011030904875.html?wpisrc=nl_fed

    Reply
  • 60. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:47 am

    WARNING —- WAY OFF TOPIC:
    I just had to share my excitement with my pals here that the guinea eggs in my incubator which went through both a power outage AND a terrible heat spike are actually still alive after all!!!! One has hatched this morning. And to think the only reason I didn’t throw them all out yesterday after giving up on them was that I just plain forgot to………..

    Reply
    • 61. Richard A. Jernigan  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:52 am

      So glad to hear that your guinea eggs survived! I guess the good karma you have been spreading here has taken the opportunity to return to you for additional broadcasting!

      Reply
      • 62. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:54 am

        Aw, Richard, you are so sweet! Let’s hope some more hatch to join this one so I don’t have to go to the feed store to buy a couple of chicks to keep it company.

        Reply
        • 63. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:45 am

          LOVE new chicks : ) maybe post a picture or 2? I was making a “Spring” theme bulletin board at my 2nd job and looking for a perfect picture of baby chicks…

          Reply
          • 64. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:48 am

            Well, these are keets (guinea babies) not chicks (chicken babies), but they are WAY cute. Dunno how to post pix here though…….. I can email some to you when it (or they) fluff out and starts looking cute. Just out of the egg is not their most photogenic moment………

          • 65. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:51 am

            please email me : ) would LOVE it!

          • 66. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:52 am

            p.s. would love just out of egg…and later “fluffed” if not too much trouble….you take the absolutely most marvelous photos!

          • 67. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:56 am

            Will do, Gregory. My just out of the egg shots are not very good, being taken through the incubator cover and all. But I’ll send you some of each.

          • 68. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:58 am

            MMMMWWWWAAAHHHH!!

          • 69. Sheryl Carver  |  March 10, 2011 at 9:17 am

            Yeah, Kate!

            I would also love some pics!

            I bought 6 young guinea hens last summer. (That is, I know for sure from their calls that at least 3 are hens.) I have yet to find any eggs. Since they free-range during the day, I don’t know if they are laying in out-of-the-way places or are just not laying. I got them for tick control, so they are doing their job, but I am puzzled by the lack of eggs. Without a guinea cock, I know the eggs wouldn’t be fertile, but I’d still like to know why I’m not finding any.

            Anyway, congratulations on your new keet(s)!

          • 70. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 9:41 am

            Just mention of these unique birds provides memories of a lovly experience:

            My hubby and I ate a lovely restaurant in SLC called La Caille (http://www.lacaille.com/ ) early on in our relationship. It has a /2 mile long cobble stone road leading up to the chateaus complete with on-site vineyard…anyway, we ate outdoors by a lake with fountains, formal gardens….and birds…many baby peacocks and guinea fowl were running and squawking about..the parent guinea was particularly vocal and fun to watch…the baby peacocks were so darn cute too!

            tx for sparking the memory Kate and Shery : )

        • 71. Kathleen  |  March 10, 2011 at 10:45 am

          Great news, Kate! I was actually going to ask about them because I know you’d been incubating the eggs.

          Reply
          • 72. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 11:43 am

            Thanks for all the congrats from y’all! Sheryl, I can likely fix you us with a guinea cock at some time, if you still think you need one. There are probably about 500 eggs all piled up in one hidden nest at your place…………

          • 73. Sheryl Carver  |  March 10, 2011 at 12:05 pm

            Thanks, Kate!

            I’ll email you about the possibility of adding to my poultry population.

          • 74. AnonyGrl  |  March 10, 2011 at 12:10 pm

            And if you take those eggs, many of which are probably pretty old by now, and go to the next event that NOM sponsors… you can participate in your own little recycling program…

            OK… maybe not, but it would be fun to see the results of that, don’t you think?

            :)

          • 75. Sheryl Carver  |  March 10, 2011 at 12:41 pm

            Ah, AnonyGrl, I do try to be non-violent, so “recycling” the eggs at a NOM event is probably out, but imagining the result IS entertaining.

    • 76. AnonyGrl  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:00 am

      Woo hoo! That IS good news!

      You should call it Lazarus.

      :)

      Reply
      • 77. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:06 am

        That is EXACTLY what crossed my mind!

        Reply
        • 78. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:47 am

          LOL!

          Reply
    • 79. Maggie4NoH8  |  March 10, 2011 at 3:00 pm

      OK – when I read this post the first time, I read that your giunea PIG eggs hatched…

      I was getting all ready to do some serious Googling in regards to guinea PIG reproduction!

      Reply
      • 80. Kate  |  March 10, 2011 at 3:15 pm

        Too funny!

        Reply
        • 81. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 5:34 pm

          LOL! confession: me too ::blushing::
          p.s. love your snake story Sheryl C : )

          Reply
      • 82. Sheryl Carver  |  March 10, 2011 at 3:38 pm

        Ah, yes, procreation is an interesting topic, even when NOM isn’t involved. :-)

        I had a similar sort of experience a few months ago. I found some very young snakes at the end of my driveway, & was trying to figure out if they were rattlesnakes or gopher snakes. Since they look & even act very similar, especially before rattlesnakes get their first rattle, I did a lot of searching on the web before I found enough info to make a confident ID. (They were gopher snakes.)

        The part that surprised me was that both species give live birth! I thought, “no, they’re reptiles. They lay eggs!” Well, yes, the young DO come from eggs, but the eggs stay inside the mother’s body & hatch there. Who knew?

        (Don’t tell NOM. I’m sure it would somehow be proof that god marked snakes as abnormal because of their role in the Garden of Eden story.)

        Reply
  • 83. Russell  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:04 am

    http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/2011/03/national_antigay_marriage_grou.html

    Lots of negative comments for NOM, esp. great is one by Geoffrey Farrow (11th from the top), deconstructing anti-marriage equality arguments from MD Catholic bishops

    Reply
    • 84. Mark M - Seattle  |  March 10, 2011 at 12:37 pm

      I just LOVE this comment!!!

      So i propose a truce. I wont push gay rights, equality, and the right to marry, if tomorrow NOM pushes for a bill that says DIVORCE IS NOW ILLEGAL, NO MORE DIVORCE.

      If i can’t marry the man I love, then you can’t divorce the man/women you hate!

      Reply
      • 85. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 5:39 pm

        Priceless!
        @ If i can’t marry the man I love, then you can’t divorce the man/women you hate!

        Reply
    • 86. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 7:42 pm

      really good comments on this article Russell, many ideas worth capturing for own information and use…thank you for posting!

      Reply
      • 87. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  March 10, 2011 at 8:06 pm

        another comment I like:

        @ MustDoTheHomework Here’s something YOU may not have considered. You said, “Why would it not make sense, then, that we as humans must also take the time to teach our young in the areas of masculinity and femininity and their accompanying sexualities?” Then, I ask you, do you ignore that areas of masculinity and femininity have been socially constructed by those in power? There is no consensus as to when exactly gender expectations like the ones you are inferring started, as they have varied culturally according to time and place in different societies. So your “making sense” is not more valid than that of those with a different interpretation. And you are not the holder of the ultimate truth as to be able to impose what those areas should be like. You can only offer and propose and hope that you will be validated. Mighty doesn’t make it righteous, just like quantity is not the same as quality. You seem to rely on what has been the pattern (which means you support the status quo) but ignore that if it has been this way is not because it is necessarily the right way. It is only a reflection of what has been imposed so far through means of coercion and not just value consensus or even charismatic authority. I see other people like you relying so much in biological or psychological theories and arguments as if that was the ultimate truth. It still takes interpretation to explain results out of any research methodology. I did the homework.

        Posted by: R. E. | March 10, 2011 10:50 PM

        Reply
  • 88. Michael  |  March 10, 2011 at 4:41 pm

    And where are OUR PAC’s to support pro-equality Democrats and Republicans? As long as we let radical anti-gay activists at NOM drive the debate (and news), they will win.

    Reply
  • 89. Alyson  |  March 10, 2011 at 10:27 pm

    Had no idea so many p8tt family members were guinea mamas! We have about 16 running around and they are all pro-marriage equality!

    Reply
    • 90. Sheryl Carver  |  March 11, 2011 at 7:57 am

      Didn’t know you had guineas, too, Alyson!

      Clearly we believe in equal rights for everyone, including poultry!

      I may have just found a guinea egg!?! It was in the nest that the (chicken) hens use, but it’s a lot smaller & almost white. My chickens all lay brown eggs, except for Beauty who lays blue-green ones. I’ve heard that guinea eggs have harder shells than chickens, so maybe I’ll be able to tell when I crack it.

      Keeping fingers crossed.

      Reply
  • 93. Ronnie  |  March 11, 2011 at 7:03 am

    Maryland Bi-National Same-Sex Couple Avoids Separation
    http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2011/03/maryland-bi-national-same-sex.html

    Rodrigo Martinez, who is legally married to Edwin Echegoyen in Washington D.C. as of March 1st, is safe for now as his case goes through the process (paraphrasing from the article)

    “Under the order, Martinez will need to report to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials monthly. Additionally, Soloway said, Martinez must notify ICE of any travel outside of the Maryland, Virginia or D.C. area for more than 48 hours.”

    (me) The majority of heterosexual bi-national couples do not have to go through this much stress inducing discrimination. This is what you do NOM. This is what you do Brian Brown. You facilitate the separation of loving couples because of your un-American selfishness. SHAME ON YOU!!!…..

    Good luck to Edwin & Rodrigo….I wish you all the best….<3….Ronnie

    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)

  • 4,585,301 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...