The Rise and Fall of the National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown never going to accept marriage equality; spoiler alert: yes he will.

November 15, 2012, by Jeremy Hooper

Oh, our pal Brian Brown sure is defiant.  NOM's well compensated president tells The Atlantic:

"I believe the idea of same-sex marriage is a profoundly flawed idea," he said. "We're not going to recognize these unions as marriages, ever."


"Do you really think that we're going to be quiet and go away?" Brown said. "Just because the state says it's so, we're never going to accept it." [SOURCE]

Thoughts that raise a few questions.  Chief among them: Does Brian mean "we" as in himself and his family, or does he mean "we"as in citizens of an increasingly pro-equality America?  Because those are obviously two very different standpoints.

If Brian means himself and his family, then okay—whatever.  Brian is fully free to go through this life seeing married same-gender couples as anything he wants.  He can quietly condemn us under his breath.  He can stand on street corners with his signs and/or chants, telling anyone who will listen that certain taxpayers are not as morally fit as Mr. and Ms. Brown.  Brian never has to attend one of our ceremonies (though proper etiquette would still suggest gifts), nor does he have to allow our ring-adorned hands near any of the tchotkes within his "traditional" home.  Brian can teach his kids to follow suit.  He can pray that God will overturn the marriag eequality laws.  Heck, this Christmas, NOM's top caroler can demand that his family remove all "gay apparel" references from holiday songs or sloganeering, and he can lobby his local choirs to follow suit.  I support his right to do all this and much more.

But if Brian means "we" as in American citizens who simply disagree with certain taxpapers' constituionally sound rights?  Well that's much different, now isn't it?  Different and completely unacceptable.

  • If Brian is in some sort of future position that involved the recognition of civil marriage contracts, then yes, he will in fact respect marriages like mine.
  • If Brian runs a business that sells certain services, then yes, he must follow nondiscrimination laws and apply them fairly to same-sex couples.
  • If Brian runs for office, then yes, he will have to respect the laws as they stand (/fall).
  • If Brian and his wife attend some sort of retreat or seminar or something else geared toward married couples, then yes, they very well might have to accept that some of the qualified couples in their midst are male/male or female/female.
  • If Brian wants to call hiself a citizen of America, then he is, in fact, going to accept the laws that grant civil marriage licenses to same-gender couples.

This is not a debate.  

Brian's personal desire to discriminate strikes us as cold, sure.  But if he chooses to freeze out this world's sizable LGBT population, then that is his choice to make.  In his capacity as Brian Brown, human person, he does not have to throw even one kind word at any person's marriage (though again, gifts are more than welcome). 

But as for Brian Brown, American citizen?  You best believe he is going to recognize my rights.  You can be sure that he is going to accept John and Joe's civil freedom.  You (and he) should know that full equality is coming, and Brian Brown will, in fact, have to at the very least tolerate this reality.

And if not?  Well, then I really want to hear what Brian has planned as his alternative.  I mean it—what's the plan?  Open revolt?  Civil war?  Secession?  I mean it's one thing to bluster about it, but if Brian really wants to take this hard line, then I want to hear what kind of action plan he's planning on attaching to his rhetoric.  Put it on the table, buddy!  What does "not accepting" civil marriage equality look like once NOM loses even more costly battles?