Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

New ad in support of North Carolina’s Amendment One; moneybomb and live chat tomorrow

Marriage equality

By Adam BinkGoal Thermometer

A new ad out from the homophobes seeking to pass Amendment One in North Carolina:

Pam’s House Blend has the analysis and debunk:

Here are a few of my impressions of the ad:

1. It exploits the religious angle because  there is nothing in the proposed amendment about religion, Biblical or otherwise. And it gives the false impression that if Amendment One does not pass, then established heterosexual marriages will be in danger. I mean seriously, the way one of the people in this ad is conveying her thoughts, it’s almost as if there is a fear that if Amendment One does not pass, within 24 hours, gay and lesbians are going to invade homes in attempts to kidnap heterosexually married partners.

2. The ad exploits economic and racial issues. A young man  at the beginning of the ad gives the impression that if the referendum does not pass, then it will be difficult to combat poverty. And then he uses the “activist judges” talking points and that really bothers me. As an African-American man I bristle when I see another African-American using the talking points of “activist judges overturning the will of the people.” And while I am sure the man in question is reading cue cards (rather well I might add), someone should school him that if it weren’t for supposed “activist judges,” we wouldn’t have the decisions of Loving vs. Virginia (which overturned laws against interracial marriage) or Brown vs. the Board of Education (which overturned segregation laws.)

3. Those children at the end? Now that was just tacky. What about the children in same-sex households who will be negatively affected should this bill pass? The irony is that if those voting against Amendment One had used children in their ad in the same manner as these folks had, it would be all over the National Organization for Marriage’s blog about how “radical homosexuals are exploiting the innocence of children.”

And lastly, one woman in the ad drives home the basic dishonesty of Amendment One. It begins at 1:00 when she says she is voting for Amendment One because she is married to one man for 30 years and she loves him dearly.

But she neglects to say how allowing gays and lesbians to receive that same courtesy (being married for 30 years to the person they love) would harm her marriage. And the sad thing is that I doubt that she can.

Remember, Elon University’s poll earlier this month showed 56.9% of North Carolinians opposed to an amendment that bans marriage, civil unions and even domestic partnerships. This poll is trending along with a series of polls showing increased opposition to Amendment One.

Tomorrow, Courage Campaign and P8TT will join a netroots moneybomb to help the Coalition to Protect NC Families, which is working to defeat Amendment One, get a response ad on the air. We’ll have a live chat right here at P8TT with campaign manager Jeremy Kennedy to take your questions and suggestions at 3 PM EST. Please tune in then for info on how the campaign is going and how you can help out.

22 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. Sheryl_Carver  |  March 25, 2012 at 10:01 am

    Golly gee whiz!

    Comments are disabled for the video.
    Ratings have been disabled for the video.

    Wonder why?

    /sarcasm off

  • 2. Seth from Maryland  |  March 25, 2012 at 10:08 am

    Michigan Native American Tribe Set To Advance Marriage Equality | The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians could become the first Native American tribe in Michigan to recognize same-sex marriages and only the third in the U.S. The 4,000-member tribe live mostly in the Northern Lower Peninsula, and as a sovereign nation, it can implement marriage equality even though the state of Michigan has a constitutional amendment defining marriage only as a man and a woman. A tribe member pointed out that the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman did not exist until Europeans settlers introduced it.

  • 3. Seth from Maryland  |  March 25, 2012 at 10:11 am

    this just keeps adding more and more fire to our momentum

  • 4. Kivo  |  March 25, 2012 at 10:33 am

    I found this on Judge Walker today:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/law-order-an

  • 5. Sam_Handwich  |  March 25, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    the quality of the audio is impressive

    /sarcasm off

  • 6. bythesea  |  March 25, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    Stopping Amendment One is not only important for equality in NC and those who live there. It's early timing and the novelty of actually getting a vote against bigotry in the South will mean a huge impact on the further battles to follow this fall, not to mention the psychological boost of hope to countless LGBT people that live and love in the South.

  • 7. Str8Grandmother  |  March 25, 2012 at 2:02 pm

    I agree with that bythesea
    no fallbacks, only forward momentum!

  • 8. Reformed  |  March 25, 2012 at 2:18 pm

    Stopped by my local Starbucks today for a chai latte and asked how the boycott was going? I was supprised that the staff was not aware of it, and that they didn't know what the "national organization for marriage" was.

  • 9. BradK  |  March 25, 2012 at 2:42 pm

    Glad to see that The Atlantic story was so far off the mark…

    /sarcasm off

  • 10. Reformed  |  March 25, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    FROM MMA official petition website –

    "Against the will of the overwhelming majority of the people of Maryland, the Legislature has voted to legalize same sex marriage . . . "

    It seems to me that if a petition is to be "official" then the wording on the official site shouldn't start with such a presumption. Shouldn't it be as neutral as the wording that would appear on a ballot? Or are official petitions a different bird all together. This petition's online distribution site is for something that the vast majority of Marylanders don't support. How will the election officials know which referendum to put on the ballot, without knowing what the vast majority of marylanders do not support. I'm confused. :)

  • 11. Rich  |  March 25, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Ready for a good laugh?
    "Ash
    Posted March 25, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Permalink
    When NOM speaks, the world hears!"

    As posted on the NOM web site and in reference to Dump Starbucks.

    My response was more on the line of: "drivel and shrill diatribes." It didn't get posted. Surprise!

  • 12. Mark  |  March 25, 2012 at 6:33 pm

    I noticed that too. Was wondering if anyone else did as well.

  • 13. MarcosLB  |  March 25, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    It should be against federal law to make false statements in campaign ads.

  • 14. _BK_  |  March 25, 2012 at 9:10 pm

    And there should be a way to sue.

  • 15. Frisky1  |  March 26, 2012 at 4:35 am

    New Hampshire Republicans must be deaf then.

  • 16. Jamie  |  March 26, 2012 at 8:53 am

    I think slander and libel laws apply. No?

  • 17. _BK_  |  March 26, 2012 at 10:12 am

    Oh yeah… Hope those cover it. :)

  • 18. Str8Grandmother  |  March 26, 2012 at 10:31 am

    Good one Frisky :)
    I'll give a thumbs up to dat.

  • 19. Michelle Evans  |  March 26, 2012 at 11:13 am

    Like the woman in the video, Cherie and I have been together for 30 years (Nov 27, 1981). And since we're actually married (Jul 20, 1987), maybe I should contact her and let her know that even though that is true, I'll bet that she hasn't noticed one bit of change in her own marriage. Of course, the moment she found out about Cherie and myself–if the woman's predictions held up–then she would have to immediately run to a lawyer and ask for a divorce since that's how stupid her rhetoric is about how our marriage will destroy hers.

  • 20. devon  |  March 26, 2012 at 11:52 am

    Polls seem to show that this will pass.
    A few more weeks of "bishops" preaching weekly hate towards gays will only increase the black turnout which is never good for marriage equality.

  • 21. Mackenzie  |  March 26, 2012 at 2:54 pm

    Everyhting else aside, this is one of the most jank campaign commercials I have seen in a long time.

  • 22. bythesea  |  March 26, 2012 at 10:22 pm

    It's an uphill battle to be sure, but there is plenty of reason to have at least some hope. We shall see. It is not over yet.

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required), (Hidden)

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL  |  RSS feed for comments on this post.

Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!