NOM Takes on Tips-Q

In their Friday email blast, National Organization for Marriage is a tad upset with us.

I know many bystanders read my letter to you each week, and that includes the gay press. This week Tips-Q.com GLBT News Service headlined a piece by David Hart called “NOM Continues to Demonize Tim Gill.” Well if by “demonize” you mean, point out the way one, rich, powerful gay Colorado billionaire is pushing politicians to ignore their constituents and pay attention to Tim’s priorities instead, yes we are going to continue to call people’s attention to Tim Gill’s agenda!

Nice try but that doesn't address the issue. Moreover, it states opinion as fact. The point is that Tim Gill's advocacy is completely transparent. He is entitled to invest his funds (earned through ingenuity and hard work) as he see fit. The Gill foundation's (501(c)3) tax returns are readily available as are those of The Gill Action Fund (501(c)4). Every grant and donation by both organizations is listed in their respective returns. A great many, by the way, are not LGBT related. We know where the money came from and we know where it is all going. Moreover, there is no tax ambiguity. The foundation provides grants only to charities while the Action Fund donates to other political organizations.

Contrast that with NOM. We have no idea where the money is coming from. The most that Gallagher has offered is that initial funding came from "religious institutions." Unlike Gill, NOM is profiting from tax ambiguity. Funds donated to religious organizations are tax deductible. Funds donated to political organizations like NOM are not tax deductible. When funds provided to a church are redirected to NOM, the contributor gets a tax deduction that they would not get if they donated the funds directly to NOM. In summary, unknown religious organizations are donating unknown sums of money to a political organization, acting as conduits for preferential tax treatment. Furthermore, NOM has not yet filed a tax return that we know of and they have not disclosed any financial information. Therefore, the contributions from unknown donors in unknown amounts are being spent in unknown ways. Nevertheless, NOM claims to be a grass roots organization. Can you say astroturf?

NOM goes on to say:

The most telling thing, though, in David Hart’s piece critiquing my last letter to you, was his response to this statement I made:
And Maggie also reminds me one reason I fight so hard: "If we continue to fail to do so, our political opponents will use their cultural power to create an America in which traditional religious groups are redefined by the government as the moral and legal equivalent of racists."


David’s reaction? "I have a simple suggestion for them; Don't act like racists and you won't be treated like racists."

It's hard to believe that we could wake up in an America and find our faith communities have been redefined by the government as racist threats to America. I mean, how can an idea like "Marriage is the union of husband and wife" be treated as the legal equivalent of racism? Reluctantly, I’ve come to accept that people like David are quite serious about using the law to impose their view of morality on the rest of us.

An example of "turnspeak." We are using the law to impose our morality? Utter nonsense. In point of fact, gays do not enjoy equal protection under law. I have yet to entertain a coherent argument that supports the notion that one couple's same-sex marriage has any effect on any other couple's "traditional" marriage. I have also pointed out that many of NOM's arguments require one to embrace the idea that marriage is "zero sum." In other words, that people who enter into a same-sex marriage subtract from the number of traditional marriages. Obviously, that is rubbish.

Either way, we are unique winners or losers in the battle for marriage equality. As we achieve equality, it has no effect on anyone else. If we lose marriage equality battles it does not benefit anyone. The only winners, either way, are organizations like NOM. NOM collects donations and pays out a portion of those as salaries and benefits. I continue to argue that the primary purpose of NOM is to provide an income and benefits to Maggie Gallagher.  It is a business — a tax exempt political consultancy.