More Fakery

Posted on 04/09/2009 at 3:19 pm by Bob Cesca

The Human Rights Campaign has wheeled more audition tapes further proving that actors were used to portray “real people” in that new and awful anti-same-sex marriage commercial.

By the way, contrary to what Lee posted earlier, I don’t think it’s particularly effective propaganda. The talking points in the spot hardly seem like they’re related to same-sex marriage. How would a (fake) doctor be unable to practice medicine if gay people are allowed to marry?

Of course those of us following this battle might be able to connect the dots in the spot’s fractured logic, but what casual viewer is going to make the connection between gays marrying and “freedom taken away” — I mean, other than a viewer who was predisposed to this sort of backwards thinking in the first place?

I seriously doubt this spot is going to convince anyone of anything other than how a 95 percent majority can so easily play the victim when confronted by equal rights for a 5 percent minority.

This entry was posted in Civil liberties and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe Tone

    Bob,I was just listening to “Talk of the Nation” on NPR, and Maggie Gallagher, President of the “National Organization for Marriage” was one of the guests. It was amazing to hear her twist and turn the facts.Because I am at work, I cannot call in, but I would really like someone with this organization to explain to me, how, exactly, are my civil liberties in jeopardy in gays are allowed to marry (or anyone else’s for that matter)?How will this bring about the end of civilization?Once again, the evangelical right is playing the “fear” card, designed to work on Stupid People™.For the record – I’m a 50-something heterosexual male.

  • http://tarackian.deviantart.com J M Ashby

    I think its very telling that they show more concern over gays than the recent rampages of lunatics with guns fueled by wingnuts.Clearly the gays pose a bigger threat to their way of life and security than unstable conspiracy theorists with guns.

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com Kyle

    No one who is “on the fence” about gay marriage is getting swayed to their side with this commercial. It serves the purpose of reinforcing their own prejudices (“you are not alone in your bigotry”). To treat is seriously is to take their arguments seriously, and the whole point of this ad is a joke.They’re “taking it further” than just gay couples? Like what? Is someone suggesting mandatory homosexuality? Are Christian men being forced to imbibe semen?

  • GItheJOE

    Ash,FUCKING WOW!!! Bravo, that is perfect. For some reason I can’t connect the dots of gay marriage to the death of Americans but I can connect the dots with Guns, bullets, body armor, entrenched ideological values and death to many Americans.Someone please keep count of the number of deaths related to gay marriage.For the record, we are up to 40 FUCKING GUN RELATED DEATHS in the past month IN AMERICA NOT IRAQ!

  • ceu

    Do we really want one segment of the population deciding what rights another segment is allowed to have??A major point of the Constitution is to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority – why do so many people think that refers to public opinion polls on civil rights issues?

  • fe

    GI, I think the number was 57. Although that may be for two months.either way: bad.

  • bob42

    I wander if those people in the genital herpes commercials really have the virus. I WANT PROOF!!!

  • BlueFan

    I read yesterday it was 57 deaths for the month of March. Just too fucked up.As the sister of a deceased (from AIDS) gay man, I just can’t comprehend how people are so threatened by gay relationships, let alone marriage. No one gonna make you suck cock unless you want to, okay?????Adding insult to injury, I reside in the state that brought you “Yes on Prop 8″, much to my disgust and chagrin.

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com Kyle

    bob42, those herpes commercials aren’t making emotional appeals to deny a large percentage of the population civil rights. Big difference.

  • Curly Lasagna

    There was nearly 20 in the Binghamton shooting alone. Throw another book on the fire and keep fueling the hatred and ignorance, kids……

  • http://broadwaycarl.blogspot.com Broadway Carl

    Someone please keep count of the number of deaths related to gay marriage.

    Don’t think that they aren’t trying to connect the two, GI.

  • http://broadwaycarl.blogspot.com Broadway Carl
  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe Tone

    I’m not sure why I want to waste my time, but Bob42:Since you seem to be on the homophobic side of this issue:Explain to me how my civil liberties (or anyone else’s civil liberties, for that matter) are jeopardized by gay marriage?

  • Lee Stranahan

    Here’s why it’s effective : right now, the numbers of with the anti-same sex marriage people. Put it to a democratic vote almost any place in the USA in 2009 and they win.So, yes – the video plays defense. But that’s all it NEEDS to do. It doesn’t need to convince people to change their minds…it needs to convince them to stay the course.And it plays to the religious right dog whistles all over the place.What I said was – there should be a well produced, inclusive ad to counter it. I have no possible idea why this idea would be controversial to anyone in favor of marriage equality. It’s common sense.

  • ElMystico

    I don’t think the people who would be swayed by that ad are thinking as far as “wait, how does it make sense that gay marriage prevents doctors from practicing their faith?” They just think ‘The Gay™ is attacking The Christ™ again’.Although I agree it might not have a lot of reach among people who have the mental wherewithall to go ‘hey, wait a minute.’PS Anyone see Lawrence O’Donnel beating up on Pat Buchanan just now on Hardball?PPS. Buchanan is Catholic? I totally didn’t realize that. I just assumed he was some crazy Protestant.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    This is a group whose scriptures contain the following (paraphrased):

    1. Homosexuality is an abomination.
    2. Eating pork is an abomination.
    3. Eaiting shellfish is an abomination.

    So the freak out about 1 while totally ignoring 2 and 3.The California Doctor refused to provide medical care to a lesbian (It had nothing to do with marriage). She swore to an oath when the state gave her her license to practice medicine that she would provide medical care to everyone and would obey the state’s anti-dicrimination laws. She was sued and the court ordered her to obey her oath or lose her license to practice medicine in CA.The NJ case was a church the rented property to the general public for events but refused to rent it for same sex civil union ceremonies. They were fined for violating NJ’s anti-discrimination laws which must be obeyed when you do business with the public.The MA case was where parents unsuccessfully sought to end public school discussions of family diversity, including of same-sex couples.So what we have here are people who demand that ID be taught in science class alongside evolution, demand that we may not teach family diversity, and demand that we allow them to treat our laws in the same a la carte fashion that they treat their own scriptures.Their religion does not give them the right to pick and choose what laws to obey. Nor do they get to censor education to suit their fanciful notions.These people are dangerous fanatics. The Christian AntiGay Jihad™ has arrived.

  • Izzy

    I watched the commercial and at the bottom it clearly says the people in the commercial are actors portraying real, concerned Americans or something to that effect. Why is there all of this controversy over this? Commercials use actors. All. Of. The Time.

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com/ Kyle

    The fakery isn’t the point, Izzy. Try reading this paragraph:”Of course those of us following this battle might be able to connect the dots in the spot’s fractured logic, but what casual viewer is going to make the connection between gays marrying and “freedom taken away” — I mean, other than a viewer who was predisposed to this sort of backwards thinking in the first place?”

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    Izzy -It’s not so much the actors, it’s the way they use the facts in a very misleading way.Same sex marriage does not prevent the Doctor from doing her job, her interpretation of her religion requires her to violate her oath so she should have considered that before taking an oath and then violating it. She demands the right to violate her oath to her state licensed profession because of her mistaken interpretation of her religion. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Doctors shall not provide treatment to lesbians.No one forces the church to rent facilities for same sex civil unions provided they not rent to the public. If they want the income from renting to the public then they must obey the law just like everyone else. Religion does not give you a pass to ignore the law.Likewise, minorities do not get to dictate what can and can not be discussed in public schools. If they want a ban on discussion of marriage diversity, then I demand that the Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Invisible Pink Unicorn be taught as possible deities. It’s only fair.

  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe Tone

    Izzy,I’m not concerned because the people in the commercial are paid actors, any more than I care if the person in the Preparation H commercial really has hemorrhoids.I’m concerned because the commercial is a lie, playing to irrational fear.The audience is supposed to infer that somehow, their civil liberties are at risk if gay marriage becomes legal.Look at Git’s post above.In every case obliquely referred to by the commercial, the issue wasn’t about gay marriage.The issue was whether or not discrimination being practiced was allowed under existing law.The discrimination was already illegal, and gay marriage had nothing to do with it.By distorting the facts and obfuscating issues, the “National Organization for Marriage” is attempting to scare the shit out of people.To reiterate:I would like anyone opposed to gay marriage to explain how anyone’s current civil liberties are jeopardized by gay marriage.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    Thank you Wolfe Tone.I see you like the girl from Homer as well unless you are a different Wolfe Tone. Are you in AK?The only people effected by the legality of gay marriage are gay people. Their rights are being infringed.The AntiGay marriage Jihad is demanding the right to discriminate. No one has the right to discriminate.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    Why is it Lee that you continuously insist that we have to prove to them that we’re not the bogey-man, that we have to engage them in some sort of discourse? You want us to answer with an ad of our own that somehow “counters” theirs. Listen, they are not interested in “a dialog.” They’re interested only in making inflammatory statements that then keeps us engaged in responding to them. A well conceived response video would only validate their agenda. It would give them credibility where none is deserved.The proper response is parody and mockery, because that’s all it deserves.

  • Bob42

    Explain to me how my civil liberties (or anyone else’s civil liberties, for that matter) are jeopardized by HUMAN AND ANIMAL marriage?I hate to be a smart @#$, but come on… This comes down to whether people think being gay permissable or not. Most of america thinks no

  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe Tone

    Bob42:You did not answer the question, merely went off on a tangent.I know of no equal or gay rights organization advocating inter-species marriage. It is not part of the discussion.The only people attempting to interject that inane comparison into the discussion are homophobes like yourself.You cannot actually answer the question because you have no examples, or, you really are as stupid as you seem to be.

  • http://tarackian.deviantart.com J M Ashby

    Bob42 – What kind of a sick question is that? Why are you comparing beastiality with homosexuality, you sick fuck.Go jump off a cliff you ignorant white trash bastard.

  • jenski42

    David Sedaris: Telling your gay neigbor he can’t get married is kind of like the U.S. telling Mexico they can’t celebrate Christmas.Bob 42, take my number out of your name, it’s getting all dirty.And for the record, who the hell cares what most Americans think about whether it’s okay to be gay or not? Those people don’t want gay marriage, they should not have one.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    Bob42 -No. It comes down to whether or not you think it is valid to deny someone the same rights that everyone else has. It comes down to “Is it OK to discriminate against that minority.”I think you overestimate how many people back your position. Your phrasing is a push poll. You frame the discussion with an inappropriate question. We are not asking if homosexuality is permissible or not. That is not the question. The question is whether you can discriminate against a minority.No one is asking to allow marrying animals. Why do you bring in irrelevant distractions?Every state has a legal definition of marriage as a contract between two human beings. Specifying gender relationships is an unconstutional denial of equal protection. LGBT community is only asking that we obey our laws as written.You may practice whatever bigotry and discrimination you think your religion demands as long as you are in your home or your church. When you are out here with the rest of us, you will not be allowed to pollute our law system with your bigotry and discriminatory beliefs.The CT supreme court ruled that denying same sex marriage was a denial of equal protection and therefore unconstitutional. They ruled thatway because that is what the law says wheter you like it or not. Both the MA and IO supreme courts ruled the exact same way for the exact same reason.You have already lost. We don’t like people that disrespect our constitution and think they get to pick and choose which laws to obey just like they pick and choose which things in Leviticus to obey.In closing Fuck You, you ignorant, hypocritical, self-righteous, bigoted, religious twatwaffle.

  • Bob42

    People just draw the marriage line in different places, you draw it at beastiality, some draw it at homosexuality. Some even question whether marriage between man and woman is moral. Some people think homosexuality is wrong, call them whatever you want, thats just that. Don’t bring me into this.Maybe that was way too intense an example, I should of said, “Explain to me how my civil liberties (or anyone else’s civil liberties, for that matter) are jeopardized by HUMAN AND A TOASTER marriage?”The point being conveyed, merely was, it doesn’t effect You’re, Wolfe, personal civil liberties, no matter what the marriage is. People just don’t want to be told what to do, if I’m a teacher and want to pray in a public school for 10 minutes daily with my class, I can’t do that. Thats being told what to do. Gay marriage may cause people to do things they don’t want to do, with respect to their religion. Right now, the religious majority has their way, the law is in line with their beliefs, you’re wanting to change that. You are really surprised by the outlash? Look at the 60′s…man… Thats all.And comparing them to Jihad, really?

  • Izzy

    Okay, now I understand. I didn’t understand why everyone was so upset about the actors but the issue is not even about them but what they’re expressing(obviously—and I missed it). That’s why I like coming here: very informative.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    No Bob42, you just don’t get it.The Constitution provides for equal protection under the law.As a matter of law you and your discriminatory ways are illegal. It has nothing to do with religion. IT’S THE LAW.You may jump around aand make whatever asinine loud noises you want. It does not change the fact that the way our Constitution is currently written it is unconstitutional to deny anyone the right to a same sex marriage whether or not they are gay. If two non-gay men want to be married (many marriages are platonic, or did you not know that?), the constitution says they may.How many times do I have to explain this to you. Do I need to speak more slowly. This is a matter of law and to deny the right to marriage because the persons getting married are of the same gender is a denial of equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional.If you want this changed, then amend the constitution to change the equal protection clause. Then, when you do that, I will push for an amendment denying equal protection to Christian fundamentalists that try to inflict their idiotic medieval prejudices on the rest of us.

  • http://oneceltsview.blogspot.com/ Wolfe Tone

    No, Bob42.As Git said, “You don’t get it.Offering ridiculous comparisons like “Human/Toaster” marriage is just a mechanism by which you are dodging the question asked.I’m amused that you point out, without a hint of irony, that “People just don’t want to be told what to do,” but fail to include gays in that group.Please explain to me how “Gay marriage may cause people to do things they don’t want to do, with respect to their religion.” I’ve wracked my brain, and can’t think of one valid example.Look at my previous comments. I have not compared “National Organization for Marriage” to jihadists.I’ve pointed out that the argument they put forth to oppose gay marriage is false and deliberately misleading.The advertisement being discussed on this thread implies that mine, yours, and everyone’s civil liberties will be in danger if gays are allowed to marry.My question remains… “howzat?”But the group’s opposition is really a religious and/or homophobic one, and is not based on any laws or equal protection under the constitution, no matter what the advertisement implies.The advertisement would be far more honest (though just as morally wrong) if they said “Our God™ hates gays and doesn’t want them to marry, so you should oppose gay marriage too!”

  • Ajabu

    @Bob42:I was just reading along, minding my business & watching the community rip you a new one when I hit this-”People just don’t want to be told what to do, if I’m a teacher and want to pray in a public school for 10 minutes daily with my class, I can’t do that.”No, you bet your ass you can’t do that. Especially if my kid is in your class. As Git pointed out, your “idiotic medieval prejudices” don’t belong in anybody’s classroom.Unless you’re a parochial school teacher, keep that bullshit to yourself.Fuck you very much.

  • Alex

    I’d also like to point out from an ethical standpoint that animals/trees/toasters/etc. don’t have a say in the matter of things like sex, love, marriage.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    Alex -It’s very clear that Bob42 thinks that gay people should have the same legal rights as a toaster.He does not understand that his position is already illegal. The LGBT community is only asked that we obey our laws as written. Currently MA, CT, IO, and VT are doing so. I expect that Prop * will be thrown out as an improper and unconstitutional attempt to improperly amend the CA constitution.I am serious. If the Christian AntiGay Jihad (Yes, I called it a Jihad because it is) attempts to amend state constitution’s equal protection clause, then I will push for a similar amendment denying equal protection to Christians. We can all play this denial of rights game.It is a Jihad because it is an irrational and fanatic attempt to abridge the constitutional rights of a minority based on medieval religious superstitions. These people are dangerous ideologues.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    If the CA supreme court punts and lets prop 8 stand, it will still violate the U.S. Constitution’s equal protection clause. Ultimately someone with deep pockets will challenge it and it will go down in flames.Legally, Proposition 8 clearly unconstitutional. The Christian AntiGay Jihad should talk to some constitutional lawyers. They are wasting their time. They will never circumvent the equal protection clause. As a matter of law, this is very simple and straight forward.

  • nitesurfer

    There is no such thing as “gay marriage.” Call it what. Enforce it. Label oppoents bigots, homophobes, etc. Still, it will not be marriage. It will, however, tear America apart. You think the yokels in flyover country are arming themselves to the point of causing ammo shortages around the nation is because they don’t like “cap and trade?”It’s people on our side who needlessly provoke gun-clingers by indulging the narcissism of a whiney interest group.With all the tough fights we must wage, we invest in the loser cause of whether two men can marry? We’ve lost our marbles.