NOM Supporters Vow to Treat GLBT Community as Second Class Citizens, Resort to Racial Epithets

National Organization for Marriage loves to cause a stir. They’ll post something on their Facebook page and their supporters rally around their every word, resorting to hate speech, even Terms of Service violations. Sometimes it’s promptly removed by Facebook. Sometimes it sits for days for the world to see that this organization is, in fact, a hate group. Yet, when the GLBT community and its allies point out this type of behavior, it’s quickly labeled as an attack on religious freedoms. Yet, most of the NOM supporters resort to ‘religious’ reasons for their intolerance, hate, hypocrisy and bigotry. Do you find love from these comments?

Michael Ejercito has said some pretty awful untrue things about gay people and their families. Was the racial epithet really necessary?

If you’re gay or lesbian or as Milo Chloe likes to refer as “homos,” you’re not welcome to be employed by his company or do business. Does this sound familiar, as in pre-1960s familiar? “PRAISE GOD” for discrimination? Milo says yes.

Then there’s a NOM favorite, Paul Liebe Sr. who is more of a liability for NOM with his use of “homo” and labeling GLBT people as “deviant” and “Paedophile.” And don’t you dare “dye your hair perple” as people may judge you. Perple? Ohhh, purple! Not judging you, Mr. Liebe. By the way, in German, “Liebe” means “love.” Full of it. Full OF IT.

Ladies and Gents, you have that wonderful, fuzzy, loving organization called NOM. And you thought Antranae Lee was a liability.

4 thoughts on “NOM Supporters Vow to Treat GLBT Community as Second Class Citizens, Resort to Racial Epithets

  1. Michael Ejercito

    In the comment thread that you referenced, I stated that in 1868, marriage was commonly understood to be a union of one man and one woman, citinga law dictionary at use at the time.

    When someone claimed that it was outdated, that it was simply a product of bigotry, I commented that the idea of equal protection existed in 1868, which of course means that equal protection and defining marriage as a union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony is compatible. Also note the quotation marks.

    1. culturecheck Post author

      Um, you used a racial epithet. You didn’t have to use it. But you did. You can cite history all you want to but the fact remains, YOU SAID IT. Stop making excuses, Michael. What you say will come back to haunt you. Your ignorance is being documented. We’re not asking you to change, but we’ll keep using you as an example as long as you keep spouting off homophobic, racist, misleading, inaccurate comments.

  2. Pingback: FYI: NOM Supporters, We Know You Don’t Like Being Called Out; But If You’re Going to Comment Here Anonymously, Don’t Even Bother « Exposing NOM and its supporters (NOManiacs)

  3. bayhuntr

    I see these people as a necessary evil, more of our youth than ever are leaving religion, and these people are leading the way, or more precisely, chasing them away. Most of them know gay people and are friends with gay people. Many of their childhood friends turned out to be gay and they have spoken openly about it with each other. In other words, they know when the religious haters are lying. I tell ya, once you know the religious would lie about something like this, why would you believe anything they say?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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