It turns out that such claims are in fact complete balderdash. Rubbish. Nonsense. Bunk. When the National Organization for Marriage - the organization fighting the release of the identity of those who bankroll them - has been required to prove the truth of their claims that "pro-traditional marriage" proponents have been harassed, they consistently come up empty-handed:
In state after state, judges are finding that these sorts of examples do not actually constitute "harassment," and they're rejecting NOM's requests to therefore keep its donors secret and be exempt from campaign finance disclosure laws.In the most recent decision, Judge Morrison England, Jr. from the Eastern District of California, flat-out rejected these allegations of widespread harassment:
NOM's strategy is essentially reversing the traditional argument -- that gay individuals frequently face harassment -- and arguing instead that gay individuals are the harassers.
But four federal judges and three state boards in seven states -- California, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Rhode Island and Washington -- have all found NOM's evidence to be lacking. Not a single state has backed up NOM.
While Plaintiffs characterize their evidence as voluminous and comprised of "virtually countless reports of threats, harassment, and reprisals," Plaintiffs' Motion, 4:14-15, they have pointed to relatively few incidents allegedly suffered by persons located across the country who had somehow manifested their support for traditional marriage.Protect Marriage v. Bowen, Court file No. 09-0058, November 4, 2011, at 31 and 38.
* * *
Accordingly, while Plaintiffs can point to a relatively few unsavory acts committed by extremists or criminals, these acts are so small in number, and in some instances their connection to Plaintiffs' supporters so attenuated, that they do not show a reasonable probability Plaintiffs’ contributors will suffer the same fate.
Yeah, yeah, we know. Kersten's recycling another pile of lies and passing it off as news. Imagine that.