Queerty’s attack on protect-marriage salaries

$500K/year for Brian Brown
Brown

Brown

The following story comes from a late June posting on the pro-homosexual site, Queerty.

Far be it from us to relish the financial woes of our enemies, but it appears the campaign to stop same-sex marriage is running out of money, even as one of it’s main proponents takes in a cushy mid-six-figure salary.

Oh who are we kidding–we eat this stuff up!

Reuters reports that ProtectMarriage.com, which is defending Prop 8 in the Supreme Court, reported a $2 million shortfall in 2011, the third year in a row it was in the red. The group claims it’s made up its 2011 deficit and that donations in 2012 were down only 3%.

…But it is still $700,000 short in fundraising for its Supreme Court costs, according to a ProtectMarriage.com attorney, Andrew Pugno. That message has gone out to donors, with some urgency, as the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in March in its first thorough review of same-sex marriage.

“Unless the pace of donations starts to pick up right away, we could soon be forced over a financial cliff,” ProtectMarriage.com said in an email to donors earlier this month.

ProtectMarriage.com’s lead outside counsel, Charles Cooper, has not stopped work on the Supreme Court case, although he declined to comment on financial arrangements with clients.

Diminishing donations also means the anti-equality crowd has less to spend on state battles—like the ones they lost in Maryland, Minnesota, Maine and Washington State.

In Washington state, for instance, gay marriage opponents raised $2.8 million, compared with $12.6 million for gay marriage supporters. That’s a dramatic shift from the 2008 electoral battle over California’s Proposition 8, the state’s ban on gay marriage, when ProtectMarriage.com took in $40 million to nearly match its opponents, and went on to win.

With the coffers at Inequality ‘R’ Us dwindling, it’s a little surprising to discover that Brian Brown, the grand poobah over at the National Organization for Marriage, is making more than $500,000 a year—even as NOM reports a 25% drop in fundraising.

After considerable effort, former presidential candidate Fred Karger got a copy of NOM’s 2011 501(c)3 tax return and discovered that Brown made serious bank in 2011.

He was paid $230,000 by NOM’s political operation where he claimed to work a minimum of 40 hours per week, and another whopping $230,000 from NOM’s Educational Fund where he claimed to work another 40 hours per week. Add $47,000 in benefits and you have the “Half-Million Dollar Man.”

Hey, go nuts, Brian—give yourself a big fat raise. Hell, bankrupt the place! You deserve the best things in life.

To view NOM’s 2011 Educational Fund 501(c)3 Federal Tax Return, click here

To view NOM’s 2011 Political Organization 501(c)4 Federal Tax Return, click here

To read the original story, click here.

Comments

comments

To add a comment, click on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ icons OR go further down to the bottom of comments to the Post your comment box.

Comments

  1. Bakersfield Crusader says:

    And what does that say about those who raise and spend obscene amounts of money to drag the sacrament of marriage down to the level of perversion?

    • Indeed, Crusader. No one questions the scandals and corruption of those who promote same-sex-so-called-marriage any more than they would be shocked by the fact that Al Capone didn’t pay income tax. It says much that they relish the defeat of family and the sanctity of marriage. To be so lost to goodness and honor, with no sense of shame! I would truly rather be dead.

      • general electric does not pay income tax either, nor do the catholic clergy, i know one pastor of a cathedral who takes the month of july for vacation at his oceanside home so much for the reference to capone

    • uh, Nothing?

    • Sacramental marriage isn’t affected by civil marriage equality.

      • Ann Malley says:

        Supporting a false sense of ‘equality’ for the whole of society helps nobody, C&H. Despite what folks may want, not all things are equal and never will be.

        • Oh Ann … Civil marriage is not equal to sacramental marriage. Civil marriage is inferior to sacramental marriage.

          • Ann Malley says:

            And civil marriage should still be marriage, C&H, not the false construct of homosexual couplings.

      • Not according to countries where same-sex disordered unions have been legal for over a decade. Marriage is dying.
        As for equality, can three people claim equality or how about a man and a boy? If not why not? Who are you to deny equality to other sexual preferences

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      Those supporting marriage equality wouldn’t have to spend very much money at all if people would stop confusing sacramental marriage with civil marriage. At this point, the only opposition to a person’s fundamental right to marry, are those who confuse the two and who raise obscene amounts of money to obstruct this right. A right which has been decided at least 14 times by the US Supreme Court, and affirmed now as applied to same sex couples, about 20 times in lower federal courts.

      • You have a fundamental right to marry…someone of the opposite sex. Redefining marriage to include other sexual preferences, claiming it’s about equality is nonsense. It will never be moral to engage in sodomy or some other same-sex disorder. And it will further destroy marriage and family life. The wages of sin…..

      • Catherine says:

        “Those supporting marriage equality wouldn’t have to spend very much money at all if people would stop confusing sacramental marriage with civil marriage. ”

        More spiritually deadly lies! …. As if Satan is ever appeased with respecting boundaries! The devil is influencing the roaming trolls as much as he influenced the Supreme Court to once allow slavery and currently abortion.

      • Your Fellow Catholic says:

        Courts have NEVER found this; “You have a fundamental right to marry…someone of the opposite sex. “. In contrast, over a dozen of courts have found that the fundamental right to marry is not contingent upon the gender of the person being married. This is not a question of morality, which is a question for churches and faith groups to decide, but is a question for our federal and state governments, which have decided in unison that the right to marry is not contingent upon gender.

        • “In contrast, over a dozen of courts have found that the fundamental right to marry is not contingent upon the gender of the person being married.”
          You can’t be serious…Judicial tyranny you mean, have found that sam-sex disordered unions are a so-called fundamental right. They also ruled ‘slavery’ was legal and baby killing, abortion is legal. Moral relativism is nonsense.
          And what about three people marrying? Why redefine marriage in civil court to include just two of the same sex? Brazil legalized a threesome. What’s to prevent the same here. And why not lower the age of consent and have men and boys or women and girls? Redefining marriage to include pepple with gender identity confusion is wrong…

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            No court has found same sex marriage to be a fundamental right, Ronnie. Courts have held, repeatedly over very many decades, that the right to marry is a fundamental right for all people. This has been applied to slaves, to prisoners, to black people, to white people, to men, to women, and now, we shall soon hope – to gay people. All of these courts have said the same thing: the right to marry is a fundamental right for all people under the law. ALL people, not just white people, not just to Catholics, not just to law abiding citizens. It is a fundamental right for ALL people, whether you like the people or not. Whether you approve of their marriage or not. A fundamental right subsists within the individual, not within the couple or even with society. Fundamental rights pertain to all individuals.

          • Your Fellow Catholic says:

            Just want to remind you, Ronnie, that the biggest obstacle to outlawing slavery were Christians who claimed that the Bible approved of slavery. Do you really want to slavery as your best argument against same sex marriage?

          • YFC…You’re confusing my point: (on purpose?)
            Judicial tyranny is out of control in this country with Judges deciding same sex conterfeit unions are a fundamental right. Just as the courts decided that slavery was legal and baby killing abortion, in the case of same-sex unions the courts are “wrong” again! Courts have made terrible mistakes many times and they are doing it again legalizing same sex disordered unions. As for slavery, yes, some confunsed and misguided Christians justified their support for slavery but it was Christians who ended it!
            Do I want to use slavery as my best argument against same-sex confusion! Absolutely, slavery was immoral and so is unnatural sexual preferences which are deadly to the body as well as the soul, not to mention the family and society!

    • Anne T. says:

      Yep, Bakersfield Crusader, they are using the old divide and conquer routine yet again. If they would just stop all this nonsense about a child having two mothers or two father and two people of the same sex being able to get “married”, people could use that money to support their two parent heterosexual families and widows and widowers could support theirs, AND THEY KNOW THAT. It is WRONG to take what is meant to help married men and women and widows and wiowers, etc. to support their children and give it to those who should not be getting such benefits, nor should be having children. It is the Me Generation if ever there was me. And the only marriage equality is between one man and one woman. All else is just lopsided. End of discussion.

    • Michael McDermott says:

      Good Point Bakersfield:

      The Gaystapo Legal Grinder takes advantage of Public Financing of their suits, and stuffs their pockets with big $$ from the taxpayer tills.

      The diversion of huge amounts of tax money in to ‘Aids / STD prevention / education’ has been largely a big flop, with much of the money used to purchase the Medications needed to Rejoin the ‘Conga Line of Buggery’ and develop newer treatment resistant strains via ‘sharing the love’.

      That Said – Attorneys on All Sides still expect to be paid like Attorneys – First and Foremost, which is something they share with the rest of the legal ‘profession’ – for whom “Mr Green” is the real client.

      The Catholic Church has been largely ineffectual in its efforts, as their ‘Pro-Marriagge’ groups are pretty much led by the Church of ‘nice/mice’ – who don’t want to offend anyone, even by speaking the Truth when it is Not Politically Correct – or might implicate Insiders still busy covering up for the ‘Lavender Mafiosa’ who infiltrated the system.

  2. Life Lady says:

    Not only does the rabid homosexual lobby want to suppress natural marriage, but they sem to have a lot of “sour grapes” for a man earning his daily bread. It’s not my concern what Brian earns, but that he actually does the work, which I believe he does. It also demonstrates how very low those rabid homosexuals will go to avenge themselves of their perceived wrongs aimed at them. Truly, I support natural marriage. If they decide to get in the way I can’t help it. It’s as if they want the spectacle without any of the consequences. So we’re in opposition. THat’s not any justification to stoop so low.

    • Anonymous says:

      I think everyone supports traditional marriage. I know I truly support it. I’ve never heard anyone say they didn’t. Expanding civil marriage to include same-sex couples doesn’t change that; nor does it change or affect in any way the religious “sacrament of marriage” between husband and wife. Brian Brown is being paid an awful lot of money by someone to specifically cause and perpetuate the harm and suffering of others – particularly the children of same sex headed families, for whom the benefits of married parents are explicitly denied. That’s what this article is justifiably pointing out.

    • no one is trying to do away with marriage between a man and woman but gay maen can also fall in love. all human beings can fall in love , since god is the essence of love all love beautiful we could use a lot more love in this world

  3. I think everyone supports traditional marriage. I know I truly support it. I’ve never heard anyone say they didn’t. Expanding civil marriage to include same-sex couples doesn’t change that; nor does it change or affect in any way the religious “sacrament of marriage” between husband and wife. Brian Brown is being paid an awful lot of money by someone to specifically cause and perpetuate the harm and suffering of others – particularly the children of same sex headed families, for whom the benefits of married parents are explicitly denied. That’s what this article is justifiably pointing out.

    • Anne T. says:

      A child has a right to a mother AND a father whenever possible. Taking benefits to support traditional two parent heterosexual families and giving them to other is JUST PLAIN WRONG. You don’t need it. All you need is the right to give your healthcare power of attorney to whomever you please and your rightfully earned property to whoever you please. That can be easily done in other ways.

      • Anonymous says:

        It’s so funny to read about all of these marriage cases. In all of the cases, the party opposing same sex marriage is always very careful to state that they fully support extending all benefits of marriage to same sex couples. They merely object to the name used for the relationship.

        However, the truth is out on this website. It turns out, people here oppose not only the use of the term marriage, but also the extension of benefits. At least we know where people on this website stand. Makes it a little bit easier to overturn laws that restrict same sex marriage.

  4. I guess the message is to find ProtectMarriage.com on the internet, and donate. 🙂

  5. St. Christopher says:

    “C&H”: This is one leg of the “Big Lie” advanced by the homofascist lobby. This position is identical with that taken by politicians, like Gov. Cuomo’s famous father, to the effect that “I am against abortion, but I cannot deny the legal right of women [to slaughter their own pre-born babies].” This nonsequitur to the moral issue involved, as been a chief reason that many, many Catholic politicians can claim that they support the Church’s position, although they “personally” oppose abortion (such as Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and the entire sorry caravan of heretics). The legal fact of society newly permitting an overtly immoral action — such as abortion, or homosexual marriage — always threatens the stability and viability of any institution: lawsuits will certainly follow, as well as demands to the IRS for the loss of any tax benefits (e.g., Sec. 501c3 status), and opposition to any employment conditions requiring that, say, homosexual persons cannot work for the Church and “be married” even if permitted legally. Importantly, people in the pews also begin to change, as has been the case, at least superficially, to the notion that the morally repugnant bahavior is really “OK.” Catholic bishops must (but generally do not, cowards that they are, particularly Cardinal Dolan) step up often and everywhere and say that, legally speaking, society need not bend the knee to homofascists.

  6. Wm. Hamilton says:

    $500,000 annual salary for Mr. Brown? Really? If that figure is correct, it is scandalous. And how much do they pay their attorneys.?
    While I strongly support traditional marriage, I believe that many charities become an end in themselves and that end is to keep a handful of people rolling in money. Surely Mr. Brown and co. could get by on far less. Tell me, what do you do with a monthly income of nearly $42,000?

    • Anonymous says:

      Apparently nothing useful, given the organizations recent successes. They haven’t really done anything but engage in low quality litigation.

    • I suspect that in less than 10 years NOM AND many of the orginizations which focus only on gay marriage will not exist of be only faint shadows of thier former selves. Also ..why and how does ProtectMarriage.com still even exist? Prop 8 is a settled matter.

  7. Conus gloriamaris says:

    Marriage is a biblical union between a man and woman…not a man and man…God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve…the sodomite gallery should thank the “breeders”, if it weren’t for “us”, the sodomites would cease to exist…you savvy?

    • CG ~ “Breeders” was an anti-straight term which went out of use in the early 80’s.
      It was especially stupid considering that lesbians also
      breed” Also – lesbians don’t commit sodomy. Comparing all gay people to the few fools that used it is like comparing all hetrosexual people to the Westbro “Baptist” “Church” folks.

    • Your Fellow Catholic says:

      The state is not a party to any biblical unions, as we derive from the First Amendment. So, therefore, any unions that the state dignifies, are independent from any Biblical unions. Therefore, the state is free to devise any unions as it so chooses. Biblical authorities are free to join in those unions or dissent from those unions as they see fit.

      • Anonymous says:

        So then we must limit marriage to Catholics only?

        By your reasoning Conus, that will make marriage irrelevant real quick. The Catholic Church has a duty to oppose any marriage that is not founded on a belief of God, as articulated by the Catholic Church.

        Only 23% of the US identifies as Catholic.

        • Your Fellow Catholic says:

          Conus, we are not talking about Christian marriages here, we are talking about the civil marriages that the state licenses. Clearly, there are state marriages involving non-christians, yet the Church doesn’t make any attempt to prevent those marriages. Nor should it. This is what we mean by the separation of Church and State.

  8. Anonymous says:

    What? an image in an eye makes gay people futile? What?

    • Anne T. says:

      Great post, Conus gloriamaria. The trolls who come on here would do well to heed what you said. I suspect that some of them are guilty of the sin of presumption also, which means they think they can go ahead and sin all they want and encourage it in others, and the Good Lord will and has to forgive them. That is very dangerous thinking. They just might find themselves in the position of the bridesmaids without any oil in their lamps when the bridegroom came and were cast out.

  9. Dave N. says:

    Ever since Maggie Gallagher threw in the towel and left, NOM has been totally ineffective, except, as the author notes, to provide lucrative salaries to the people at the top. Too bad Brian Brown has been allowed to drive this organization into the ground; I’m guessing they will be out of business in 12-18 months even with support from Tom Monaghan and the Catholic Bishops.

    • Anonymous says:

      Umm…Maggie Gallagher is also a crook. She was paid tens of thousands of dollars in undisclosed federal contracts to write articles about “healthy marriage” by the Bush Administration. She testified about those articles before Congress and failed to disclose her financial incentive to produce the material.

      The people leading the fight against same sex marriage are making bank while the little people who do are get nothing in return.

    • Anonymous says:

      She never left NOM, she is still on the board.

  10. His salary seems excessive. The most distressing thing is all of the money raised by the faithful to pass one man/woman marriage laws that are then overturned by judges thus nullifying all efforts. The thought was that the push for gay marriage would die because only a few more liberal states would be making it legal, but the whole thing is exploding across the country because of liberal judges. I hope the Catholic Church stands strong on this issue, because there are crack in the wall.

  11. Michael McDermott says:

    This is an Important subject for the Pro-Family / Marriage / Life lobby – as it mirrors the scam by RINO$ pretending to support the Republican Platform, while selling out the highest bidder. Soo to with who is Making Big $$ (Mainly well paid Attorneys ostensibly on the side of Good…

    – Still Expect to get the same compensation the Courts give to those Attacking Marriage via tax subsidized Attorney Fees funding the Gaystapo.

    When former judge ‘von-wanker’ in Frisco acted as ringmaster of that circus, he Chose only certain firms to ‘represent’ the People (apparently, those who were well paid but still unwilling to present All the Arguments / Facts / Witnesses available)…
    – and improperly forbade others who would have Fully Litigated the Case from participating, even if they were doing so for Free or at minimal cost.
    Still – 500K a year, donated from people who don’t see that much in a decade, does seem abusive in light of the Cause, which is not a Private Dispute but a Public Good.

    But then Governot Schwarzenegger was being Blackmailed by the Gaystapo over his not so ‘secret’ Extra Son, and betrayed the Voters worse than his predecessor ‘gay’ Davis did.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Brian Brown needs a new photographer. That picture is awful!

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.

Speak Your Mind

COMMENTS POLICY: Comments are limited to 750 characters and will be truncated at 750. Comments should not contain offensive or libelous language. Please strive to be civil. All comments are subject to approval by our moderator and to editing as the moderator deems appropriate. Inclusion of your email address is optional.