Two strikg featur characterize the state of public opn about gay rights general and gay marriage particular.1 The first is the creasg level of
Contents:
GAY MARRIAGE, RELIGN AND THE COURT
Namg and shamg were key parts of the mpaign to make gay marriage legal. * op ed articles on gay marriage *
It was the first time gay-marriage activists adopted a strategy of srg their most well-heeled opponents away om the before the phrase “ncel culture” entered the lexin or Republin senators plaed about the power of “woke pal, ” Mr. Prevly, the boytt was far more equently a tool of gay rights opponents than supporters.
While the Amerin Fay Associatn promoted boytts of Disney and Amerin Airl for gay-iendly polici, gay rights anizatns went a different directn. ” Brian Brown — the executive director for California of the Natnal Organizatn for Marriage, the leadg sgle-issue anti-gay-marriage group, led by people wh close ti to lears the Catholic Church and the Church of J Christ of Latter-day Sats — boasted after the Grand Hyatt prott that Mr. The next year, he dispatched an ai to an Internatnal Gay and Lbian Travel Associatn nference wh an offer: $25, 000 sh and $100, 000 hotel creds for droppg the boytt.
THE PRICE OF GAY MARRIAGE
Only five dividuals, none of them well known natnally, ntributed over $100, 000 to any of the anti-gay-marriage mpaigns relig nomatns rpond to the new prsure. ’”On the other si, however, new donors emerged beyond the tight circle of gay philanthropists who fund marriage-equaly advocy past electn cycl.
5 ln to a mpaign to pass Referendum 74, which would legalize same-sex marriage the state, proponents outspent opponents more than five to pro-gay-marriage activists ually creded chang their persuasive msagg to their improved mpaigns, their most obv new advantage me the form of rourc.