Anti-Gay Marriage Group Chided Again For Skirting Federal Financial Disclosure Rules

John Eastman NOM cv ocw.jpg
Eastman: It's all about impregnating women
Advocating against same sex marriage apparently also means cheating when it comes to the National Organization For Marriage (NOM).

According to Laguna Beach resident Fred Karger, NOM failed to make public its mandatory financial disclosure report on April 15 and then, after getting an extension, on Nov. 15.

"We need to hold NOM, its officers and its Board of Directors accountable and they need to obey IRS laws for a change," Karger said in a press statement. "They are always late in filing their tax returns and in some years have not filed until forced to do so by tax officials."

NOM's big boss is Orange County's John Eastman, a former Chapman University law professor and ultra-conservative policy advocate who got trounced in the 2010 primary race for the Republican nomination for California Attorney General.

Eastman--who claims that gay marriage will end civilization and humanity because same sex couples can't reproduce--has threatened legal action against Karger if he continues to demand access to NOM's records.

And Karger wants Eastman, who was a clerk for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, thrown in jail for contempt of court after the group has ignored rulings by a federal judge.

"I have repeatedly called for a congressional or U.S. Senate investigation of this shady organization established by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Catholic Church back in 2007 to qualify and pass Proposition 8, which ended gay marriage in California," said Karger.

Fred Karger Equal Means Equal 8.jpg
One reason NOM hides its records is to block pro-gay marriage advocate from discovering the group's donor identities. 

Karger has organized multiple boycotts of businesses, including several in Southern California.

Long established federal law requires organizations like NOM to make certain financial information publicly available.

Follow OC Weekly on Twitter @ocweekly or on Facebook

Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help

Queer is queer , end of story.


Chicken soup recipe is still a chicken soup recipe.


"Eastman--who claims that gay marriage will end civilization and humanity because same sex couples can't reproduce-"


I doubt he claims it will 'end humanity'. However, any sane society is going to 'privilege' heterosexual couples -- that's the way it reproduces itself. In fact, marriage was mostly about providing protection for the woman and esp. the results of actual sex. (Even Bill Clinton knows what actual sex is). There just is no reason to slap a state-sanction onto two dudes doing each other up the poop shoot --even if we didn't know the dire public health consequences of same.


I believe with the recent voter-approved same-sex marriage laws, comes an obligation for the federal government to recognize those unions as legitimate and legally binding contracts.


Please sign and promote the White House petition below.


Also, I encourage Republicans who support same-sex marriage and civil unions to be vocal about your support, especially to your party leaders and lawmakers. I know many good, decent Republicans, but your party is getting a bad rap due to the stances of your high-profile members.


One thing not mentioned on the petition below is that federal recognition would allow soldiers to provide health benefits to their spouses and children of their spouses, not to mention survivor benefits. And, even if your company offers same-sex benefits, federal recognition would allow gay employees to take those benefits on their partner pre-tax, just like their straight coworkers can for their spouses.


Please remember to click on the buttons below the petition also, to promote on your twitter and facebook pages.

rscottmoxley topcommenter

 @Mitchell_Young Yes, I now see. Government must "privilege heterosexual couples" because otherwise men and women would not have intercourse and babies. You're really funny.


 @rscottmoxley For most of us no -- but on the margins yup, a few percentage points of people in the middle, and there seem to be at least as many bisexuals as homosexuals -- will go on to hit for the other team.


Speaking of which--why limit marriage just to two folks? That's denying the essential nature of bi-sexuals. If they want to form a family in 3-somes or more, why should 'duo' be the only way to go. Seems like a bigoted, '2'-centric point of view.


Now Trending

Anaheim Concert Tickets

From the Vault