Friday, January 30, 2009

The Inner Workings of the DNA

501c3, dna, marriage, prop 8, traditional, homophobia, homosexual, gay, religion, conservative, family, values

If you've been paying attention, I spend a lot of my time chipping away at the Digital Network Army- the online portion of the traditional marriage crowd. (It's the bigotry, but it's also the abuse of irony, sarcasm, science and logic. I get it, you hate Teh Gay, but what did irony every do to you?)

Through careful detective work (I clicked on a link*), I learned a bit about how the Digital Network Army is organized.

(1) Their Team Captains' profiles are hidden. Hmmmm.

(2) Said Team Captains send out viral emails- marching orders for the unhidden foot soldiers, which no doubt explains why the same post ends up on so many blogs.

(3) If a member receives a comment that can't be moderated away for profanity (they want to look all fair and stuff), but can't be easily dismissed, they can alert the Team Captain, who will email the rest of the Digital Network Army, and they will then swoop in and carpet bomb comment: post so many happy comments that the offending comment disappears in the mix.

Here is a recent viral email assignment from the mysterious Team Captain:

Hello, my fellow traditional marriage supporters!My colleagues in the Digital Network Army (DNA) and I want you to join in our letter-writing campaign today to the editor of the New York Times, following up to the article that ran today about the H8 maps.

NY Times instructions for submitting:Letters for publication should be no longer than 150 words, must refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days, and must include the writer's address and phone numbers. No attachments, please.

Send a letter to the editor by e-mailing

Go viral, my dear ones! Thanks for standing up for marriage and for the donors' right to privacy!

So, there you have it: organized bigotry in the new millenium.

*a note on the link: you will have to wade through some serious sycophantery, but there is some very interesting information to be had. including the comment by thejournalistachronicle in which she outs at least one church for violating the rules of the 501(c)3.


  1. Hey! Great to see that the pro-marriage crew are out in numbers and becoming more organized! Viva la DNA!

    OK - you caught me, I'm a member of the DNA. Couldn't help but respond. I mainly wanted to respond to two of your points.

    First, you seem to take issue with the fact that the DNA encourages anonymity. You are welcome to take issue with it, but this practice is a direct result of the acts of those supposedly for "tolerance" and "love," including 1,977 reports of theft, vandalism, and violence against those who were vocally in favor of Proposition 8. All this was done while screaming how bigoted, intolerant, discriminating, and hateful we were! Ironic, yes? This is only a partial reporting, as I know of many more incidents that were not reported. I have personal friends who have children whose lives were threatened at school, have been physically assaulted, their tires slashed, their businesses targeted, and all of us have been the brunt of amazing and colorful obscenities and a great deal of rudeness (not to mention the gazillions of yard signs that were stolen). I'm glad you posted this particular assignment dealing with H8 maps. Thank you! These maps give a great example of this type of intolerant discrimination by those who profess otherwise. People are simply trying to protect their children, families, and businesses. I doubt anyone else would respond differently if they had been similarly attacked. Would you?

    Second, you seem to misunderstand the restrictions placed on 501(c)(3) organizations. This seems to be a common misunderstanding. I'm not sure why. Under the law, religious institutions are fully capable of supporting political campaigns and often do, without losing their 501(c)(3) status - as long as the campaign is not for or against any specific political candidate. They can even spend a portion of their funds to support them. I encourage you to find out more on this issue by visiting the IRS website page on point, found at,,id=161131,00.html.



  2. Please, it's pro traditional marriage. I'm pro marriage.

    I did not say that people cannot seek anonymity on the internet- merely that it is odd that the leaders of the DNA don't have so much as a viewable profile (mine doesn't tell you anything about me), but other members of the DNA use their real names and photos. (To be fair, that is a real photo of my actual dog.)

    If it is important to maintain anonymity as a member of the DNA, why do the Team Leaders not encourage this?

    As for the H8 maps, if the PACs did not make clear that this information is always available for public viewing, they should have. All other PAC donors are made public, it is the law, for very good reason. I find it interesting that prop 8 supporters seem to make the argument that they are the only ones whose names are being published.

    And, please review the Catholic Bishop's Council website on acceptable activities in politics. Requiring participation in a group such as the DNA in order to maintain good standing in a church (duty, as journalist put it) is not on the list of acceptable activities. For good reason.

    That is in a grey area of political activity for 501(c)3s. The IRS can, if they choose, interpret their current rules in a way that results in a severe spanking for churches involved in this sort of activity. I suspect that either churches are attempting to push the boundaries of the IRS rules, or they are attempting to make the case that they are persecuted. "Look, the IRS spanked us for doing something we shouldn't have been doing- everybody hates christians and it's all the gays fault!"

    Christians scream persecution at every opportunity, which I find quite annoying, considering they are the majority, and use their status as the majority to deny rights and privileges they themselves enjoy.

  3. Hey, Moniker is a commenter only! In fact, Moniker may well be an alter ego for someone who actually posts with the DNA. (I can recognize writing styles easily, so don't think you guys are getting away with that one.)

    In fact that seems pretty likely, since Moniker started his blogger account in the last 2 days.

    So, Pearlysnot?

  4. Ahhhh, yes. Now I understand. The anonymity is for their safety from the gay thugs. It's not extremists on both sides, that either side has to worry about, or anything. It must be one-sided. Because the DNA would never search out someone online and attempt to intimidate or bully them in any way.

  5. I've heard that before about the DNA. In fact, I was warned. (Yeah, I never did meet a temptation I didn't give into.)

    Oh, Pearlysnot, I happen to know that "moniker" is another word for "nickname", so giving yourself a nickname that is another way of saying nickname is not clever.

    It is, however, quite unimaginative.


Comments are for you guys, not for me. Say what you will. Don't feel compelled to stay on topic, I enjoy it when comments enter Tangentville or veer off into Non Sequitur Town. Just keep it polite, okay?

I am attempting to use blogger's new comment spam feature. If you don't immediately see your comment, it is being held in spam, I will get it out next time I check the filter. Unless you are Dennis Markuze, in which case you're never seeing your comment.

Creative Commons License
Forever in Hell by Personal Failure is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at