Dear Friends of Marriage,
What a week it has been. What an election for marriage!
Maine, first and foremost, where you–through your sacrifices and your courage and your fundamental decency–helped NOM put to rest the great lie that gay marriage is inevitable.
We can win this fight! Last week we did!
The repercussions of that great victory are rippling across the country, especially when multiplied by the defeat of pro-gay marriage Republican Dede Scozzafava in NY-23 and the victory of pro-life, pro-marriage GOP governor Chris Christie in New Jersey.
Congratulations to the New Jersey Family Policy Council, where Gov. Christie chose, in a surprise appearance, to make it clear he’s a man of his word: He will veto any gay marriage bill that crosses his desk. (And I want to thank Joseph Backholm of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, who sent NOM this note: ”We wait for the final results on Referendum-71 here in Washington. I wanted to thank the supporters of the National Organization for Marriage for your help, which we very much appreciated. Congratulations on the victory in Maine. That was incredibly encouraging. We look forward to working with you on the battles we know are still to come here in Washington.” Back at you!)
Gay-marriage advocates will fight hard to push a bill through the lame-duck session in New Jersey. And tomorrow Gov. Paterson is going to try to force legislators to take up a special emergency gay-marriage bill. Special emergency? Really Governor, can’t gay marriage wait until you figure out how to balance the budget amid a collapsing economy?
New York’s gay marriage bill is special all right–special-interest politicking at its most naked and visible.
We will keep you in this fight to the end.
But today I want to let you know what good you’ve already done, by joining together with the 500,000 other marriage defenders who work with NOM. (Help us push that up to one million by the end of the year by sending this email to three friends today!)
Frank Schubert, campaign manager for both Prop 8 and the Maine vote, sent NOM’s board an email the night of the election. Congratulations, he said, you’ve broken the back of gay marriage movement. Never again will they be able to persuade their donors and activists that they can win at the ballot box. Because, he said, they can’t.
Look at these headlines to get a glimpse of how great this victory–your victory–was!
“Maine vote a devastating blow to gay marriage” Christian Science Monitor, Nov. 4, 2009
“Gay Rights Rebuke May Change Approach” New York Times, Nov. 4 2009.
“Fresh on the heels of repeal in Maine, N.H. may reconsider gay marriage” Fosters Daily Democrat, Nov. 5, 2009
“The defeat of same-sex marriage in Maine is prompting marriage foes in New Hampshire — which now has same-sex marriage — to try again,” reports Politico, Nov. 5, 2009.
“N.Y. Gay Marriage Hope Fading?” asks the Advocate, Nov. 4, 2009.
Gay marriage is not inevitable because it is not based on truth or justice. In the end truth and love will prevail.
God bless you and your family. Please pray for NOM, and for all the groups and people working in this country to protect marriage.
Faithfully,
Brian S. BrownExecutive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
P.S. With your help we can fight–and win! Please consider what you can give to help NOM in the battles to come.
NOM in the News–Feature
“Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage Law”
CBN.com
November 4, 2009
“Loss in Maine Sets Back Gay-Marriage Drive”
New York Times
November 5, 2009
But Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, the conservative Christian group that is leading the charge against same-sex marriage around the country, read the outcome differently.
“It interrupts the story line that is being manufactured, that suggests the culture has shifted on gay marriage and the fight is over,” she said. “Maine is one of the most secular states in the nation, it’s socially liberal, they had a three-year head start to build their organization and they outspent us two to one. If they can’t win there, it really does tell you the majority of Americans are not on board with this gay marriage thing.”
Maggie Gallagher with Raymond Arroyo
EWTN
October 30, 2009
NOM on TV and Radio
ABC News–Denver, CO
November 2, 2009
CBS News–San Diego, CA
November 4, 2009
National Public Radio
November 4, 2009
MSNBC
Countdown with Keith Olbermann
November 4, 2009
CNN
Anderson Cooper 360
November 4, 2009
“Maine Marriage Victory Proves Americans ‘Aren’t on Board’ with Same-Sex Marriage, Says Expert”
Catholic News Agency
November 6, 2009
NOM in the News
“Gay-Marriage Fight Heads to New Jersey”
Wall Street Journal
November 7, 2009
“New Jersey is at the very top of our list, and it’s going to happen in the next few weeks if it happens at all,” said Maggie Gallagher, the president of the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriages. “They’re doing it in a lame duck, because it’s as far away from an election as possible.”
“Loss in Maine Could Be Staggering Blow to Gay-Marriage Movement Nationwide”
Associated Press
November 4, 2009
Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that steered substantial funds to fight gay marriage in both California and Maine, was elated by Tuesday’s result, saying it shows that “that even in a New England state, if the voters have a chance to have their say, they’re going to protect and defend the commonsense definition of marriage.”
“House Race in New York’s 23rd District Goes to the Democrat”
New York Times
November 3, 2009
“Our number one goal was to make clear that the Republican Party cannot take someone as liberal as Dede Scozzafava and thrust her out on the voters and expect the voters just to accept it,” said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which worked to defeat Ms. Scozzafava, the Republican candidate who faced a challenge from Mr. Hoffman.
“Maine Vote a Devastating Blow to Gay Marriage”
Christian Science Monitor
November 4, 2009
The result will send a clear message to other state legislatures considering bills to legalize gay marriage, says Brian Brown, executive director of the New Jersey-based National Organization for Marriage, which contributed $1.8 million to the Maine campaign against the state law.
“At Stake in Maine Vote: A Potential First for Gay Marriage”
Christian Science Monitor
November 2, 2009
Brian Brown, executive director for the New Jersey-based National Organization for Marriage, was involved in the campaign to overturn gay marriage in California. In Maine, he is working with Stand for Marriage Maine, which has the same goal.
“NOM Poll: Marriage a Wedge in NY-23″
Ben Smith
Politico
November 3, 2009
As conservative groups scramble to take credit for their roles in Doug Hoffman’s surge, the National Organization for Marriage sends on a poll indicating that Dede Scozzfava’s stance on marriage put her well out of line with the district, not to mention the Republican Party.
“Marriage Victory in Maine”
National Catholic Register
November 4, 2009
“We will probably be outspent two to one, but Bishop Malone has fought hard and deserves credit for his great determination,” reported Maggie Gallagher, a marriage expert and author who founded the National Organization for Marriage after Massachusetts legalized same-sex “marriage” in 2007.
“Stakes Are High in Maine’s Vote on Gay Marriage”
Associated Press
November 3, 2009
“New England is the one area where it’s much tougher ground for us than other states,” Brown said. “The fact that in a state like Maine we’re polling relatively even shows the depth of support for saying marriage is between a man and a woman.”
“Pre-criminations in Maine”
Ben Smith
Politico
November 3, 2009
Liz Mair picks up the buzz that will get a lot louder if gay marriage in Maine — a toss-up in today’s referendum — goes down.
“I have heard complaints from some friends and contacts within the gay community that national level gay rights organizations have not done nearly enough to lock Maine down– while it is apparent that the National Organization for Marriage has been doing its thing in Maine which always has to concern marriage advocates on some level.”
“Maine Marriage to Be Decided By ‘Razor-Thin Election’”
Washington Blade
October 30, 2009
Major donors who contributed to pass Question 1 include the National Organization for Marriage, which has contributed $1.5 million since the campaign began, and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, which has contributed $550,000.
“Maine Set to Vote on Gay Marriage”
Washington Post
November 2, 2009
Questions about the largest contributor have sparked an investigation by the state ethics commission and a court battle. The National Organization for Marriage, or NOM, has contributed $1.6 million to Stand for Marriage Maine but has declined to reveal its own contributors, despite a federal district court decision last week that it must do so under Maine law.
Some groups for gays say the organization is a stalking horse for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or the Mormons, which dominated fundraising in the California campaign. Many of the actors in a nationally televised ad produced by NOM, called “Gathering Storm,” turned out to be Mormon activists.
“Maine Gay Marriage Opposition Leader Predicts Election Day Victory”
Everyday Christian
October 31, 2009
On the Yes on 1 side, the largest donor has been the National Organization for Marriage. NOM has been instrumental in helping to bankroll the heretofore state-by-state turf wars where gay marriage has become a political issue. NOM filed a lawsuit in state court to keep the names of its donors to Yes on 1 private.
“Gay Marriage Supporters Press Case”
Washington Blade
November 2, 2009
Among the witnesses opposed to the bill were Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which helps to fund ballot measures seeking to ban same-sex marriage in other states, and Rev. Water Fauntroy, D.C.’s former delegate to the House of Representative and a leading opponent in the District of same-sex marriage.
“Marriage in Maine in Dead Heat”
The Nation on National Public Radio
November 3, 2009
When it comes to funding, the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative Christian group at the forefront of battles against gay marriage in other states, has provided more than half of the $2.5 million raised by Stand for Marriage Maine.
“Maine Gay Marriage Ban Locked in Vote”
Washington Times
November 4, 2009
“That’s why this is unlike anything that’s happened before,” said Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, which supports traditional marriage. “This is a chance for [gay-marriage supporters] to show the momentum is on their side, that Proposition 8 was a fluke.”
He added, “But I don’t think it was a fluke. I think Question 1 is going to win.”
“What Made Doug Hoffman?”
New York Daily News
November 3, 2009
The National Organization for Marriage did spend $113,000 to support Hoffman in NY-23, which included a poll that found 52 percent of voters in the district oppose same-sex marriage. The Human Rights Campaign is now engaged in hopes of helping Owens.
“Maine Says ‘No’ to Same-Sex Marriage, ‘Yes’ to Medical Marijuana”
Iowa Independent
November 4, 2009
Marriage equality advocates in Iowa kept a watchful eye on Maine for months, knowing one day they could have to fight that battle themselves. The organization leading the fight against same-sex marriage in Main and across the country, the National Organization for Marriage, has already vowed to dedicate time and resources in Iowa.
“Maggie Gallagher, Head of NOM, Attends Pro-Gay Marriage Rally in DC”
Metro Weekly
November 5, 2009
A surprise attendee of the rally was Maggie Gallagher, President of the National Organization for Marriage. Gallagher’s organization spearheaded the effort to repeal Maine’s same-sex marriage law, and by a small majority — 53 to 47 percent — voters opted to revoke equal marriage rights in that state. It appeared to bother some attendees of tonight’s rally that Gallagher would appear at a pro-gay marriage event, yet the estimated crowd of 120 mostly left her alone as she observed the hour-long protest.
Gallagher said she had just been at a nearby building and it was by “great coincidence” that she was passing by. She stated that she was not attending the event as part of a professional capacity and did not wish to go on camera for an interview.
“Urban, Rural Divide Defines Differing Views on Marriage”
Bangor Daily News
November 5, 2009
But Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that funded much of the Yes on 1 campaign, said Tuesday’s result shows “that even in a New England state, if the voters have a chance to have their say, they’re going to protect and defend the common-sense definition of marriage.” Four of the five states that have legalized same-sex marriage are in New England.
Brown also suggested that the outcome in Maine will give pause to lawmakers in New York and New Jersey, where gay-marriage legislation is pending.
“Social Conservatives Sense a Change in the Political Weather”
Los Angeles Times
November 4, 2009
“It’s a crushing blow to those who think same-sex marriage is inevitable,” Brown said. “They were 100% wrong…In a deep blue state, when voters had the chance, they voted to protect marriage for a man and a woman.”
16 Comments
What I am looking forward to is the results of R-17. It jumped out at me that we are still waiting on the results. Anyone have an idea on how long it may take?
Correction: R-71
According to a report in the Seattle Times, voters in Washington State have approved Referendum 71, which expands Washington’s domestic partnership law, know as the “everything but marriage” law.
Alright. Let me get a few things out here.
First off, I can see where you’re coming from in attatching a gay marriage bill along with a budget cut seems is in poor taste. But as for “special-interest politicking”, I can’t see anything more shameless as building a war chest to threaten any Republican’s career if they don’t cooperate with your demands. Not only is it a far more blatant attempt at political manipulation, it’s using scare tactics, threats, and bullying to do so.
Secondly, I don’t appreciate being told that gay marriage is not based on “truth and justice”. I don’t quite understand what your definition of truth implies, but gay marriage is based on nothing but justice. Our founding fathers acknowledged that all men are created equal, and to penalize men and women, Americans, under the law for whom they love is cruel and derogatory.
I understand and sympathize with the dilemnas you all are forced to come to terms with in your campaign for this cause. After reading your arguements for your cause, it seems that you worry about the exact things my side of the movement, the LGBT side, worries about. Neither of us wants to have our rights sacrificed by appeasing the needs and desires of the other side. You do not want to lose the control over to the right to believe and teach what you wish, and I do not want to be unprotected and insecure under the law with the one I love. It’s a shame our idealogies have to clash in such a way.
However, after watching your strategies, I am affraid that I’m not impressed with your tactics. Some of your previous campaigns, especially your recent use of children as an emotional foothold for legislative and popular vote, I found to be in poor taste. This “war chest” is equally disgraceful. Therefore, I’m affraid I can’t stand by and say nothing any longer. Even if it’s only verbal criticism, from this point forward, I will oppose the National Organization for Marriage.
The rush to pass homosexual marriage in New Jersey and New York suggests homosexuals have corrupted some legislators there. This happened first in Mass. on a mandatory second vote to put a constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage before the voters, and then the same thing happened in the Maine.
The Maine law that would have enabled homosexuals to marry received strong support from the legislature and the Governor, but was rejected by the voters 53% to 47%. Maine also had a 60% turnout on Nov. 3, suggesting that a lot of voters were angered by the homosexual’s corruption of the legislature.
You all are idiots.. You really want to protect marriage? Then outlaw Divorce.. You think Straight people haven’t RUINED the Sanctity of “Marriage” already.. Give me a break!!!
Idiot (above) said that “[we] are all idiots.” Before the marriage victory in Maine, I was afraid that was the case. Now, I see hope. I am thrilled to see that most people can still think critically and rationally, and appreciate the devastating consequences of homosexual “marriage.”
It is very encouraging to see that so many of us simply refuse to be indoctrinated by radical liberal media or bullied/bribed into submission.
Laura is the idiot here. She has been iindoctrinated by the radical neocon media.
Iam, is that the best you have to offer this debate?
I am ashamed of the tactics used by this group. A lot of people are associating it with the KKK and their actions in attempting to stop the law that allowed blacks & whites to marry. The fear tactics and frankly the anti - American sentiment you voice is scary. In using religion for fear you go to far. That my friends is where you begin the downhill slide for your fight. The pilgrims fled England in part due to oppression of their religions and created a country in which everyone had a right to choose. To assume that all of America will simply believe your particular religion and your interpretation of it is the only right choice is to force other religions and other people to push back. For a lot of your opponents it isn’t even about marriage rights or the use of the word, it’s about freedom from the tyranny you as a group are attempting to impose on a nation built on the premise of the right to choose our own views on religion.
“I am ashamed of the tactics used by this group.”
Stacey, what tactics are you referring to? What fear tactics? What Anti-American sentiment? Just because my philosophies are different than yours I’m guilty of being Un-American? How tolerant of you.
Everyone is free to believe as they wish, and to act upon those beliefs, even to promote them. That is all guaranteed under the freedoms of the Constitution. What is not guaranteed is the right to impose those beliefs on others. In California and in Maine, the people were asked to decide the law they would live by. That is the ultimate in freedom in the arena of ideas.
It’s interesting that you would categorize one entire side of the debate as tyrannical, yet the side you chose is not the side imposing their views on the rest in a protected, whether you like it or not, way.
Bias?
How “American” is it to demand that everyone agree with you?
“In using religion ….you go to far. ”
How “American” is it to deny religious people a voice in the national conversation?
Yeah, funny how the left now reads the 1st amendment. Once upon a time it meant you had freedom of the press and freedom of religion.
NOW it means, keep your damned mouth shut, if you believe in religion.
Tyrants. Easy to recognize, arent they?
Stacey, feel free to choose as you see fit. It is no crime for you to live with another woman and pretend to be “wife and wife”.
But it would be criminal — tyranny even — for you to insist that everyone else accept you and your partner as wife and wife, regardless of what we think and say at the ballot box. Enjoy your freedom of religion. Enjoy the freedom to live as you see fit. Please, allow your neighbors the freedom to accept or reject your choices as WE see fit. Anything less would be “shoving your morality down our throats.”
Stacey,
Your argument that the opposition to homosexual “marriage” is purely religious or Christian is simply false. Having said that, the last time I checked, people in this country were by law guaranteed freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
Homosexual radicals’ constant attacks on religion, particularly Christians, and pandering to anti-Christian sentiments to gain support among non-Christians only further show the ugly face of the radical homosexual movement.
I can assure you, however, these repugnant tactics are duly noticed by individuals, religious or otherwise, who are capable of independent and critical thinking, and objectivity.