Dear Friends of Marriage,
The New York state senate just rejected gay marriage 38 to 24. Praise God!
And thank you. NOM spent $600,000 reaching out to voters through phone calls and television and radio ads to make sure politicians heard from ordinary voters like you.
Gay marriage inevitable? Don't believe the lie! You can make a difference and we at NOM are so proud to work with you and millions of other ordinary Americans who know in their hearts that marriage IS the union of husband and wife.
It has been a real privilege to work alongside so many state leaders determined to protect marriage in New York. Special thanks to Rev. Jason McGuire of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms for his tireless efforts on the ground, and to State Senator Ruben Diaz who was in his office praying before the vote and has been a true leader on this issue.
And to all of you in New York, a special thank you. I know sometimes we ask you over and over again to make phone calls and emails to your elected officials, but it is your phone calls and emails that ultimately made the difference today. Up until the last minute, Sen. Tom Duane was assuring everyone that he had the votes to pass the bill. But when push came to shove, New York legislators listened to their constituents and soundly rejected same-sex marriage.
This great victory will reverberate up and down America, putting the fear of God--and the American voter--into the hearts of weak-kneed and weak-willed politicians everywhere.
Usually, I don't ask for donations in victory emails like this, but I feel I must make you aware of our urgent needs today. We have totally over-extended ourselves in the fight to protect marriage in Maine, New York, and New Jersey. Our accounts are empty, and we desperately need to raise funds now so that we are ready when the next fight arises.
Will you please give generously today? Click here to make a secure online donation of $35, $50, $100, or even $1000 if you have the means.
Thank you! Today is a day to celebrate!
Faithfully,Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
36 Comments
You and you're rubbish make me sick. Everything you stand for repulses me. You are homophobic bigots - I have no respect for you. You represent nothing about modern society - where everybody is equal and is able to get married. I am disgusted groups like you exist.
Congratulations! This is a bellweather!
Congrats. Wonderful news.
Gallaghar gloated that this proves there hasn't been a cultural shift on gay marriage, but these hateful, hollow 'victories' are tiny compared to what would have happened if these votes had taken place 10, 15, 20 or more years ago. The more the concept of gay marriage - even when it is being voted down - stays in the headlines, the more it seeps into the consciousness of the young. Most people who vote today have spent most of their lives without the vaguest notion of gay marriage. Those voting in the future will see it as a perfectly ordinary concept, even if it's not currently legal where they live. And one thing is certain: gay people, their families and their supporters will NEVER give up. NEVER. You cannot legislate people and their rights to equality out of existence. So, the more it's rejected, the more you will hear about it.
The gay marriage folks took a big risk. Hoping for a close vote. It backfired and now there are at least 8 democrats that need to be converted. The y will need to beg more from REP support. Not one voted, not a single one. Gov. Paterson says this is a setback. I am not sure if we will keep trying special sessions every week until it comes up again or not. The pressure must be overcoming to him.
It is nice to know the vote was so much more of wider margin than anticipated.
That's right, bigots....Keep preaching your hatred and intolerance while you hide behind your bibles.
This is far from over.....
OhhhRahhhh!! This is great news. I will definitely be donating to NOM. You guys are doing a fantastic job along with many of the other groups and people fighting for marriage and religious liberty.
Rare are the times in which I am proud to be a New Yorker. But I am now!
Congratulations NY!!! Excellent news!
"Congratulations! This is a bellweather!"
If they can't win in NY, where can they win? Now let's hear from the good people in IOWA! Fight the SSM tyranny! Go Go Go! Such good news!
re: "Your Worst Nightmare"
lol. I've rarely heard a more accurate description. A world where families are destroyed, good called evil and evil called good...no thank you. THANK YOU NEW YORK!!! I'm so glad to hear this news.
andrewd,
You are losing momentum. The people have heard your stale arguments and rejected them. You have the same rights as everyone else. Special rights you are not entitled to. Thank You New York! Every child deserves a mom and a dad.
Thank you Nom and thank you Maggie for being a beacon in a violent gay storm on marriage. Marriage is for one man and one woman and it is not up for compromise period!!
AndrewD said: "Most people who vote today have spent most of their lives without the vaguest notion of gay marriage."
Today it remains a vague notion. Perhaps you can make it more precise?
* * *
Marriage is a winner. So is NOM. So are the people of New York who stood down the hawkers of gay identity politics.
If gay marriage bills are passed, religious liberites will continue to be infringed upon. It's not just about "love" vs. "bigotry". Religious leaders can and will be persecuted for "hate speech". It has happened in countries where gay rights legislation has passed. http://robgagnon.net/homosexHateCrimePart1.htm
Legislatures and voters are not known from a historical perspective for granting minority rights.
"We the people have a right to our opinions and can vote to take them away at will. "
Our trump card is Judge Walker... Everything hangs in the balance starting January 11 2010 for us. May the religious liberties of the Episcopal, Unitarian, Reformed Jew, Quaker and Buddhist be protected by the US Supreme Court!
Kevin, let me parrot back a NOM like response. "Gay and Lesbian couples know what they are getting themselves into by having children out of wedlock."
"The children in gay and lesbian families, well they are nothing more than collateral damage."
They get a warm fuzzy feeling with the sound bite "Every child deserves a mom and a dad." Don't confuse them with reality or facts like every child deserves loving parents. Or that Gay and Lesbian parents produce the same healthy outcome or even better (recent UK longitudinal study) than "mom and dad".
Judge Walkers court will help them face the reality of facts, by throwing cold water on their warm fuzzy fantasies.
New York is just another example of two wolves and lamb voting on what they are having for lunch. All that was accomplished in New York and Maine is a that a few wolves walked away with fatter bellies.
That may be democracy, but justice and liberty will start to take place for the minority in Judge Walkers court room.
Jerome, Kevin,
“Gay and Lesbian couples know what they are getting themselves into by having children out of wedlock.”
I don't believe I've ever heard anyone from NOM say anything like that. In fact, those sound remarkably similar to some things I've said here, in the comments.
Maybe I should be flattered, but please don't confuse me or my statements as official NOMdom. I'm just a commenter, same as you.
even if gays get married the child will always be from a broken home because one of his "parents" will not be biological. Try explaining to a child that his real biological parent gave him up in a sperm bank like cattle. A child has the right to his biological mother and father. There are studies out there that suggest that a child not conceived out of love will never feel loved through their lives. That explains all the depressed people we have today. Just like religion shouldn't be forced down a child's mind, so shouldn't alternative lifestyles be forced down a child's mind. A child born into a non traditional family has no choice. who care right?
I'm confused. When did gay couples start "having children?"
Very happy for New York, very proud of them. Keep praying . . . it's working!
What amazes me is the lack of intelligence in you people that argue against gay marriage. Do you think that gay people are just going to go away, because if that's your intention you are sorely mistaken. They've existed since the dawn of man and they will exist after all you selfish, sad people have gone to your pathetic graves. Your lack of understanding that marriage is a civil issue and not a religious one astounds me. You don't even appreciate the rights that you have while trying to deny hard working, loving, tax paying americans the same rights you take for granted. So let me repeat this ,this is not about your belief in fairy tales, this is about all citizens having equal protection under the law, you know like it says in the constitution you all like to throw around but have obviously never read. Gays and lesbians have been getting married in Massachusetts for 5 years now and yet families are still standing, straight people are still getting married and half the time divorced and god has not come and destroyed the state. So, what again are you afraid of, because if nothing you predict has come to pass, that makes you nothing more than bigots who will take responsibility in the next life for the lives that you have destroyed in this one. You all have a lot of blood on your hands.
Congratulations to the state senate and people of New York! That is wonderful news.
With all the misinformation and disinformation out there, too few people understand that militant feminist lesbians are behind this gay marriage push as they spread their hatred and distrust of men and their divisiveness throughout society.
The lesbians love to say that they "recognized" or "realized" they were lesbians when they were older, implying that they had always been lesbians, even if they had been earlier married to men or had children with them. But this is patent nonsense. People are evolving their whole lives (Christians should all understand this) and these lesbians were heterosexuals who evolved into lesbians because of their experiences, which usually involved a seduction and conversion at some point. And the seduction-conversion experience will happen much more frequently in a society that is accepting of lesbianism, particularly a society which holds it to be equal to heterosexuality, a status that would be conferred by the legalization of lesbian marriage. Actually, in militant feminist circles, lesbianism is considered to be vastly superior to heterosexuality.
The increasing rates of conversion of women and girls into lesbianism might not be so frightening and disturbing if it did not put us on a path of increasing and irreconcilable conflict in the future, as the great majority of men will not readily become homosexuals or accept loneliness, many will become mentally disturbed and violent without having women in their lives, and many will be willing to do almost anything to restore traditional male-female relationships. Also, the male-female bond is the basic building block of human society, and as it is weakened feelings of human solidarity, empathy, and common purpose and social harmony will significantly decrease and lead to the creation of a much more violent, chaotic, hateful, vicious, and dangerous society.
But with New York's great victory, the hope still lives! Maybe the US can avoid the catastrophe that would surely follow from widespread acceptance of lesbian marriage and the accompanying misandry.
Congrats!
The people of all the states that have voted have shown that we share a common core belief about marriage and thats why this wonderful organization and the work you do is so needed.
Homosexual "Marriage" Inevitable? Yeah, right.
Fantastic news. Thanks to NOM and to everybody who made this victory possible.
Actually, there are a number of cases in Canada and Europe and even in the US where people have been fined and persecuted if they do not agree with homosexuality.
If people are religious or even care about freedom of religion, they will not support gay rights legislation. I'm happy about this legislation in New York. I hope that all of the good liberal people out there will realize what is really at stake and it's not just about "love".
Name-calling is not really a convincing argument. People calling us "bigots" and "homophobes" doesn't really convince anyone of anything.
The hypocrisy shown on this site by this hateful organization and in the comments of this post astounds me. You people deserve absolutely NO freedom yourselves if you are willing to take freedom away from others! It is more than name-calling going on here- all of you bigots are bad people down to the core of your very being and I wish you'd stop hiding behind God and using him to justify your hateful behavior. You should be ashamed of yourselves just as I'm sure God is ashamed of you.
hypocrite,
yet you are willing to take away the right of children to have a mother and a father? Only your wants matter? How convenient for you.
Great Victory for NY. Every child deserves a father and a mother. We do not need to continue feminizing NY State & this great country. Keep up the good work.
Legalizing homosexual "marriage" would not help the unfortunate children exploited by their homosexual "parents". It will, however, encourage more homosexual "parenting".
Homosexual "parenting", which, by design, deprives a child of his or her mom or dad, is inherently selfish and cruel. To make matters worse, pedophilia consitutes an important part of homosexual culture, making these children particularly vulnerable to sexual molestation.
Looks like NJ is up next to vote on it.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/12/nj_gay_marriage_proposal_will.html
Not sure if its true or not. But it could be up for vote next Thursday.
Hey guess what?. Gay people will always have kids regardless of the marriage equality.
Why do you people turn a blind eye to pure evidence that children are just as well adjusted than kids born into a straight family. GEEZ.
Ok - you don't want gay marriage, but LAURA...why must YOU be so ignorant about gays and pedophilia, and if you are so passionate about this, then go find a board that supports your silly opinion which CAN'T and will never be backed up by anything. Comments like Laura's are showing all of your true colors. Gay marriage has been legal for FIVE years now...It's not going away. Hardheads!
I came here to see the other side of the argument. The anti-gay marriage part.
I am left bewildered.
How can you people be so...cold? Out of all the posts here I only saw ONE that made a decent argument. I see a lot of posts that use the word "God" and almost all of them are devoid of compassion or understanding that is so vital to the ideal of God.
I also see the word "children" being thrown around a lot. Let me tell you that I was born into a heterosexual family and my father CHOSE to leave. Not even extending me the curteousy of leaving when I was too young to remember him but rather when I was seven. On my tenth birthday he told me to never call him again.
My family was hetero. I thought, by your folks' reasoning, that I was suppose to have a happy, whole family?
My point is that a child being born by artificial insemination to a gay couple has just as much chance to be happy and whole as any other child. Born into a hetero family. The only exception being all of you teaching your kids that there's something wrong with little Timmy or Erica cause she's got two mommies or daddies. It will be those kids that are taught intolerance that will pick on and socially ostricize kids with gay parents.
And please stop making the child sound like he or she was robbed of some "right" to a mom and dad. On the case of adoption, that child was already given up by their blood parents. In the case of A.I. I'm sorry to sound lewd but some guy ejaculated into a cup for money. It's not that the male was forced to give up his sperm so that a gay couple could rob his would-be offspring of a mom/dad lifestyle.
Overall, I just feel bad for the majority of you. It must be so hard to to fight with such anger and insecurity against a minority of people seeking civil rights. I don't say that to be snide, I genuinely feel bad for you.
I hope someday you can find it in your heart to stop being so cold and fearful of gay couples. Please try and remember that gay people have married. The world didn't end and children/hetero families weren't broken apart and torn asunder.
For emphasis:
1.
Gay marriage inevitable? Don’t believe the lie!
2.
Up until the last minute, Sen. Tom Duane was assuring everyone that he had the votes to pass the bill. But when push came to shove, New York legislators listened to their constituents and soundly rejected same-sex marriage.
3.
This great victory will reverberate up and down America, putting the fear of God -– and of the American voter -- into the hearts of weak-kneed and weak-willed politicians everywhere.
* * *
The SSM campaign may well prove to be the catalyst for a resurgence of respect for the core meaning of marriage throughout the country. Reaffirming the foundational social institution is among the first steps toward empowering future generations to overcome the nonmarital trends of the last few decades.
Elected representatives have a problem that the SSM merger cannot solve for them. That problem is the goal of re-election. In the realworld of wins and losses, NOM is making strides in demonstrating to politicians across the spectrum that marriage is a winner and that the merger is a loser.
Already leading lights of the SSM campaign are stepping back and reconsidering "civil union". That, too, would be a merger under a different name and unacceptable. But the momentum is shifting toward the solution that has long-existed and has been well-utilized.
The provisions for designated beneficiaries is not an imitation of marriage and is not accessible only on the basis of a nonmarital sexualized type of relationship. This solution is contract-based and fits the SSM argumentation that stresses the SSM would be a contract between consenting adults. It is a solution that is protective, rather than a preferential status, based on the vulnerabilities that families experience outside of marriage. Especially those with children.
Afterall, according to the SSM argumentation presented, repeatedly, in the comment sections here -- by SSMers -- protecting children outside of marriage is a supposed concern of the SSM campaign. Thus, the existing solution fits that well, too.
There is zilch that an SSM-merger can do for children that adoption and other provisions cannot do far more directly. And there are plenty of gaycentric agencies out there catering to one-sexed scenarios -- be they lone individuals or twosomes -- in which persons of the gay identity group are recruited. Likewise, there are agencies in the adoption realm and in the "donor" sperm/ova realm whose businesses are aimed at that particular identity group. Once, again, the SSM campaign can recalibrate itself away from attacking the core of marriage and, instead, dealing with the solutions that already exist.
Each of those bits and pieces of the SSM complaint can be addressed on merit and demerit. There is no need for SSMers to continue to deny what marriage actuallys for the sake of camoflauging what SSM actually would be.
Cheers to NOM and to the elected representives of NY who listened to reason. Cheers to the marriage supporters who made them listen and act on reason.
“you are willing to take away the right of children to have a mother and a father”
It doesn’t seem to be sinking in: outlawing same-sex marriage does nothing to stop same-sex parenting! Why is this so hard for you people to comprehend! All you’re doing is forcing the children raised by same-sex couples to be born and raised out of wedlock!!
If a lesbian gets pregnant with sperm that some guy sold to a sperm bank with the specific proviso that he NOT be revealed as the donor, and that lesbian raises the child with a helpmate, that is, a partner/lover, exactly how is that worse than a single straight woman raising a similarly conceived child alone???
Affirmation of the two-sexed sexual basis of marriage does not outlaw the non-marriage category of which SSM is a subset.
The marriage law does not "force" children to be born out-of-wedlock.
Society, in our legal system, has extended the marital presumption of paternity -- based on the opposite-sexed nature of human procreation -- to unwed scenarios. The imitation is less effective, but not due society being anti-child.
Of course, the sexual basis for the presumption of paternity -- within marriage and outside of marriage -- is extrinsic to all one-sexed arrangements.
Adults in one-sexed scenarios (lone individuals or twosomes or moresomes of the same sex) choose to segregate fatherhood and motherhood. They do so before the child is conceived and so they cannot excuse their choice and their behavior by citing the best interests of children-yet-to-be-concieved. They choose and act in the best interests of themselves. They choose to create these children for domestic arrangements which are either fatherless or motherless by design.
Outlawed? Nope. But nonmarital nonetheless.
So, Kevin, you can stop hyperventilating and breathe easier.
What is it about the lesbian scenario, in your view, that makes it superior and worthy of special status? Is it the lesbian sexual behavior alone?
If not, then, do the Grandmom/Mom twosomes deserve a license to SSM, too? Or two female straight friends raising children together? Maybe if they used "anonymous donors"?
There have been court cases, in which a pair of lesbians insisted that the father is indispensable to the well-being of the child he fathered (through sperm "donation") with one of the women. Does that mean the three deserve a license to SSM, too? Sexuality is irrelevant to SSM, anyway, according to you Kevin.
One Trackback
Social comments and analytics for this post...
This post was mentioned on Twitter by nomtweets: HUGE MARRIAGE VICTORY IN NEW YORK!!! http://nomblog.com/?p=616...