A new poll shows Kelly Ayotte trouncing the openly pro-gay marriage Republican Bill Binnie by 33 points. Congrats to Kevin Smith and Cornerstone Action for their ad campaign, which Politico highlighted as "Binnie slammed on gay marriage, immigration."
Category Archives: States
NOM Election Watch: In NH, another Pro-Gay Marriage Republican Bites the Dust
Brian Brown interview with ABC Affiliate in Providence
Brian Brown tells ABC Channel 6 in Providence: “We need to make sure that the voters understand what’s at stake, and vote for candidates that support protecting marriage.”
Angry Pro-SSM Protestors Storm Podium in Providence
Most of the media ignored what actually happened, but this NBC video captures the truth.
Police stood by as protestors stormed the podium, surrounded Brian Brown and tried to prevent him from speaking. Only Brian's grace under fire, and the law-abiding, prayerful, and peaceful crowd prevented this from turning even more ugly.
Gay Married Couples Redefine Fidelity, Too
Why stop at the word marriage? Other words can be redefined as well. Take "monogamy"and "fidelity." They call them "San Francisco relationships," as the SF Chronicle is proudly reporting on the release of a new study of over 500 couples. The study, by Colleen Hoff, shows that the majority of gay couples are not monogamous and that "planned infidelity" was good for their relationships -- including marital ones, according to the Chronicle.
The Chronicle reports on a second study by an Oakland gay couple Lanz Lowen and Blake Spears who interviewed 86 couples with at least eight years together in open relationships:
Three out of 4 people described non-monogamy as a positive thing, and said it gave them a sexual outlet without having to lie. Participants reported it helped relationships survive by providing honest options and minimizing deceit, tension and resentment. Some "played" independently, others as a threesome, and about 80 percent agreed to tell all or some details of their encounters, the rest preferring a "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Sexual fidelity, these "San Francisco" relationships assert is not necessary in marriage. "At least half those interviewed were married, having taken their vows during one of the two brief times when it was legally sanctioned in the city or the state.
"It's a redefinition of marriage," Spears said.
Yes it is.
Union-Leader welcomes NOM to Manchester with more Lynch Coverage
Governor Lynch’s address to Tim Gill’s Political OutGiving conference this spring is creating quite a stir in New Hampshire – just in time for the Summer for Marriage Tour coming to Manchester.
Lynch lauded by national gay rights advocates
Manchester Union-Leader, July 13, 2010
Staff Report
CONCORD —Gov. John Lynch’s support for a same-sex marriage law in New Hampshire earned him a featured position at a recent private meeting of national leaders and donors in the gay community.
The Washington Blade has reported that Lynch was among four governors and several other elected officials who attended “a closed-door conference of wealthy LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) political donors” in mid-May in Chicago. The conference was known as “Political OutGiving,” described by the Blade as “a highly confidential event for a network of more than 200 big-stakes LGBT contributors to political campaigns.”
. . .
The conservative National Organization for Marriage earlier this year spent about $200,000 on television ads claiming that “Lynch lied” on several issues, including samesex marriage, by signing the bill into law after saying in a 2006 gubernatorial debate that “I do not support gay marriage.”
Lynch said in April he was “disgusted” with the ad and accused the out-of-state group of “meddling.” The “LynchLeads” site and a related television ad were created in response.
NOM to be in Manchester
NOM will be in Manchester on Thursday as part of a “Summer for Marriage: One Man-One Woman Tour” rally at City Hall Plaza, presumably to continue to criticize Lynch.
According to a media advisory, “The tour covers many of the key battleground states in the ongoing fight to protect and preserve marriage as one man and one woman.”
The New Hampshire-based self-described “pro-family” Cornerstone Action, the political arm of Cornerstone Policy Research, e-mailed supporters yesterday criticizing Lynch’s attendance at the gay leaders meeting and asking for donations to “keep the liberals away.”
It also asks supporters to call Lynch’s office “and tell him how hypocritical it is for him to denounce the involvement of NOM in New Hampshire one month, only to fly out to Chicago one month later to meet with the nation’s wealthiest gay donors!”
The Cornerstone group also filed a right-to-know request with the governor’s office asking for “all correspondence, invitations and travel records between Lynch and his staff related to his meeting in Chicago with Tim Gill.”
Group executive director Kevin Smith said Lynch “has officially sold out to the radical gay lobby” by attending the meeting “presumably to beg for money for his fledgling campaign.” . . .
Is Obama a Bigot or Just a Liar?
Prof. Robert George, who is a founding Chairman of NOM's board, asks a great question today on National Review Online: “Obama on Marriage: Bigot or Liar?”
Like Sherlock Holmes’s dog that didn’t bark in the night, liberals have been strangely silent about Obama’s comments on marriage.
It has become a matter of orthodoxy among progressives that those who believe that marriage is properly defined as the union of one man and one woman are guilty of bigotry.
There is a problem, however: Barack Obama has assured voters that he believes marriage to be the union of one man and one woman — not two men, two women, or some combination of more than two people. As Donald Trump rather pointedly noted after the Miss U.S.A. pageant, President Obama’s position on the definition of marriage is identical to the position stated by California beauty queen Carrie Prejean.
So what do progressives think? Has the president embraced bigotry? Or has he lied to the American people about his position on what marriage is and how it should be defined?"
Religious Liberty Watch
Gay marriage advocate (and--like Ted Olson, the lawyer opposing Prop 8--a Federalist Society member) and law professor Dale Carpenter recently said he was advising a Minnesota gay rights group on how they could lawfully exclude a street preacher from handing out literature against homosexuality at a large gay pride even in a public park that 200,000 folks will attend.
Prof. Carpenter argues that the New York City St. Patrick’s Day Parade, which had a right to exclude pro-gay rights groups from marching, is the relevant paradigm. A federal judge just said "no go guys." If the First Amendment means anything it means you can speak, preach, and hand out literature in a public park. Nobody is going to think that the gay rights groups authorized his speech. "As a festival attendee in a public forum, Johnson is entitled to speak and hand out literature, quintessential activities protected by the First Amendment, so long as he remains undisruptive," Judge Tunheim wrote in the 19 page ruling, according to the WSJ.
A win for the First Amendment. But look how many establishment and "conservative" gay rights figures now believe the First Amendment means: we get to restrict your rights to disagree?
Supreme Court Rules Against Christian Legal Society in California (Sort of)
The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that Hastings College of Law could require that all student groups be open to any student, regardless of that student's views. Theoretically Christian groups under this "all comers" policy would have to accept not only gay students, but atheists and Buddhists as members and officers of their groups, and vice versa. Gay rights groups would have to accept Prop 8 supporters as full voting members, too. But the Court left open the possibility that Hastings applied the policy in a discriminatory manner, against some groups but not others, as the facts of the case strongly suggest. Bottom line: Case continues. Most media will report this as a big win for Hastings. But see: http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/230398/i-cls-v-martinez-i-my-first-quick-take/david-french
WaPo's Favorite New Republican
What does it take to get the WaPo to call you a "rising star" in the GOP and instant "Veepstakes" material in 2012? Be a pro-gay marriage, pro-choice Republican, of course.
Like Charlie Baker, running for governor of Massachusetts on the GOP ticket. WaPo, swooning, is pretending Baker is following the Scott Brown formula. But Sen. Brown was pro-marriage amendment and far more openly prolife than his opponent. (He describes himself as pro-choice but opposes partial birth abortion and federal funding; He was endorsed by the Susan B. Anthony List as well as NOM.) Baker did manage to sum up the energy to pledge to veto the so-called "bathroom bill" which adds gender identity to Massachusetts discrimination law--similar language in Maine this year lead the Maine Human Rights Campaign to propose integrating bathrooms and locker rooms in public schools and universities.
Baker is running just seven points behind an unpopular state governor in latest polls. Will be interesting to see how this plays out in Massachusetts, but don't hold your breath for anyone named Baker on the ticket in 2012.
Charlie Baker, best of luck, but to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, Scott Brown is a friend of ours, and you are no Scott Brown.
Planned Parenthood St. Louis Insemination Services
Insemination Services? Who knew? Lovely photo of two women headlined "They Just Found Out They Were Expecting Finally"

Because nothing causes infertility like attempting to have a child with another woman?
