February 3, 2010 – 2:29 pm

CONTACT: Tara DiJulio, 202-224-5444, Washington DC 20510
For Release FEBRUARY 2, 2010
BENNETT DEFENDS TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE IN NATION'S CAPITAL
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) introduced legislation today that would guarantee residents of Washington, D.C. the right to vote and decide whether same-sex marriage licenses should be issued in the nation's capital rather than allowing the decision to be made by the D.C. city council. Read More »
February 2, 2010 – 10:10 am

Dear Friends of Marriage,
Breaking news from Washington . . . .
9 U.S. Senators have agreed to co-sponsor a bill that would guarantee the right of DC residents to vote on same-sex marriage.The bill will be introduced shortly and will complement a similar bill introduced in the House in January. The House bill is HR4430, and I'll keep you posted when the Senate Bill is introduced and assigned a number. Read More »
February 1, 2010 – 5:48 pm
Marriage Watch / Maggie Gallagher
Heather McDonald has just published a very thoughtful and brave piece on National Review online.
It begins this way:
An image from a TV ad for gay marriage, reproduced in the January18 New Yorker, provides a Rorschach test for reactions to America'songoing revolution in family structure. Two men in black suits stand shoulder-to-shoulder in a group of people, looking into each other'seyes. In their arms are two newborns in white baby clothes and blankets. Though it's not immediately apparent from the photo, the men are at a baptism for their infants. The ad, still being test-marketed, is called "Family Values," and is intended to emphasize the "conventionality of gay couples," explains The New Yorker.
If your reaction to the image is: "Where's the mother(s)?" you may not yet be fully on board the "conventionality" bandwagon. If your reaction to the foregoing question, however, is: "Why does it matter?" then you are keeping pace with the revolution. "Why does it matter?" may ultimately prove the more appropriate response, but no one should pretend that it represents anything other than a radical revision of the traditional relationship between parents and children - one whose consequences no one can predict.