The Queen of England, in her first public event to mark her diamond jubilee, talks about the importance of the Church, and religious liberty.
"The concept of our established Church is occasionally misunderstood and, I believe, commonly under-appreciated. [...] Woven into the fabric of this country, the Church has helped to build a better society. More and more in active cooperation for the common good with those of other faiths.
The Editors of LifeSiteNews editorialize on the disturbing story we reported last week:
...In the past week we have witnessed the Supreme Court of Canada dismiss the appeal of a Quebec family for permission to exempt their child from that province’s controversial ethics and religious culture course, which critics say is “relativistic,” and teaches that all religious are equally valid. And we have heard a spokesperson for the Alberta education minister state that under the province’s new Education Act even homeschooling parents will no longer be allowed to teach their children traditional Christian sexual ethics.
... We who have witnessed the slow but steady drumbeat of Canada’s soft tyranny know by now that “tolerance” increasingly applies only to those who hold to the official state-sanctioned opinions, or who remain silent; “multiculturalism” is only deemed a virtue insofar as the cultures in question jettison any part of their heritage that might be deemed “offensive”; while “diversity” is mainly a celebration of superficial differences whilst demanding a deeper ideological similitude.
... By explicitly targeting homeschoolers, and/or by explicitly forbidding the right of parental opt-out, the Quebec, Ontario and Alberta governments have played their hand. They have made it clear that they will tolerate no dissent, and that, as the source and symbol of freedom, they fear the family. Perhaps this all sounds eerily familiar. It should, if you have studied any history. Every attempt to create a totalitarian regime begins with this attempt to eradicate, or at the very least mitigate the influence of the family: to tear the roof off the family home and to reach the fingers of the state inside.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 27, 2012
Contact: Anath Hartmann or Elizabeth Ray (703-683-5004)
“Mark Grisanti’s political career will be ended over same-sex marriage, and he might take Dean Skelos with him.” - Brian Brown, NOM president -
Washington, D.C.—The National Organization for Marriage’s New York PAC today endorsed Democratic Senate challenger Chuck Swanick over incumbent Republican Mark Grisanti, announced a $5,000 contribution to Swanick’s campaign. NOM also pledged to use all its energies to defeat Grisanti’s reelection bid to the Senate. Grisanti was one of four Republican Senators who betrayed voters by breaking his word about support for traditional marriage. Grisanti had previously solicited and accepted a $4,000 contribution from NOM.
“Mark Grisanti betrayed us and the people of his district when he broke his word and voted to redefine marriage last year,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “Four years ago Grisanti promised us he would defend marriage in the Senate, and we gave him a $4,000 contribution in response to his personal solicitation. Today we are endorsing Chuck Swanick, who truly will fight for marriage, and our $5,000 contribution to Mr. Swanick begins in earnest our quest to drive Grisanti from elected office.”
NOM-NY PAC joins the Conservative Party in endorsing Democrat Swanick, former chairman of the Erie County Legislature and a politician with a strong track record of supporting marriage in a district expected to be heavily Democratic. Many political observers believe that if Swanick defeats Grisanti, GOP Senate Leader Dean Skelos will lose his majority in the Senate.
“In response to those who say that electing Mr. Swanick could cost Dean Skelos his majority in the Senate we say, ‘we don’t care,’” Brown said. “Mark Grisanti’s political career will be ended over same-sex marriage, and he might take Dean Skelos with him. But that is Skelos’ own doing for having allowed the same-sex marriage bill to come to a vote in the Senate. We are committed to electing a pro-marriage majority, not protecting Republicans like Mark Grisanti who betray our core values.”
NOM said it intends to participate in legislative contests throughout the state as part of its $2 million commitment to make sure the voters of New York are able to vote to restore marriage in New York. In addition to Grisanti, the group plans to oppose Senators James Alesi, Roy McDonald, Stephen Saland and Shirley Huntley, and support those who voted against redefining marriage such as Ruben Diaz.
“We are on a crusade to reclaim the people’s right to vote on marriage. We will work with legislators of any party, like Chuck Swanick and the courageous Democratic Senator Ruben Diaz, who will stand for the truth of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. We’re committed to achieving a majority for marriage, not any particular partisan majority,” Brown concluded.
###
To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), [email protected], or Anath Hartmann,[email protected], at 703-683-5004.
Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).
A groundswell of support for the marriage amendment in North Carolina, via the "Vote for Marriage North Carolina" twitter feed:
Be sure to follow @NOMtweets for more marriage updates on twitter.
Voting to redefine marriage has consequences, as John Eligon of the New York Times City Room blog writes:
In the first political rebuke of one of the four Republican state senators who voted for same-sex marriage, the Erie County Conservative Party has endorsed a Democrat who is challengingMark J. Grisanti’s re-election bid.
The county party’s chairman, Ralph C. Lorigo, said Senator Grisanti had lost its trust after twice telling party executives, in 2008 and 2010, that he was not in favor of same-sex marriage, and then voting last year to legalize it.
“A lot of people felt betrayed by that commitment that he broke,” Mr. Lorigo said in an interview on Friday.
The party instead endorsed Charles M. Swanick, a former member of the Erie County Legislature who once changed his affiliation to Republican before returning to the Democrats. Mr. Lorigo said Mr. Swanick had told the county’s Conservatives that he was against same-sex marriage and abortion and in favor of fiscally conservative policies.
“Swanick is not a fall-in-line Democrat,” Mr. Lorigo said. “Swanick will vote his conscience. He’s made a commitment to us that on our issues, on our values, he will vote his conscience.”
... Mr. Grisanti’s seat is important in the battle for the Senate, where Republicans hold a three-seat majority. Groups opposed to same-sex marriage across the country have vowed to work to prevent the four Republicans who voted for it from winning re-election.
Bob McCarthy of The Buffalo News discusses Flip-Flopper Mark Grisanti's uphill chances for re-election, especially in light of him losing the Conservative Party endorsement because of his betrayal on marriage.
McCarthy also points out that Grisanti's winning margin in 2010 was the Conservative Party line endorsement:
Today on Public Discourse, Melanie Baker of Human Life International reports on recent events in her home state of Maryland, and what's at stake in the marriage debate:
The law cannot be divorced from reality, from nature. The moment this happens, law becomes arbitrary, the whim of the ruling power: it becomes tyranny.
...If Maryland’s Civil Marriage Protection Act becomes law, Pandora’s box will be opened. Once the law redefines marriage as the sexual union of any two consenting adults, further modifications will no longer appear alarming: two consenting adults might become two consenting persons (age therefore being eliminated and opening the door to disguised child abuse), or “two” might be deemed an arbitrary number (already there are lawsuits making their way through the courts), thus opening the door for polygamy and polyamory. When the law can be changed so flippantly, it does not inspire confidence in its ability to “protect.” What sort of “freedom” and “protection” will your children, and their children, enjoy in fifty or sixty years at this rate?
Finally, we need to take a good, hard look at the type of discourse surrounding this issue. Rational discourse seeks truth: it employs premises that flow together to yield a sound conclusion. The pathos-laden language that is being employed in this issue is simply not a valid response to rational discourse. Reason must be answered with reason, not emotion. There is an objective truth that continues to shine in the debate, and it is the simple fact of nature: the essential component that sexual difference brings to marriage. This is a fact of nature that can be clearly seen by reason, and it is here, on the plane of reason, that this Act needs to be assessed by law.
PolitickerNY on NOM's voter education efforts in the race to replace disgraced marriage flip-flopper Carl Kruger:
The National Organization for Marriage has taken its anti-gay marriage efforts down to a local level, purchasing advertisements in the special election to replace former State Senator Carl Kruger. A reader found one of these ads in the Orthodox Jewish publication Country Yossi Magazine.
“We Need A Senator Who Supports Torah Values,” the ad’s headline reads, before going after the Democratic candidate. “Lew Fidler voted to support same-gender ‘marriage,’ a forbidden act under the Torah.”
The ad’s featured photo is the Republican candidate, attorney David Storobin, standing in between Majority Leader Dean Skelos and State Senator Marty Golden, surrounded by Rabbis. Below is a photo of Mr. Storobin with Rabbi Yisroel Belsky, who theNew York Times once described as “prominent and influential.” According to the ad, Rabbi Belsky says it is forbidden “to provide public recognition or any kind of assistance to Lew Fidler … Rabbi Yisroel Belsky endorses David Storobin, who will support Torah Values.”
The National Organization for Marriage, a non-profit formed to pass Proposition 8 in California, is a constant player opposing efforts to legalize same-sex marriage around the country.
In the New Hampshire Union Leader:
...NOM President Brian Brown said New Hampshire is in the spotlight.
“I think the Legislature has a chance to right the tremendous wrong of forcing this thing through a few years ago,” Brown said.
Asked what the $250,000 will be used for, Brown said: “We'll expose those candidates who decided to undermine marriage.”
Plans include running independent TV ads as well as donating directly to legislators' campaigns this year.
“There are limits on what we can do with direct contributions, whereas with independent expenditures or issue ads, we can spend unlimited funds,” Brown said.
In 2010, NOM spent more than $1 million, including running ads critical of Republican gubernatorial candidate Bill Binnie.
NOM expects to spend about $15 million nationally this year, backed by donations from 60,000 supporters.
“We're a national group, but we've got thousands of supporters in New Hampshire, and we work hand in hand in New Hampshire,” Brown said.
Via the UK Telegraph, the former Archbishop of Canterbury on gay marriage.
"The government has no mandate from the people to redefine marriage. [...] This matter is so serious and important for our nation that we cannot allow this act of cultural and theological vandalism to happen.
The San Fransisco Chronicle Politics blog:
The Courage Campaign, the liberal California group that focuses on gay rights, among other issues, has an unusual new partner.
Leaders of the organization today announced they are teaming up with the gay-oriented smartphone app Grindr to try to convince the Democratic National Committee to help fund efforts for same-sex marriage equality during this year’s elections.
For those who are unfamiliar, here is a Chronicle story by comrade Meredith May on Grindr. It’s basically a hookup app for gay men that uses GPS to tell a user how far away — in feet — a potential paramour is located. Some people use it for benign socializing, but it is widely known as a way to meet someone for an immediate sexual encounter.
A news release from the Courage Campaign describes Grindr as “the world’s largest all-male social network.” Grindr says that more than 3 million people have downloaded the app.
As part of the effort, Grindr will send messages to people who have downloaded the app, asking them to sign a Courage Campaign petition that will be sent to the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
Adam Bink, director of online programs for the Courage Campaign, said the organization had no qualms about teaming up with the site, which calls its efforts “Grindr for Equality.”
More on this incident via the Los Angeles Times:
The spat between New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez and a Santa Fe hair stylist has gotten as ugly as – dare we say it? – a lousy haircut.
Earlier this week, KOB-TV ran an interview with Antonio Darden, who has cut the Republican governor’s hair a handful of times. Darden, who is gay, announced he would never do so again unless Martinez dropped her opposition to gay marriage.
The spectacle of the stylist's protest worked the Internet into, well, a lather. (The story lends itself to all sorts of goofy puns.)
So Martinez’s office spent Thursday fighting back.
A few months ago, Martinez needed a haircut on short notice, spokesman Greg Blair told The Times in an email. One of her staffers called about half a dozen hair stylists, including Darden, before finding one who could fit her in. At the time, Darden didn’t utter a word about gay marriage, Blair said.
That changed in recent weeks, when Darden left a voice mail that the governor’s office released to reporters Thursday. In it, Darden appears to have recently learned that Martinez opposed gay marriage, and said he was “upset and distraught” over her stance.
Then Darden mentioned a recent controversy in which a Democratic lawmaker referred to Martinez as “the Mexican” for whom a colleague had been “carrying water.” (The lawmaker later apologized.)
“I do believe the comment about ‘taking the Mexican some water’ was appropriate, since she wants to be attacking the gay people,” Darden said in the message. “You may pass this on and let her listen to it. And, Susana, if you are listening to it, shame on you.
“I am going to let all gay people know,” he continued, “stop serving you, stop providing you with what you need.”
It’s unclear what prompted Darden’s phone call.
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Same-sex marriage advocates claim they are just asking for their rights and want to be left alone...that there are no consequences to redefining marriage.
But tell that to the 14-year-old girl who is getting death threats because she dared to stand up and tell the Maryland legislature to vote no on same-sex marriage.
And if you think it's bad now—just wait until after the bill is signed into law.
This marriage supporter, this is what NOM stands up to and fights against every day.
HELP FIGHT BACK AGAINST THE TYRANNY OF "TOLERANCE"
BY MAKING A DONATION TO NOM TODAY!
14-year-old Sarah Crank testified before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee on January 31st. She urged the committee to give her "the best birthday present ever," by "vot[ing] no on gay marriage." She continued:
"I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it's fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don't want more kids to get confused about what's right and okay. I really don't want to grow up in a world where marriage isn't such a special thing anymore."
CLICK HERE to listen to Sarah's complete 60-second testimony.
She is brief, polite, and totally non-threatening. Just a happy, smart young girl.
But it obviously struck a chord because within minutes after her testimony was posted online, the comments quickly turned vicious and ugly.
As documented by TFP Student Action responses to her testimony included:
"And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its [sic] like to be harassed and bullied..."
"My god I hate people like this. Most (not all) Americans are [expletive] retards. If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That's a promise."
"Her parents should be exterminated."
"The [sic] is why abortion must stay legal—to prevent little bigots like this from being Born..."
"Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks."
"Her belief is hurting other people. I will attack her as much as I please."
"Parents like hers should be sterilized..."
"I'm gonna kill 'er!"
Can you imagine the outrage if such comments were directed at one of the children of same-sex couples testifying FOR the same-sex marriage bill? It would be all over the national news.
And yet this young girl and her family, heroically standing for what they know is right, are harassed, bullied and even threatened with their lives.
And no gay marriage group has said a word to denounce the threats.
Marriage Supporter, the fact is, radical same-sex marriage advocates are not about live-and-let-live.
AND IF WE DON'T TAKE ACTION RIGHT NOW TO STOP THIS, IT WILL BE A NEW AMERICA WE LIVE IN...one in which same-sex marriage becomes law and anyone who disagrees will be bullied into silence; people of faith will be muzzled.
It's not too late—but we must fight back now.
Click here to make your secure online donation right away. Some of you can give $1000, some $100, and some $25. Whatever the amount you can give, it is critical that you stand with us now and fight back against the radical forces that would see you silenced, threatened and harassed for simply believing that marriage is between a man and a woman. Just like they are trying to do to Sarah.
Thank you.
Marc Fisher in the Washington Post:
All of a sudden, they are bigots and haters — they who stood tall against discrimination, who marched and sat in, who knew better than most the pain of being told they were less than others.
They are black men, successful ministers, leaders of their community. But with Marylandpoised to become the eighth state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage, they hear people — politicians, activists, even members of their own congregations — telling them they are on the wrong side of history, and that’s not where they usually live.
... Nathaniel Thomas spent decades as an administrator in Howard University’s student affairs office, counseling young people not only about their course work but also about their personal quests for justice. He came to the ministry at the dawn of middle age, eager to help people, and especially fellow black men, discover in the word of God a path out of despair.
Over the past couple of years, as Thomas and dozens of other black clergymen in Prince George’s County have stood on the front line of the campaign against same-sex marriage, he has come to see the revolution at hand — in his view, a rebellion against religion and tradition — as an assault on the sustainability of the black family.
Which is why Thomas and his friend Reynold Carr, director of the Prince George’s Baptist Association, are gearing up for the next battle, a statewide ballot referendum in November to challenge the legalization of same-sex marriage, which the state House of Delegates approved last Friday.
... Thomas and the 77 other Baptist ministers in the association do not see same-sex marriage as a civil rights matter. Rather, they say, it is a question of Scripture, of whether a country based on Judeo-Christian principles will honor what’s written in Romans or decide to make secular decisions about what’s right. In Maryland, as in California and New York, opinion polls have shown that although a majority of white voters support recognition of same-sex marriage, a majority of blacks oppose it, often on religious grounds.
John P. Holdren, the top science adviser to President Barack Obama, wrote in a book he co-authored with population control advocates Paul and Anne Ehrlich that children from larger families have lower IQs.
The book—"Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions"—argued that the United States government had a “responsibility to halt the growth of the American population.”
“It surely is no accident that so many of the most successful individuals are first or only children,” wrote Holdren and the Ehrlichs, “nor that children of large families (particularly with more than four children), whatever their economic status, on the average perform less well in school and show lower I.Q. scores than their peers from small families.”
However, from the same article:
“The columnist Dr. Joyce Brothers answered a question sent into Good Housekeeping (February, 1981) by a mother of four asking if she should consider having another baby as follows: ‘Studies have shown that children reared in small families are brighter, more creative, and more vigorous than those from large families,’” the authors noted.
“However,” they said, “the belief that, for a particular set of parents in a modem country like the United States, a larger family will lead to children with lower IQs appears to be, simply, wrong. The belief that birth order effects on intelligence act directly to decrease the intelligence of children born later in a given family also appears to be, simply, wrong.”
“Do large U.S. families make low-IQ children? No,” said the authors. “Are birth order and intelligence related to one another within U.S. families? No.”
