March 21, 2012 – 10:00 am
The UK Sun's associate political editor David Wooding reports:
Britain could end up with two Queens on the throne if gay marriage becomes law, an MP warned last night.
Tory Peter Bone claimed the new legislation would throw the monarchy into crisis.
He said it would mean a lesbian Queen having a Queen consort or a gay King having a King consort.
Mr Bone has demanded an emergency summit of Commonwealth leaders to discuss the planned changes.
He said: "They seem to be rushing this through without thinking of the broader implications."
...Mr Bone believes this would make it impossible for the monarch to continue as supreme governor of the Church of England.
And a gay monarch who conceived a child either by sperm donor or surrogate would raise wider questions, he warns.
The donor would have a right to a peerage and could gain regal rights.
Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr. in TownHall:
For the last several weeks, I have been discussing the current battle over the definition of marriage with friends and parishioners. I have been amazed by a new collaboration between former political rivals in all of our urban, minority communities. The largely white religious right is literally becoming a melting pot of diversity as far as this marriage issue is concerned. Huge numbers of blacks and Hispanics of faith are starting to feel that there is a “not so subtle” media attack on the nation’s most fundamental institutions. They realize that many movies and TV sitcoms have gone out of their way to express support of “so called” gay rights.
...There is a huge amendment campaign going on in Maryland right now – to develop their version of proposition 8. As I have already stated the national media campaign is now coming to roost in Maryland. Liberal talking heads project that blacks like me should identify with gay people because they are fighting the same battle for Civil Rights that we did. The overwhelming majority of black Americans find this argument both offensive and ridiculous.
... The five states that will pursue constitutional amendments, defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, will likely influence the fate of the institution of marriage nationally. [...] I also pray that you will support the cause with your dollars and volunteer service.
Jonathan Baker, director of NOM's Corporate Fairness Project, is interviewed in this Stateline article about Washington State companies injecting themselves in the marriage debate:
"... according to the [SSM] bill’s sponsor, Democratic state Senator Ed Murray, there was nothing more crucial to the legalization of gay marriage than support from high-profile businesses such as Nike and Microsoft. "It's how we got moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats to vote for this,” he says.
... gay rights activists have built aggressively from their original base of industry support. Some gay rights groups have hired lobbyists whose sole focus is reaching out to business leaders.
Those efforts culminated in more than 100 businesses publicly supporting gay marriage in Washington State before the bill’s passage in February, from heavy-hitting corporations such as Starbucks, Google and Alcoa to mom and pop shops scattered around the state. Small business support was key to turning individual legislators, who “know their local businesses,” Murray says.
... the National Organization for Marriage [has] taken notice of this trend. In response they have launched their own effort, called the Corporate Fairness Project, to pressure businesses to stay neutral in the debate. “I don’t believe that you can work for a company that has taken a position on this and feel that both sides are well represented,” says Jonathan Baker, director of the Corporate Fairness Project. “Both sides should be able to go to work and feel comfortable. By a company taking a corporate position on the matter, they are automatically going to make one side or the other feel a little less comfortable about it.”
Baker’s group is also working to ensure that companies don’t discriminate against employees because they oppose gay marriage, which Baker insists is happening with some regularity. Bank of America and Cisco came under fire from the National Organization for Marriage for terminating their relationships with leadership consultant Frank Turek because of his vocal opposition to gay marriage. They both subsequently reinstated him as an eligible vendor in good standing. "As we see more and more companies jumping into the marriage debate,” Baker says, “we think it's certainly a risk that could grow."
NOM's efforts on behalf of David Storobin are mentioned:
In various parts of New York State stretching from Brooklyn to Buffalo, voters in vacant legislative districts will elect new representatives to Albany today.
The marquee race is the special election to replace former State Senator Carl Kruger. Mr. Kruger, Democrat who represented southeastern Brooklyn, resigned when he pleaded guilty to federal corruption charges last December.
Advertisements supporting and opposing Democratic Lew Fidler and Republican David Storobin have been flooding out in a last ditch effort to affect the vote.
Most of the latest advertisements appear to mirror previously reported ones. However, some eagle-eyed readers pointed The Politicker to several new ads, including an email blast from the National Organization for Marriage supporting Mr. Storobin and an ad from the same organization calling out former Mayor Ed Koch for his support of Mr. Fidler while touting Mr. Storobin’s rabbincal support. Another ad from a group called “Torah Defense Values, INC.”, was sent out in an email blast with a similar message against Councilman David Greenfield.
Mr. Fidler also has an ad in the Orthodox Jewish newspaper Hamodia, showing off his own rabbinical support.
New Hampshire Republican State Senator Fenton Groen in the Concord Monitor argues that Democratic supporters of gay marriage were "turned out of office" in 2010 after voting to redefine marriage the year before:
In the next few weeks the New Hampshire House and Senate will debate and vote on HB 437, the bill that will restore the traditional definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
...Now is the time to keep our promise to restore traditional marriage. I believe that is what citizens expect from those they elect to represent them - to keep the promises they made in their campaigns.
Let's talk about what the people of New Hampshire said about marriage with their votes in the 2010 election.
The House passed gay marriage by a thin 186-179 margin. So what happened to those 186 representatives who voted for same-sex marriage? Nearly two-thirds of them, 122 of the 186, were not re-elected...
... Twenty-five Democrats voted against gay marriage in 2008. Nearly 60 percent of them won re-election, compared to only 34 percent of those who voted in favor of gay marriage. It is distinctly possible that the outcome of the 2010 election would have been substantially different if more of Democrats had voted against same sex-marriage!
And how did the voters treat the 23 Democrats who were conspicuously absent for the vote on same-sex marriage? Not very well! Fourteen of them, more than 60 percent, were not re-elected.
What happened in the Senate? Same-sex marriage was passed on a 13-11 vote. Thirteen Democrats voted for same-sex marriage. Nine of them, a whopping 69 percent, were not re-elected! One Democrat senator voted against gay marriage. He was re-elected. In fact, every senator who voted against gay marriage and ran for re-election was re-elected!
My opponent and I both took principled stands on opposite sides of the marriage issue. The citizens of my district sent me to Concord to do what I said I would do. I will do all I can to keep my word to the voters of Senate District 6 and passionately support the restoration of traditional marriage.
I believe the 2010 election results made it pretty clear that is what the majority of voters want us to do.
Phyllis Woods, Republican National Commiteewoman for New Hampshire (Dover) writes in Foster's Daily Democrat:
In 2009, however, the Democratic-controlled legislature followed well-funded social activists from New York and Washington, D.C. down the rabbit hole of a radical agenda aimed at making gay marriage the law of the land in as many states as possible.
Despite an economic crisis that crippled New Hampshire like no other since the Great Depression, these social activists successfully persuaded lawmakers to take up a gay marriage law for which there was little appetite — outside a small cadre of liberal democrats — before even bothering to pass a state budget.
Three years later, the same gay marriage lobby that ignored the state's economic needs to enact a gay marriage law it bought and paid for is now using the economy as an excuse to protect it.
... These outside social activists, and wealthy activist donors prompted democrats to fast track gay marriage in the House and Senate when their party took control of the legislature.
In response, a host of bright, strong conservatives campaigned in 2010 for the office of State Representative on a promise to respect the true will of the people by fighting to restore traditional marriage. Now is the time for New Hampshire voters to support these courageous representatives, who are doing exactly as they promised.
It is time for conservatives to undo the damage caused by a radical wing of liberal social activists, and by lawmakers who put activist gay marriage donors before the people they serve.
Republicans in the legislature have one, last opportunity to stand up for the people of New Hampshire against the powerful gay marriage lobby. They must not let down the families of New Hampshire.
The UK Christian Institute:
The widow of a former deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats has resigned from the party after almost 50 years because of its plans to redefine marriage.
In a letter printed in a Scottish national newspaper last week, Lady Joan Johnston said gay marriage was the ‘straw that has finally broken the camel’s back’. She had been a Lib Dem member since 1964.
She made the decision following a recent email from Nick Clegg, in which he claimed one of the party’s achievements will be the first homosexual marriage before 2015.
... Lady Johnston said: “I also take strong exception to the fact that if the Party advocates the redefining of “marriage” in this way, it follows that this will be promoted in schools as being on the same footing as traditional marriage between a man and a woman.”
She argued that one of the purposes of marriage as the union between a man and a woman is the procreation of children.
Dear Marriage Supporter,
Tomorrow the New Hampshire legislature will vote on a bill to repeal same-sex marriage.
Have your representatives heard from you this week?
Our opponents know what is at stake, and they're pulling out all the stops. New Hampshire is poised to be the first state legislature to repeal same-sex marriage. We have a chance to make history!
Two years ago, out-of-state gay millionaires flooded the state with money to buy same-sex marriage. Then the people of New Hampshire spoke, taking back their state and electing a pro-marriage majority to the state legislature.
It's time to speak once again!
Tomorrow morning, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on HB 437, the bill to repeal same-sex marriage. It is CRITICAL that your representatives hear from you this week.
Here's what I need you to do:
- Click here to look up the phone number for your representative. Same-sex marriage activists have been phone banking and your representatives need to hear from their own constituents. Let your representatives know that you stand for marriage, and that you sent them to Concord for a purpose—to take back New Hampshire from out-of-state money and special interests. Phone calls are especially critical in these final days before the vote. (Please call the district office number to reach your state representatives.)
- Click here to send an email to your representatives today! Many offices are keeping track of the emails they receive for and against the bill—make sure your legislators know where you stand today!
- Come to Concord tomorrow morning! Cornerstone Action is organizing a pro-marriage rally tomorrow at 8AM. Click here for directions.
It's crunch time! Please step up and do whatever you can for marriage today!
If the numbers are true there could be more of a "demand" for polygamous marriage than gay marriage:
An “unprecedented” number of Muslim women are inquiring about polygamy, the Islamic Sharia Council in Britain has said.
Newspaper reports suggest that thousands of Muslim women in Britain are entering polygamous relationships.
The news comes as the Westminster Government launched a consultation on whether marriage should be redefined.
British Muslim men reportedly bring about 12,000 brides to Britain each year, leaving UK-born Muslim females struggling to find a husband.
Although polygamy is illegal in Britain, many Muslim communities believe it is legitimate for a man to have up to four wives.
Under UK law only one marriage is legal, but men can have “nikah” religious ceremonies. -- The UK Christian Institute
March 20, 2012 – 12:00 pm
As further sign of how previous arguments for redefining marriage have fallen flat, a left-leaning group that claims to be centrist is trying to circulate a new set of talking points to members of Congress hoping to coach and coax them into coming out in favor of same-sex marriage:
Third Way, an influential centrist Democratic group, on Thursday provided a new memo to all House and Senate lawmakers' offices that gives advice on how to change positions on the issue without being called a dreaded "flip-flopper." It outlines three rules that will help ensure a smoother transition in support of marriage equality: share a personal story about the people in your life who have influenced your position, emphasize that marriage is about a commitment instead of rights, and allow that other people's views may be "changing at a slower pace" but that they, too, could come around soon. -- The Huffington Post
The last two tips in the document [PDF] we find revealing:
Don’t say “gay marriage” or even “same-sex marriage.” These terms can reinforce the notion that gay couples are seeking a different kind of marriage, rather than simply trying to join the tradition that is already a fundamental building block of our society. Terms like “marriage for gay couples,” “allowing gay couples to marry,” or giving gay couples “the freedom to marry” are all good options—and all avoid using an adjective modifying the word marriage.
Exercise caution in explicitly comparing marriage and our country’s journey on this issue to the civil rights movement, or saying that not allowing gay couples to marry is comparable to anti-miscegenation laws. This direct comparison can hurt more than it helps, by causing people to think about the differences between the experiences of African Americans and LGBT people, not the similarities.
March 20, 2012 – 11:00 am
Reuters:
...Preserve Marriage Washington, a coalition that opposes gay marriage, aims to collect 120,577 signatures by June 6 to place a ballot measure before voters in November seeking to repeal Washington's law, the group said.
If the group reaches that number of valid signatures by the deadline, the state's same-sex marriage law would be put on hold until after the matter is decided by voters in November.
Learn more at www.PreserveMarriageWashington.com.
March 20, 2012 – 10:00 am
City & State's The Notebook blog:
Four Republican senators voted for the gay marriage bill last year: Jim Alessi, Mark Grisanti, Steve Saland and Roy McDonald.
And wealthy former Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino says he has lined up Republican challengers to primary three of them, challengers he would be expected to strongly support financially.
... In an interview at the Republican state convention in Rochester, Paladino said he has challengers lined up for Alessi, Grisanti and Saland — though the Buffalo millionaire declined to name those people at this point, saying the campaigns themselves would make the decisions about campaign announcements. The fourth senator, McDonald, appeared likely to faced a primary challenge from Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin, but the assemblyman recently decided to take a pass.
... For a whole host of reasons, Paladino is also very, very unhappy with Republican Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, and is actively trying to unseat him as Republican leader.
