NOM BLOG

Monthly Archives: May 2012

AP: North Carolina a Political Headache for Democrats (Because of Marriage)

The Associated Press:

Once a bright spot for President Barack Obama, North Carolina is now more like a political migraine less than four months before Democrats open the party's national convention in Charlotte.

... When Democrats announced the choice in February 2011, they said selecting the Southern city signaled Obama's intent to fight hard for the conservative-leaning state like he did in 2008. They also highlighted the economic transformation in the state and in Charlotte - from tobacco, textiles and furniture-making to research, energy and banking. Party leaders noted the state's strong political leadership and expressed hope that a Perdue re-election bid would get a boost from the attention that would be lavished on the convention.

Now traditional Democratic Party groups are threatening huge protests in part because they're deeply uncomfortable that the convention is being held in one of the least union-friendly states. And thousands of Democrats across the country are calling for the convention to be relocated because of the gay-marriage vote.

... There's also the fired-up Republican base that turned out Tuesday to approve the constitutional ban on gay marriage. The vote prompted more than 28,000 people to sign an online petition - by the New York-based Gay Marriage USA - to move the convention from Charlotte. Twitter also was flooded with similar sentiment from angry supporters of same-sex marriage. Obama stated his support for gay marriage a day after the vote.

Democrats want to include gay marriage in the platform to be adopted at the convention. That could create controversy at a gathering that's intended to promote party unity by drawing attention to a divisive social issue when the economy remains the most pressing concern.

Video: Pro-SSM Protestors Gather Outside MA Catholic Church

The local CBS affiliate with an update on the story we mentioned earlier this week:

AP: Obama Stance Adds Fuel in Marriage Battlegrounds

NOM's Political Director Frank Schubert on the ongoing political fall-out from Obama's marriage flip flop:

"...Frank Schubert, political director for the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes gay marriage, said Obama's opinion will continue to have ramifications as November's elections close in, particularly for Democrats who don't share his view.

"I think he's scrambled the omelet quite a bit here and made it complicated for Democrats, in swing states in particular, because it puts them in position of having to, sometimes publicly, distance themselves from the president," he said." -- AP

NY GOP Primary Candidate Goes After Sen. Gillibrand for Abandoning Marriage

George Maragos, who is running in the New York GOP primary to challenge Sen. Gillibrand, attempts to distinguish himself from the other candidates by making his support of marriage clear:

U.S. Senate Candidate George Maragos: All Conservatives and Republicans should be alarmed with Ms. Long's recent statement in which she curiously stops short of defending traditional marriage. Ms Long simply states that "the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) upholds the constitutional premise that marriage is a state issue, allowing individual states to adopt laws {they} want." In other words she agrees with the State of New York same-sex law. Perhaps she is "evolving" as Senator Gillibrand and President Obama have in support of gay marriage?

I support DOMA, but I believe that the New York same-sex law should be repealed to respect the religious beliefs of millions of New Yorkers regarding traditional marriage. -- Maragos for New York

NY Senator Saland Calls Traditional Marriage Position "Extreme"

DiCarlo for New York Senate:

Last night State Senate candidate Neil Di Carlo overcame the efforts of the Dutchess / Putnam County Republican nominating machine which tried to deny a candidate choice to delegates assembled in a ballroom of the Poughkeepsie Grand Hotel.

In a surprising forced vote following a severe three minute speaking restriction, Di Carlo, virtually unknown to most everyone in the ballroom, carried almost 25% of the vote, an unheard of victory in the tightly controlled political machine environment.

After losing the machine effort to deny exposure of the 250 plus Republicans to Di Carlo's short speech, 32 year incumbent Saland angrily characterized Di Carlo's support of traditional marriage as belonging to an "extreme" political party. Taking a page from the Obama White House, the avowedly left-progressive Saland sought to demonize Di Carlo for referring to Saland's traitorous vote for homosexual 'marriage' and refusal to support a referendum allowing voters to choose on the issue.

The New Rebels for Marriage! NOM Marriage News

NOM National Newsletter

Dear Marriage Supporter,

I flew to Europe this week to spread the good news: marriage is a winning issue!

I was in London.

The Law Society had banned the conference. So the organizers switched the venue to the Queen Elizabeth II Center, which is actually owned by the government.

The managers of the QE2 Center waited until the night before the event to ban the conference against gay marriage—again.

We assembled at a London hotel instead.

Here's what I told the crowd:

"I'm an American—so I'm a bit of a rebel. You guys have accomplished something amazing here. Six months ago you gave yourselves only a ten percent shot of derailing David Cameron's gay marriage bandwagon. Now it's a fifty-fifty battle, a result of a genuine rebellion of the people against the elites who looked at polls and were going to throw in the towel."

And I told them, that's exactly what has happened in the U.S., over and over again. Political elites try to shut down the debate, they tell us it's impossible to win. Then we win, over and over again.

Phillip Blond is an important public intellectual in Great Britain. He's behind David Cameron's emphasis on localism and the true diversity it encourages. He's not behind the Prime Minister's absurdly counterproductive embrace of gay marriage.

He's actually taken the position that gay marriage is "homophobic" for forcing gay people out of authentic diversity into an institution designed by and for opposite sex couples. Domestic partnerships, he says, offer homosexual people a chance to develop their own diverse cultural norms.

Philip Blond showed up at the conference, and sat there tweeting a response to all those who claimed he was hanging out with bigots, saying more or less 'I haven't heard anything homophobic, and the way to get me to show up at something is to try to ban it.'

(For some of his actual tweets, the liberal press in the U.K. reports them here.)

We got a chance to hang out together afterwards.

For the flavor of Phillip Blond, take a look at this video from the nomblog:

Philip Blond is not the only rebel for marriage!

Brendan O'Neil used to publish a Marxist magazine. He now edits his own progressive online journal Spiked.

After the amazing victory for marriage in North Carolina, he published an essay in The Telegraph chronicling the open hatred and insults directed at an entire state by elites:

The bile being spat at the people of North Carolina exposes the ugly elitism of the gay-marriage lobby.

This orgy of bile, from the mainstream branding of North Carolina's voters as 'ignorant' to the peripheral demands that they do the world a favour and kill themselves, shows what is behind the gay-marriage campaign. This is not about rights and equality, or love and happiness. Rather, gay marriage has become a tool through which the right-minded sections of society express their moral superiority over the dumb, the brainwashed, the insufficiently cosmopolitan, the churchgoing. Gay marriage has become a kind of weapon, wielded by the right-on to demonstrate that they are better—that is, less brainwashed and more caring—than your average redneck or country black. Supporting gay marriage has become a kind of cultural signifier, a way of distinguishing oneself from the ignorant throng.

Given all this, it is possible that the voters of North Carolina were not only voting against gay marriage, but were also sticking two fingers up at the sneering cultural elite which has been hectoring them for weeks to do "the right thing" and embrace "liberal values." In the intensively divided America of 2012, being against gay marriage can now be seen almost as an act of political rebellion, against a faraway elite which fears and loathes anyone who is not like them.

A New York progressive named Sean Collins was inspired (I suspect in part by Brendan's courage) to rebel and come out as another progressive opponent of gay marriage:

In this environment, those who disagree with, or have questions about, gay marriage will feel tremendous pressure to start conforming. Opposing gay marriage has become a view that "dare not speak its name". Following Obama, expect more public figures to be called upon to recant and say 'I now believe'.

Well, count me out. I will not join the cultural elite's bandwagon, a bandwagon that runs on self-flattery and the demonisation of 'backward' voters. Critics of the same-sex marriage campaign are here, and we're not all bible-thumping Christians—get used to it.

Sean Collins' piece is worth reading, both for its own sake and as a cultural signifier of its own: this thing called gay marriage is not anywhere near inevitable!

At some point even the Manhattan liberals are going to start questioning a movement that seeks to brand the majority of the black and the white working class as "bigots."

What is left of progressivism as a movement of the working classes against the elites? What is left but open disdain for the views and values of the people whose interests progressives claim to champion?

An Associated Press reporter this week rebelled against the directive that all portrayals of people who oppose gay marriage "MUST" be unsympathetic.

(I know a little about this informal press rule. When a Washington Post lifestyle columnist published a personally humane profile of me a few years back, the avalanche of hatred directed against her for finding me personally likable was amazing! She had to come out, through the WaPo ombudsman, as a personally pro-gay marriage bisexual to survive!).

So the AP profiles John Tolo, a St. Paul missionary, whose ministry has bought and is renovating an abandoned house to create a safe space for teens.

From his own life, ("recalling his own drug use and multiple sexual relationships after his parents divorced") and his work with the poor in St. Paul, Tolo worries about "this fundamental breakdown of having a healthy father role model and a healthy mother role model." He says that "there's this major identity issue where men are just missing."

Tolo supports some kind of legal recognition for same-sex couples, but told the AP that marriage is a sacred template for raising and caring for children as God intended. Broadening marriage risks undermining that, while infringing on the rights of Christians to define their own institutions.

"It's almost like the government wants to come and rewrite the Bible and, to me, that's a position that I don't think the government should take," Tolo said.

Another opponent of gay marriage, April Brown of Lewisville, Texas, told the AP "I was evolving, definitely, just like the president," said Brown, the mother of four. But not in the same direction!

Until a few years ago, Brown said she was heading toward acceptance of the idea of civil unions for gay couples. But she was troubled after reading about a lawsuit filed by a gay man against the eHarmony dating site, demanding it provide matchmaking for gays and lesbians. That struck a chord because Brown knew two straight couples who had met through eHarmony and gotten married. While same-sex couples might argue they had a right to be together, what gave gays or lesbians the right, she wondered, to demand a private business change its ways to suit them?...

"I just began kind of questioning, what do they really want?" she said.

Brown said she doesn't want to tell people they can't be together. But the word "marriage" means something more, the joining of a man and a woman that is critical for society to sustain itself. "That's when it goes from a right to a privilege," she said.

You and I know that millions of Americans are like Mrs. Brown and Mr. Tolo: decent, loving, law abiding people who don't hate anyone but who do want to stand up for what's right—in our eyes, and more importantly in the eyes of God.

The rebellion continues!

A young teen in North Carolina rebelled this week against the hatred and invective directed at her and her whole state for standing up for marriage:

But for me the personally most moving "rebellion" is not a rebellion at all, it's a demonstration of a profound faithfulness to the Christian tradition.

Since President Obama's announcement that gay marriage is a right, we've seen an extraordinary outpouring of faithfulness and leadership from the black Church.

Two quick examples:

Here's a roundup from the local press of black pastors speaking out and speaking up, in defense of core Christian teachings.

The Orlando Sentinel, among other news outlets, reveals the reality: Even More Black Pastors Speak Out Against Obama's Marriage Switch

"I'm opposed to same-sex marriage. I don't find any support for it in the Bible," said the Rev. Willie Barnes, pastor of Macedonia Missionary Baptist Church in Eatonville. "I wish he had never made that statement."

And watch this TV coverage of a historic press conference held by civil rights leaders who marched with Rev. Martin Luther King, along with major bishops of the Church of God in Christ

Rev. Bill Owens, who consults with NOM as a liaison to the black churches, organized the effort as he is organizing 100000signatures4marriage.com among African-American Christians.

Most importantly, I want to thank Bishop Blake and the Church of God in Christ for publicly speaking out in defense of marriage, reaffirming their commitment to core Christian principles, after the media coverage of President Obama's announcement.

Let me share with you this important statement in its entirety because I don't think you will read it elsewhere. From Charisma News, the official publication of COGIC:

The president's position regarding "same-sex marriage" has set off a "firestorm," unlike any other debate in our civil society, perhaps, since the civil rights unrest of the mid-20th century.

The advocacy for same-sex marriage, while in conflict with our nation's long-standing moral posture, has indeed created opportunity for the church to communicate our unequivocal position about God's design and foundation for humanity, the biblical mandate for heterosexuality through the bonds of matrimony and the centuries-old understanding of the only acceptable means of procreation, habitation and the establishment of the family. The president suggests same-sex relationships and male-female relationships committed to by oath before God and/or witnesses, where formal documents are signed before a civil or ecclesiastical figure. It further implies that both are equally good and valuable. In addition to this, it suggests that both equally contribute to the good and advancement of a society. From a fundamental view of Scripture, the same word should not be used to describe both same-sex and heterosexual relationships.

Fundamentally, traditionally and historically, marriage has functioned to unite a man and women together in facing the challenges of life, to sanctify sexual involvement, to authorize the conception of children, provide an environment for the protection and development of offspring and to strengthen and sustain the family unit.

Historically, the sexual coming together of husband and wife produces children who are the fruit of both their bodies and are united by blood to their brothers and sisters. This coming together of husband and wife is the means by which the world has been populated, and the human race sustained.

A husband, wife and children are the bedrock of a society which also mirrors the universal church as a microcosm, or domestic church, out of which God's values are modeled, nurtured and disciplined. This divinely inspired family framework, pronounced in Old and New Testament Scripture, is without compromise. To tamper with the foundation is to disrupt the order God intended. This order is the intended structure by which all humanity is expected to govern their lives.

The human body is designed by God as male and female to anatomically accommodate individuals of the opposite sex in the conception, bearing and nurture of children; the human body is unquestionably designed to accommodate individuals of the opposite sex, not of the same sex.

The Holy Bible, which is the authoritative Word of God, clearly prohibits sexual relations between members of the same sex. Though it does not isolate intercourse between individuals of the same sex as the only sin, it designates this and a series of other activities as sinful behavior from which the Christian is to abstain. 1 Cor. 6:9-11 (NKJV) says, "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God." (See also: Leviticus 18:22; Romans 1:26-27; and 1 Timothy 1:8).

The Bible indicates that there is nothing that can excuse or eliminate the sinfulness of sexual involvement between individuals of the same sex. Neither so called "marriage vows," civil unions, nor homosexual drives or passions are recognized by the Bible as justifications or acceptable excuses or rationale for sexual acts between individuals of the same sex. Sinful desires and inclinations must be resisted and overcome by the power of God in Christ Jesus, and by power of the Holy Spirit who strengthens our minds and our wills.

Our vocabularies are made up of thousands of words because there are so many distinctive entities and concepts to be referred to. Each word designates a category of entities which are unique to that word. Specific words are most useful when they reflect identical images, and when they do not create conflicting or unclear images in the mind of the speaker and the hearer.

The Bible defines marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24; 1 Corinthians 7:2; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6). To define marriage otherwise is to dilute and destroy its usefulness as a word which denotes what is highest and best about human society.

While we are committed to proclaim and support the tenants of the Bible, and also to persuade others to do so, we recognize that in a free and democratic society morality cannot be legislated. We oppose violence and discrimination against individuals or groups because of sexual orientation. We do not feel that it is necessary to legalize same-sex marriage to provide the civil benefits and civil rights to all regardless of sexual orientation.

COGIC is the largest black Pentecostal denomination in the United States—and the 5th largest Christian denomination of any kind. This kind of affirmation would be big news if the largely white and liberal mainstream press were not clueless and biased in their marriage coverage.

I'm honored to work with and learn from and follow the lead of fearless men and women of God like this, who recognize: this is not primarily about whom you vote for, but about where your heart and its treasure lies. This is about whether we are going to put our faith in princes or in God?

Let me follow where COGIC leads by affirming the closing of their historic statement of faith:

We proclaim the value and worth of every human being regardless of sexual orientation.

But, we passionately and unapologetically defend the right of faith communities to maintain the integrity of their message, mission and identity. We welcome to the church all people who seek to serve and know God and His Word.

God bless you. We rebels for marriage keep growing!

Thank you for making all of this possible. Without you—your courage, your fellowship, your sacrifices of time and treasure—we could not have helped make any of this happen.

2,000+ Gather for World Congress of Families in Madrid

Our President Brian Brown is in Spain speaking at this event!

The World Congress of Families (WCF) will convene Friday through Sunday in Madrid to discuss the importance of traditional marriage to society, just days after President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage.
... The conference, which gathers a network of pro-family organizations, scholars and leaders from more than 60 nations, last met in 2009.

This year’s theme is “Marriage and Family, Future of Society.”

The goal is to demonstrate that marriage between one man and one woman is essential to future family and societal prosperity.

Same-sex marriage was created in Spain in 2005 by former Prime Minister Jose Zapatero.

“What is a wonderful about WCF is that we are going to have people from diverse religious backgrounds,” Mantilla said. “Everyone is united on the fact that we need to promote what we know is true and what people around the world know is true.” -- CitizenLink

New York Progressive Writes "Why I’m Coming Out... Against Gay Marriage"

Sean Collins is a writer based in New York. He sub-titles his article "A New York Progressive Braves the Opprobrium of His Peers by Questioning Same-Sex Marriage":

The growing clamor in favor of gay marriage has led me to recognize that it is important to speak out and be counted – against the gay-marriage campaign. This is not because I am a Christian or anti-gay, but because…

1) The gay-marriage campaign is elitist and believes its opponents are ‘bigots’

2) Same-sex marriage is not a civil right

3) Traditional marriage and the family are worth defending from state intrusion

4) The question of gay marriage has yet to be fully decided

...What remains to be seen is whether the politicization of gay marriage will lead to a strong reaction against it. The meaning of marriage, and the question of whether it should be changed to include gays and lesbians, should be a matter for public debate. For that reason, it is worth calling for state ballots: this is a social issue that should be decided democratically, not in courtrooms.

Today there is great moral pressure to fall in line behind the introduction of same-sex marriage. This is not due to the power of a relatively small number of gay activists; it is because the entire cultural elite – Democrats and increasingly Republicans – have thrown their collective weight behind gay marriage. In doing so, they are trying to assert their moral superiority by distinguishing themselves from so-called ‘bigots’.

In this environment, those who disagree with, or have questions about, gay marriage will feel tremendous pressure to start conforming. Opposing gay marriage has become a view that ‘dare not speak its name’. Following Obama, expect more public figures to be called upon to recant and say ‘I now believe’.

Well, count me out. I will not join the cultural elite’s bandwagon, a bandwagon that runs on self-flattery and the demonization of ‘backward’ voters. Critics of the same-sex marriage campaign are here, and we’re not all bible-thumping Christians – get used to it.

Read his entire column here.

Video: Maggie Gallagher on What Harm Redefining Marriage Has Caused

NOM co-founder Maggie Gallagher participates in a series by The Daily Beast where readers can ask prominent thinkers anything they want. In this video, she answers a common question: "what harm has redefining marriage caused?"

Capehart's Folly

Jonathan Capeheart, a particularly energetic activist on behalf of redefining marriage, claims NOM is "apoplectic" over America's "rapid change of public opinion" on marriage.

He also claims Obama, after his endorsement of same-sex marriage, is "doing just fine" and that national support for redefining marriage is "up today because of what he did."

Talk about inventing the reality you want to see.

NOM is hardly "apoplectic" over Obama's long-awaited flip flop on marriage. Instead, we believe it is broadly evident to most fair-minded Americans who have been watching the fall-out that Obama's abandonment of marriage has hurt him in the short run and will hurt him even more in November.

It is, after all, Democrats who are quickly abandoning the President over his new position. It is marriage that has pushed Obama's numbers down and raised Romney's support in key swing states such as Florida, not to mention North Carolina which just voted 61% in favor of Marriage, more, even, than Virginia did (57%) when given its chance to vote in 2006 and almost as much as Florida did (62%) in 2008, back when Pres. Obama still said publicly he believed in marriage.

And need we cite the recent poll showing 25% of Floridians are less likely to support Obama because of his marriage morph? Or the poll before that showing Romney now leading Obama by 8 in North Carolina?

If this is Capeheart's definition of Obama "doing just fine" he clearly wants to redefine more words than just "marriage."

Also important to note: it continues to be pro-marriage activists in Maryland and Washington State that are in the process of qualifying referendums to overturn gay marriage by putting the question to the people, and it is gay-marriage supporters (as usual) that are opposing these and similar efforts to allow the people of (for instance) Iowa, New York, and the District of Columbia to vote to restore their marriage laws. So who actually acts as if a majority of Americans support their view of marriage, us or Capehart and co.?

If these state initiatives are signs that marriage supporters are an "apoplectic" movement this is a very strange way of showing it.

Even the Democrat-leaning pollsters at Public Policy Polling have admitted that they don't believe polls showing a majority support for redefining marriage. James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal quotes a pollster who puts the actual support for gay marriage at closer to 40%, not the elusive 50% Capeheart wants to see. Americans, when they have voted, have tracked the lower figure.

Why is this the case? Because a solid majority of Americans have and will continue to believe that to make a marriage you need a husband and wife.

This same unmovable majority of Americans will be heading to the polls in November.

That's what should unnerve Obama's reelection team. Capehart should check in on how they are doing next.

Video: Mississippi Pastors Speak Out Against President Obama on Marriage

WAPT local news reports that "Pastors across Jackson lashed out at President Obama's comments supporting gay marriage":

An Open Letter from a Black Pastor to Pres. Obama on Same-Sex Marriage

Eric C. Redmond is senior pastor of Reformation Alive Baptist Church in Temple Hills, Md., and is a former second vice president of the Southern Baptist Convention. He writes in TownHall:

Dear Mr. President,

Your recent expression of your understanding of 'marriage' is troubling to us. There are no tenets that can be identified as Christian that allow for anyone to view homosexuality as acceptable. The Christian faith holds to the Bible as the truth, for it has given ample evidence of being the very words of God to man. It is the Bible that reveals marriage to be a union between a man and a woman; it is the Bible that reveals all homosexual activity to be sinful. Therefore we would reject your so-called Christian understanding of same-sex marriage as uninformed and false.

... Do not be deceived: Our votes will not come cheaply. Our mutual identity as African Americans is something we celebrate every time you laugh off the ignorance of those who question your American citizenship and when you make those long strides that have come to characterize your trek from Marine One to your home. Yet our confidence in your ability to govern the nation justly and equitably is not based solely on the contrasting ethnicities of your opponent and you. Yes, our ancestors made many sacrifices for us to have the right to vote. However, they also died while trying to stand for righteousness. So we can use the nil option in November, opting not to vote for you or the presumptive Republican nominee.

Therefore, we will not be giving you our vote this fall unless you reverse your professed position on same-sex unions. This would demonstrate to us that you are a man of wisdom who has the good interests of the American people in mind, and who has the heart of the people of faith in mind. For we are not limited to an either/or option when it comes to suffrage, but you are: Either you change your position on same-sex unions or you will not have our votes. We would rather throw our vote away than have to explain to the parents of our grandchildren how we voted for a president who sees marriage so differently.

34% in AFRO Poll Say They Can No Longer Support Obama Because of SSM

In a poll of 1,141 readers of the website AFRO (which covers black history, community, and news), 34% of respondents in their poll said they disagree with President Obama's support of same-sex marriage and can no longer support him because of it:

NAACP's Pro-SSM Stance Labeled Contrary to Black Tradition

Charlie Butts at OneNewsNow:

The NAACP has endorsed homosexual "marriage" -- but one expert says that doesn't reflect the attitude of most African-Americans on the issue.

"...[Dr. Timothy Johnson -- founder of The Frederick Douglas Foundation] encourages factions within the NAACP to reassess their relationship with the organization.

"... I think those individuals who call themselves Christian or call themselves Jewish who are members of the NAACP should denounce the organization, should cancel their membership, and really look for something else or another organization such as the Frederick Douglas Foundation to be affiliated with," he states.

... On Monday, the president of the National Black Church Initiative denounced both the NAACP and President Obama for supporting same-gender marriage. Rev. Anthony Evans said churches with which he is affiliated will put their faith ahead of support for black leaders "every single time."

... The National Black Church Initiative comprises 34,000 black and Hispanic churches across 15 denominations.

In a related OneNewsNow online poll, almost 70 percent of the more than 5,000 respondents feel President Barack Obama will lose either a "significant" amount (15-25%) or a "huge" amount (more than 25%) of the support of black church-goers in the November election.

WAPT.com Web Poll: 25% in Jackson, MS Say They Aren't Voting for Obama Over SSM

A web poll by WAPT News in Jackson, Miss. found 25% of people saying they were no longer voting for Obama over his flip flop on marriage versus 3% who said they were voting for Obama now because of it: