Monthly Archives: November 2012

Uruguay Bishop: "Children Have a Right to be Raised by a Father and Mother, by Birth or Adoption"

ABC News:

Uruguay's congress is considering a gay marriage law that would give same-sex couples all the same rights and responsibilities of heterosexual married couples.

The country already has a civil unions law and has stood out in Latin America lately for legalizing abortion and planning to sell government-grown marijuana to any citizen who wants it.

The proposed "marriage equality" law would change Uruguay's nearly-century-old civil code and give married gays and lesbians all the rights and responsibilities of heterosexual married couples, including the possibility of adopting children.

... Uruguay's Roman Catholic Church is opposed.

Bishop Jaime Fuentes, who presides over family issues for the church's governing episcopal conference, told the AP Wednesday that "marriage equality" is a discriminatory misnomer.

"It seems logical that two people of the same sex who care for each other and want to share their lives together can have some sort of civil acknowledgement, but it can't be the same as what governs marriage," Fuentes said. "Giving this kind of union the same obligations and rights as marriage would represent serious discrimination against a married man and woman."

The bishop argued that "children have a right to be raised by a father and mother, by birth or adoption."

Victory For Christian Demoted Over Gay Marriage Comments

The UK Christian Institute:

A judge has today ruled that bosses at a housing trust were wrong to demote a manager who said gay weddings in churches would be “an equality too far”.

Adrian Smith, a Christian, made the remark on his personal Facebook page, which was not visible to the general public, outside work time.

But bosses at Trafford Housing Trust, near Manchester, took action against Mr Smith saying the comments amounted to ‘gross misconduct’ and could bring the Trust into disrepute.

Mr Smith went to court with the financial backing of The Christian Institute’s Legal Defence Fund, which exists to protect the civil liberty of Christians.

It emerged in evidence that the Trust was worried it could lose a gay rights charter award unless it took action against Mr Smith.

But today the judge, Mr Justice Briggs, said the Trust had no right to demote Mr Smith over his Facebook comments, and ruled that the Trust had breached the terms of his contract.

Mr Smith says he is delighted to have won the case, but he is worried others may be in the firing line if the Government pushes ahead with its plans to redefine marriage.

He said: “I have won today. But what will tomorrow bring? I am fearful that, if marriage is redefined, there will be more cases like mine – and if the law of marriage changes people like me may not win in court.

“Does the Prime Minister want to create a society where people like me, people who believe in traditional marriage, are treated as outcasts? That may not be his intention, but that’s what will happen.

Bloomberg: SSM Backers Remain Focused on States Where People Can't Have a Say

More evidence that despite what happened in these past elections, gay marriage backers still don't trust their ability to win state elections:

Gay-marriage advocates, coming off their first ballot-box victories, are targeting New Jersey and five other U.S. states where the road to legalization is simpler because voters can’t overturn laws through referendums.

In Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island, lawmakers plan to consider or revisit the issue next year, and all except Minnesota already allow civil unions. Even though they prevailed in votes in four states Nov. 6 after a decade of defeats, backers say they prefer to make homosexual weddings legal through legislatures or courts. -- Bloomberg BusinessWeek

Chicago Mayor Emanuel Chooses Gay Marriage Over "Safer Streets"

Last year, one of Mayor Emanuel's top three priorities was "safer streets". A year later, homicides are up 38% in Chicago, and instead of "safe streets" the Mayor's new priority is gay marriage:

Mayor Rahm Emanuel Tuesday ranked legalizing gay marriage as his No. 3 legislative priority in Springfield — behind pension reform and a Chicago casino — and said he plans to get “very involved” in passing a gay marriage bill.

... Asked how involved he was willing to get in the fight for gay marriage, Emanuel said he planned to be “very involved.” That apparently means putting his notorious powers of persuasion to work on reluctant Chicago lawmakers. “While Illinois led the way nationwide with civil unions, it is time now that we take the next step, which I said when we had a ceremony in Millennium Park. This is the first step toward marriage equality, and I hope that we will take that step and I will lead an effort,” he said. -- Chicago Sun-Times

Brian Brown to The Atlantic: "The Fight Has Just Begun"

Eleanor Barkhorn of The Atlantic features several quotes from our president Brian Brown about the future of the marriage movement:

"...Marriage traditionalists had a range of reactions to last week's elections. On one end is Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage. "It's absurd to say the fight is over," he said in an interview. "The fight has just begun." He believes that the ballot initiatives succeeded simply because marriage-equality supporters poured so much money into the campaigns. "We could have won these fights with the right amount of money," Brown said.

... Whether optimistic or defeatist about the opinions of Americans as a whole, marriage traditionalists agree on one thing: Their own views on marriage are not changing. "Religious and social conservatives cannot abandon what we believe to be true," Dreher wrote. Jennifer Marshall, director of domestic policy studies for the Heritage Foundation, agreed: "Marriage is deeply linked to children's welfare and our social order," she said. "We are as committed as ever to explaining that relationship."

... Brown put the same sentiments a bit more bluntly. "I believe the idea of same-sex marriage is a profoundly flawed idea," he said. "We're not going to recognize these unions as marriages, ever."

Baptist Press: Poll: 60% of Voters Back Traditional Marriage

The Baptist Press:

Despite four victories by gay marriage supporters on Election Day, a solid majority of voters nationwide still believe marriage is between one man and one woman, according to a new poll.

The survey by the Polling Company shows that 60 percent of voters in this year's election agreed that "marriage is between one man and one woman." Fifty-one percent agreed strongly. All total, 34 percent disagreed with the statement.

The poll of 800 people who voted either on Election Day or who voted early was conducted Nov. 7.

Vatican Spokesman: "Catholic Church Will Not Give Up its Defense of Marriage"

A strong statement from the pope's spokesman Fr. Lombardi, SJ in response to recent international efforts to redefined marriage. Here is what he said about the context in the United States:

In the United States, some of the referendums held on the same day as the presidential elections in various States have, for the first time, delivered an outcome favourable to same-sex marriages. It is therefore clear that in western countries there is a widespread tendency to modify the classic vision of marriage between a man and woman, or rather to try to give it up, erasing its specific and privileged legal recognition compared to other forms of union.

It is nothing new. This we had already realised. Nevertheless, the matter does not cease to amaze: Because we should be asking if this really corresponds to the feelings of the people, and because the logic of it cannot have a far-sighted outlook for the common good. Not only the Catholic Church is saying this; it was pointed out clearly by the Chief Rabbi of France in a well-reasoned statement. It is not, in fact, a question of avoiding unfair discrimination for homosexuals, since this must and can be guaranteed in other ways. It is a question of admitting that a husband and a wife are publicly recognised as such; and that children who come into the world can know, and say they have, a father and a mother.

In short, preserving a vision of the human person and of human relationships where there is a public acknowledgement of monogamous marriage between a man and woman is an achievement of civilisation. If not, why not contemplate also freely chosen polygamy and, of course, not to discriminate, polyandry? It is not expected, then, the Church will give up proposing that society recognise a specific place for marriage between a man and a woman.

Breitbart's Ken Klukowski: "Marriage Still Wins When Equally Funded"

Breitbart News contributor Ken Klukowski:

"...the facts from the election returns don’t support the contention that marriage is a losing issue. First, it appears that supporters of gay marriage had vast resources to promote these ballot measures that swamped social conservatives, easily outspending supporters of traditional marriage. The Left managed to heavily market this issue not only to their base but also developed ads targeting Republicans, young people, and minorities with customized messages as to why those specific audiences should support gay marriage. Traditional marriage supporters had insufficient funds to effectively respond.

Second, in each of those four states, traditional marriage outperformed Mitt Romney and Republican candidates in general. Far from a drag on the ticket, traditional marriage received more votes than Romney in each of those four states. Thus, most citizens voting Republican/Romney also voted for traditional marriage, and also a sizable bloc of Democrat/Obama voters supported traditional marriage.

In the end two things appear clear within the context of how gay marriage is currently being discussed. The first is that there is a trend among young voters in favor of gay marriage. The second is that, given the narrow margins in these races, traditional marriage still wins when equally funded, but a large imbalance of resources for promotion and organizing to mobilize voters can give gay marriage a winning edge.

The looming question that America will soon face as a consequence of gay marriage is polygamy."

NOM's Thomas Peters on PBS: The Future of the Pro-Marriage Movement is Bright

NOM's Thomas Peters discusses the election results on PBS NewsHour and also responds to the inevitable question about inevitability:

Here is the last exchange between the host and Peters:

Suarez: "Aren't you standing on shifting sand? Given the momentum of the polls, given the momentum of the legal challenges, the losses in various federal appellate courts, the changes in various state laws, maybe you'll win tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, but are you fighting against an inevitability?"

Peters: "No for two important reasons, first of all, I believe in the truth of my pro-marriage views, just as the other side does, and people who have those deep-seated convictions don't look at the changing tides wherever they may be they fight for what's true and what's right. Second of all, I think it's amazing with all of the cultural forces tying to redefine marriage that we're still here in 2012 just barely seeing some footholds gained in deep blue states. I think the future of the marriage movement is bright and ultimately I don't believe history moves in one direction."

Mainwaring: SSM Victories "Tactical Wins, Not a Sea Change"

Doug Mainwaring, a gay tea party activist and writer, notes the "thin margins for same-sex marriage" in deep blue states and concludes:

"...In my home state, Maryland, a minimum of 23% [100% - (37%/48%) = 23%] of the opposition to same-sex marriage came from Obama/Biden supporters. Earlier in the year, the Maryland House of Delegates only narrowly passed same-sex marriage legislation with just one vote to spare, and that only came with lots of arm-twisting.

These are not overwhelming victories representing a sea change in public attitude toward same-sex marriage. These are tactical wins." -- AmericanThinker

Minnesota LTE Shows Our Opponents' Misinformation Campaign Worked

This letter to the editor in the StarTribune shows the misinformation campaign by our opposition worked. This individual thought the Marriage Protection Amendment would deny "financial and health protections" to same-sex couples, when all it would have done is place Minnesota's definition of marriage beyond the reach of activist judges and politicians:

"My heart sank when I learned that a movement to legalize recognition of same-sex marriage is gaining steam. I voted against the amendment, feeling that we should not deny state protections to same-sex couples, especially financial and health protections. At the same time, using the term "marriage" is so emotionally laden that it begs to be fought long and hard by those whose view is "traditional." Can we not just agree to provide legal protections to same-sex couples without calling it marriage? I believe there is enough support within the state that this could be accomplished without the amount of bloodshed we saw this last election. What do you think, Minnesota? Can we all agree to civil unions, and let the emotions have a chance to heal?"

Prof. Regnerus: "Is it Time to Retire the National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study?"

Prof. Mark Regnerus shares his comments in National Review Online on the National Longitudinal Lesbian Family Study, which once again is garnering plenty of favorable press despite the methodological failings he points out:

"...What exactly is the NLLFS and why do I say it should be retired?

... the reason is that its sample — 78 kids growing up in activist households — is no longer a source for valid, reliable information. Why?

... The “Hawthorne effect” refers to the tendency of study participants to work harder or perform better because they know they are being studied. While it is typically applied to experimental research studies of worker productivity, the same could be true here. It’s a cousin to “social desirability bias,” which is closer to what I’m suggesting. In this case, I’m concerned that the kids feel pressure to give better-than-accurate portrayals of their household and personal life. When the adolescent children of lesbian parents are being intermittently interviewed for a study whose results have proven quite politically important — and almost always covered favorably by the mainstream media — it’s prudent for scholars to be skeptical about whether respondents are still offering valid and reliable responses years after they were first contacted. Some kids will always offer valid information, but given the fishbowl these 78 have lived in, I’m concerned that social desirability bias will affect disproportionate numbers of them, especially in contrast to far larger survey projects.

... I just don’t believe the 78 kids in the NLLFS are capable of reporting unbiased information any more, not after a childhood and adolescence spent entirely in a fishbowl. Even the NLLFS’s principal investigators suggested that 25 years of data collection may be enough. I would concur, and — since the study commenced in 1986 — we eclipsed that mark in 2011. Perhaps it’s time to commit significant funds — and a panoply of research perspectives — to a very large (and hence expensive), longitudinal, population-based data-collection effort that would make fans of the NLLFS and fans of the NFSS alike content with its methodology.

I’m all for more information. But if the data are to be valid and reliable, the study needs to be as free of source bias as is humanly possible. I won’t hold my breath, though, because in the case of lesbian parenting, a nationally representative sample is not what many of my scholarly, rational, and allegedly dispassionate colleagues in the social sciences appear to want."

"The Judge Has Determined the Woman Who Gave Birth is, in Fact, a Mother."

A society that seeks to tamper with marriage will also inevitably seek to tamper with biology. This example via Elizabeth Marquadt at Family Scholars:


"A Harris County judge has reached a decision in an unusual custody battle involving a surrogate and two Houston men. The judge has determined the woman who gave birth is, in fact, a mother."

For background, see Jennifer Lahl and I writing about the case in HuffPost, "Are Women Easy Bake Ovens?”

NOM's Peters on What the Election Taught Us: "Marriage Will Not Win If It's Not Defended."

NOM's Thomas Peters reflects on what lessons should be learned from the election results:

Thom Price asked whether the election losses were attributed to a lack of communication.

"It's a lack of activation, not communication," said [NOM's Thomas] Peters, who noted the disparity in the number of volunteers working against Minnesota's marriage amendment in comparison to the numbers supporting the amendment. He suggested that Catholics need to be far more active in the process. "Our opponents start by voting, and then spend months phone-calling, door-knocking, and getting the word out."

On the issue of marriage, Peters noted that traditional marriage lost in all four states - Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, and Washington.

"In Minnesota, we tried to pass a marriage protection amendment so that marriage couldn't be redefined by judges. In Maine, voters approved same-sex 'marriage.' In Maryland and Washington, referendums to try to overturn gay marriage failed," said Peters. "We were outraised by 4 to 1, and 8 to 1 in some cases. Yet, in every one of those states, more people voted for marriage than voted for Romney. Traditional marriage lost by only a small margin. The message this sends to Christians is that marriage will not win if it's not defended." -- NCRegister

UK Survey Aims to Make Pre-School Classes "Gay Friendly"

The UK Christian Institute:

Parents in the East End of Glasgow were shocked to be asked about their sex lives, so that their pre-school children would get “gay-friendly” lessons.

Mums and Dads were offered free theatre tickets in exchange for answering a survey about their sexual orientation.

The study was carried out by a local arts group which is part-run by the city council.

The aim of the Platform charity’s questionnaire, was to help “monitor the degree to which our programmes are gay-friendly”.