The Frederick News-Post reported Sunday that a Chick-Fil-A restaurant in Frederick, Maryland, was the target of vandals who gluedgay marriage stickers and other items to the windows sometime Saturday night.
Cpl. Gregory Santangelo said that in addition to the stickers, several homemade signs and an image "with the American and gay pride flags combined," were also affixed to the windows.
He also told the Post that the restaurant hired a cleaner to remove the items.
According to the Post, video surveillance of the suspect and physical evidence were collected, and the Frederick County Bureau of Investigation is looking into the matter.
At least two other Chick-fil-A restaurants have been vandalized since company president Dan Cathy expressed support for traditional marriage.
Maryland Chick-fil-A Vandalized with Gay Marriage Paraphernalia
DumpStarbucks.com News: Can Same-Sex Marriage Sink a Multi-National Icon?
Welcome to the DumpStarbucks.com News!
Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day saw millions of people patronizing Chick-fil-A in support of Dan Cathy's freedom of speech and his standing up for traditional marriage. It was a major victory for the cause of marriage, because it helped to dispel the myth that same-sex marriage is inevitable, and also because it helped supporters of traditional marriage realize that we do not stand alone—regardless of how the main stream media may portray the situation.
In response to this victory for marriage, same-sex marriage advocates planned "National Kiss-In Day"" at Chick-fil-A. The results were predictable enough: It failed miserably.
Failing to learn from their mistake, same-sex marriage advocates promptly tried again, scheduling "National Starbucks Appreciation Day"" for Tuesday, August 7, 2012. But before this day even occurred, it was renamed as "National Marriage Appreciation Day""—because (and here is where it gets really interesting), Starbucks contacted the organizers and asked that they include other companies!
This is from the National Marriage Equality Day Facebook page: "This expansion of focus is the result of the direct encouragement of Starbucks Corporate Headquarters who wanted other equality-minded companies and organizations to share in the appreciation.""
Now, I don't know about you, but this does not sound like a company that wants to publicize its relationship with the same-sex marriage movement. To me, this sounds like a company that is on the ropes and fears a public relations nightmare. Let's be charitable and assume that the U.S. public is split 50-50 on marriage. (Really, I think support for traditional marriage is a good bit higher, but let's use the 50-50 number for argument's sake.) Even assuming this overestimated level of support for same-sex marriage, who would want a movement that treats a priest like this to be trumpeting their brand as a national ally?
Do you think Starbucks would want to tell every social conservative in the United States about supporting something that they don't, particularly after the company's reputation has already taken a hit amongst Republicans and the company has missed its own sales forecasts?
So, Starbucks continues to pull back from their support for same-sex marriage, telling the Christian Post that "Starbucks as a company has not contributed to any cause supporting same-sex marriage in Washington State and has no plans to." To be certain, Starbucks has not retracted their corporate position in support of same-sex marriage; but now it is clear that they aren't jumping at the opportunity to publicize and take action in connection with their new policy, either.
What you can do this week:
Are you active in local Republican party politics? Do you join other conservatives in TEA party meetings? Consider sharing an informational flyer with them at your next meeting. If you are not active in these circles, consider stapling the flyer on a community bulletin board around town or at your church. Be sure to follow all local rules when posting a flyer on a public bulletin board, but please do help us get the word out however you can!
Have a great week!
NOM Pledges $100,000 to Defeat Pro-SSM Iowa Judge
Conservative activist Bob Vander Plaats announced the launch of an effort Saturday to defeat Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins in the Nov. 6 judicial retention vote similar to the way voters sent a trio of justices packing two years ago for their role in a 2009 decision that paved the way for same-sex marriage in Iowa.
“This is about freedom, not just about marriage,” Vander Plaats said in unveiling Iowans for Freedom’s 2012 campaign to oust Wiggins — who is one of four Supreme Court justices who will be up for retention this fall — during the sold-out Family Leader’s Family Leadership Summit that drew 1,000 activists to the Point of Grace church in Waukee.
“We see this as a freedom and constitutional issue important to all Iowans. If courts are allowed to redefine the institution of marriage, every one of the liberties we hold dear is in jeopardy.”
To kick off the campaign, Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage pledged that his organization would provide a match of up to $100,000 the contributions that are made during the next two weeks.
Iowa GOP Chairman Calls for Ouster of Another Pro-SSM Judge
The Des Moines Register Iowa Politics blog:
The Republican Party of Iowa’s chairman is pushing for the ouster of one of the authors of a court decision that legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa.
Gay marriage instantly became a political hot button in Iowa after the ruling three years ago, but there has been little urgency behind the issue this year.
Chairman A.J. Spiker, in a statement emailed across Iowa this morning, called for Iowans to vote against Iowa Supreme Court Justice David Wiggins to “help end the bullying of activist judges once and for all.”
The Nov. 6 general election ballots will ask whether Wiggins should retain his seat on the bench. He is the fourth justice to come up for a retention vote since the court’s unanimous ruling in spring 2009. The first three justices, Marsha Ternus, David Baker and Michael Streit, were ousted by Iowa voters in fall 2010.
Katrina Trinko: GOP Shouldn't Silence Itself on Social Issues Around Young Adults
Katrina Trinko responds to the New York Times article which tried to get the GOP to underplay social issues to young adults. On same-sex marriage she writes:
AP Photo
"...Furthermore, while support for same-sex marriage may be growing among young Republicans, 63 percent of young Republicans either oppose or don’t have an opinion about gay marriage, according to the poll cited by the Times. That’s still two-thirds — hardly a tiny percentage.
I’m 24, and I’m used to being the odd one out among my peers in opposing the legalization of same-sex marriage. But I also get the impression that very few young adults have heard a good argument for why it should be opposed. It’s not that they’ve heard the argument that marriage should be tied to procreation — delivered charitably, with an awareness that many young adults have gay friends and/or family — and have rejected it so much as they simply have been emotionally moved by the case made by gay and lesbians who wish to be married. It might be worth thinking about how a better case can be made for traditional marriage before deciding that there is no way to win over more of public opinion on this point.
But it’s also worth noting the intensity of those young adults who support legalizing same-sex marriage, or as they call it, marriage equality. I don’t agree with their cause, but I admire their dedication and commitment. And they are showing that young adults do not merely vote on pocketbook issues, but that they are also very much attuned to and concerned about moral issues." -- National Review Online
Cardinal of Chicago: The Way SSM is Being Debated Now is a "Formula for Tyranny."
Cardinal Francis George of Chicago on lessons learned from the Chick-fil-A controversy:
CNS photo/Paul Haring
"Responses to my reflections last week on “Chicago values” fell into two camps. There were almost universal plaudits for recognizing that the government should be concerned about actions and not about thoughts and values. The media, of course, are in this camp, because they are concerned about the free speech that is at the heart of their profession.
More complicated, on the other hand, was the reaction to the “value” that was the case in point: same-sex “marriage.” Some who are comfortably in the first camp deserted the field of argument on gay marriage. An argument is always made in a context that determines what can be considered sensible, and it seems to me that some of us are arguing out of different contexts.
There are three contexts for discussing “gay marriage”: 1) the arena of individual rights and their protection in civil law, 2) the field of activities defined by nature and its laws, and 3) the realm of faith as a response to God’s self-revelation in history. Unfortunately, when the only permissible context for discussing public values is that of individual rights protected by civil law, then it is the government alone that determines how it is acceptable to act. Every public actor (including faith communities) then becomes the government’s agent. This is a formula for tyranny."
Democrat Party Platform Backs SSM
Making it official:
The national Democratic Party’s platform committee endorsed gay marriage Saturday for the first time and called for the repeal of a federal law that recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman.
The committee, meeting in downtown Detroit, let stand the work of a separate group that drafted the platform two weeks ago in Minneapolis. The platform is a broad statement of the party’s priorities on the economy, social issues and national defense and next goes to the national convention in North Carolina in September.
Scott Dibble, a committee member and a state senator from Minnesota, said support for gay marriage can attract new voters.
“Young people are looking for a political home right now. This has become a defining moral question of our time,” said Dibble, who is gay.
The platform says Democrats support “marriage equality” and the “movement to secure equal treatment under law for same-sex couples.” -- AP
Political Rhetoric Professor Debunks Maryland Poll Claiming Majority Support for SSM
Prof. Richard Vatz, who himself is not opposed to same-sex marriage, offers in the Baltimore Sun a thorough fisking of polls commissioned, conducted and used not to portray actual support for same-sex marriage but instead to undermine resistance to it:
"There was a brief explosion of optimism from those supporting same-sex marriage in Maryland last week after a poll by Hart Research Associates indicated that voters in the state support it by a significant margin of 54-40. No state has ever approved gay marriage at the ballot box, but advocates here and elsewhere — The New York Times published a piece titled "Hopeful news from Maryland" — contend that the issue hasn't polled this well before either.
They shouldn't get too excited just yet. Gay marriage is an issue in which polls don't necessarily reflect what voters will actually do at the ballot box because it is increasingly politically incorrect to oppose such nuptials. And there is particular reason to doubt the accuracy of this poll.
For the record, I do not oppose same-sex marriage, but I do oppose the use of unsound polling data for political purposes.
The results of earlier polls on the referendum to overturn Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act have generally been much closer. Advocates are spinning this one as evidence of a shift in public attitudes on the question, but there are reasons to doubt whether that is the case."
Torrence Police Arrest Man Charged With Vandalizing Chick-fil-A
Manny Castro, the self-described street artist who admitted he painted "Tastes Like Hate" on the side of a Torrance Chick-fil-A last week in response to the chicken empire's anti-gay-marriage stance, has been arrested, Torrance police tell the Weekly.
Sgt. Steven Jenkinson said Castro was collared in West Hollywood about 7 p.m. yesterday.
Castro is was arrested on suspicion of vandalism, according to Torrance police.
Although Castro admitted to the artwork in response to the Chick-fil-A CEO's stance against same-sex marriage, Torrance detectives say they developed independent evidence that leads to the provocateur.
NY Senator McDonald Constituents Sent Mailer Reminding Them of His "Shove It" Comment
The campaign to re-elect marriage flip-flopper Roy McDonald is upset that his opponent in the New York Republican primary, Saratoga County Clerk Kathy Marchione, sent a mailer to his constituents reminding them that he said he would "defend traditional marriage" but then he "turned his back on [them]" voting for gay marriage and when confronted about this he "told [them] to 'take the job and shove it'" if they didn't like his vote.
Minnesota Voter Says Look to Iowa for Why We Need to Pass the Marriage Protection Amendment
Morris Gildemeister of Hastings, MN on the clear and present danger to marriage in states without Marriage Protection Amendments:
"...Our neighboring state of Iowa provides an excellent example of why marriage should be defined as between a man and woman in the state constitution, as the amendment up for a vote this fall would provide.
Iowa legislators passed a law in 1998 defining marriage as between a man and woman, similar to the law presently on the books in Minnesota.
But in 2005 a lawsuit was brought on behalf of same-sex couples stating that the existing law violated the equal protection clause of the state constitution. A district court ruled in favor of the same sex couples and later the state Supreme Court upheld the district court ruling. Today same-sex marriage is legal in Iowa.
A similar scenario is likely in Minnesota unless the state constitution is amended to define marriage as between a man and woman.
Anyone who believes children are best nurtured in a setting which includes both a man and woman must vote “Yes” on the proposed constitutional amendment this fall. Again, remember not voting on the amendment is counted as a “No” vote." -- Hastings Star Gazette
Leroy Huizenga: "Opposing Gay Marriage Is Rational, Not Religious"
Leroy Huizenga, Director of the Christian Leadership Center at the University of Mary in Bismarck, North Dakota, writes in First Things:
"Many make the mistake of thinking that opposition to gay marriage is religious. A Facebook friend recently posted this quote: “Have you ever noticed the same people who claim that marriage is a religious institution only think that LGBT people shouldn’t get married? They never seem to object to Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, or atheists getting married.”
This is a perfect summary of the ignorance with which many (though by no means all) gay marriage proponents operate.
...Because of the harmony of faith and reason, thoughtful Christians can speak of marriage in terms of both categories. And we sometimes confuse categories, and that proves confusing to the general public. But make no mistake: Our defense of marriage is no act of legerdemain, in which we try to force what we know solely by revelation on the public. (Observe no one is pushing laws forcing participation in the sacraments or forbidding participation in a particular faith.) Rather, we are concerned for the common good, a rational concern motivated by our very faith. Convinced that reason and nature teach us the truth about marriage, we will continue to make arguments in the public square about the public goods of marriage, for no society or person can long thrive kicking against the goads of reason and nature."
Washington State Bishop Urges Catholics to Reject Gay Marriage
An excerpt from his statement sent to all parishes in the Catholic diocese of Spokane:
"...My genuine hope is that we all can value the coming vote on Referendum 74 as an opportunity to have a substantial public debate regarding this critical issue, carried on with respect, honesty and conviction. When addressing issues of depth and passion – indeed, most importantly at such times – we should be committed to the proposition that our public dialogue must be marked by civility and clarity, and that it should generate light rather than heat. As a means of contributing to that effort, I ask your careful consideration of the attached reflections which outline some of the reasons for the Catholic Church’s position recommending that citizens vote “reject” on Referendum 74, and thus overturn the law that redefines marriage. I offer these thoughts with respect, but also out of a sense of duty to contribute to the debate for the good of our state."
Paul Ryan's Solid Pro-Marriage Voting Record
Today Mitt Romney introduced Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his vice presidential running mate.
Here is a sampling Rep. Ryan's pro-marriage votes during his years in public service:
"Voted for a resolution proposing a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union between one man and one woman." (source)
Voted against repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in 2011. (source)
Voted YES on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Voted YES on Constitutional Amendment banning same-sex marriage. (Sep 2004)
Voted YES on permanently eliminating the marriage penalty. (Apr 2004)
Votes YES on reducing Marriage Tax by $399B over 10 years (Mar 2001)
Voted YES on promoting work and marriage among TANF recipients. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on eliminating the "marriage penalty". (Jul 2000) (sources)
Supported the marriage amendment in Wisconsin in 2006. (source)
New York Times Embraces Gender Fluidity for Little Kids
The New York Times on the next steps towards obscuring gender:
Many parents and clinicians now reject corrective therapy, making this the first generation to allow boys to openly play and dress (to varying degrees) in ways previously restricted to girls — to exist in what one psychologist called “that middle space” between traditional boyhood and traditional girlhood. These parents have drawn courage from a burgeoning Internet community of like-minded folk whose sons identify as boys but wear tiaras and tote unicorn backpacks. Even transgender people preserve the traditional binary gender division: born in one and belonging in the other. But the parents of boys in that middle space argue that gender is a spectrum rather than two opposing categories, neither of which any real man or woman precisely fits.
“It might make your world more tidy to have two neat and separate gender possibilities,” one North Carolina mother wrote last year on her blog, “but when you squish out the space between, you do not accurately represent lived reality. More than that, you’re trying to ‘squish out’ my kid.”
The impassioned author of that blog, Pink Is for Boys, is careful to conceal her son’s identity, as were the other parents interviewed for this article. As much as these parents want to nurture and defend what makes their children unique and happy, they also fear it will expose their sons to rejection. Some have switched schools, changed churches and even moved to try to shield their children. That tension between yielding to conformity or encouraging self-expression is felt by parents of any child who differs from the norm. But parents of so-called pink boys feel another layer of anxiety: given how central gender is to identity, they fear the wrong parenting decision could devastate their child’s social or emotional well-being. The fact that there is still substantial disagreement among prominent psychological professionals about whether to squelch unconventional behavior or support it makes those decisions even more wrenching.
Many of the parents who allow their children to occupy that “middle space” were socially liberal even before they had a pink boy, quick to defend gay rights and women’s equality and to question the confines of traditional masculinity and femininity. But when their sons upend conventional norms, even they feel disoriented. How could my own child’s play — something ordinarily so joyous to watch — stir up such discomfort? And why does it bother me that he wants to wear a dress?
-
Categories
- Adoption
- Ads
- Africa
- Alerts
- Australia
- Canada
- Catholic Church
- Chick-fil-A
- Children
- Civil Unions
- Civility
- Cohabitation
- Congress
- Corporate Ethics
- Culture
- Debating Marriage
- Divorce
- DOMA
- Dump General Mills
- Dump Starbucks
- Economics
- Education
- Election 2010
- Election Watch 2012
- ENDA
- Ethics
- Europe
- Events
- Featured
- Federal
- France
- Free Speech
- Gay Voices
- GOProud
- Human Rights Campaign
- Humor
- IRS
- Law
- Let The People Vote
- Manhattan Declaration
- March for Marriage
- Marriage
- Marriage Election Watch
- Marriage Moment
- Marriage Update
- Marriage Victory
- MarriageADA
- Media
- Mexico
- Military
- Mitt Romney
- New Zealand
- News
- NOM Marriage News
- NOM on Facebook
- Offbeat
- Parenting
- Pedophilia
- Politics
- Poll
- Polling
- Polygamy
- President Obama
- Press Releases
- Pro-Life
- Prop 8
- Religious Liberty
- Research/Study
- Ruth Institute
- Same Sex Marriage
- Science
- Scotland
- SFMA
- Social Media
- South America
- SPLC
- States
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Hawaii
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- Washington DC
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
- Statistics
- Supreme Court
- United for Marriage
- United Kingdom
- Women
- Youth
-
Archives
- June 2021
- April 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- July 2020
- May 2020
- August 2017
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
