NOM BLOG

NBC Celebrates "End of Traditional Marriage"; Perpetual Female Singlehood

The Culture and Media Institute:

The mainstream media's campaign against traditional marriage sunk to new depths on NBC's October 11 "Today." Anchor Ann Curry teased a nearly seven-minute piece on the rapid increase of single women in society by touting "a new spin on romance, dating, and what some are calling the end of traditional marriage."

And that was just the opening.

Beverly Hills therapist and author Sarah Brokaw (daughter of former NBC anchor Tom Brokaw) joined the parade of singlehood cheerleaders, saying "I have not been married, and I don't have kids, and I sit back and think: 'Well what have I really accomplished if I haven't reached those traditional milestones?' And the way that I look at being accomplished is to have a real sense of curiosity about life."

Canada’s ‘Hate Speech’ Provision Faces the Chopping Block

LifeSiteNews:

A private members bill introduced into the Canadian House of Commons is seeking to delete the controversial “hate speech” provision in the Human Rights Act that has been used to silence Christians and conservatives who express politically incorrect opinions.

... Critics of section 13 have long argued that the clause creates the precise equivalent to a ‘thought crime.’ The provision defines a discriminatory practice as “any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” if the person or persons affected are “identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.”

... In the last 15 years, decisions by various Human Rights Commissions have penalized those who adhere to traditional Judaeo-Christian values.

Mayors have been fined for refusing to proclaim ‘gay pride’ days. A teacher was suspended for writing against homosexuality outside the classroom. A printer was fined for refusing to print materials for a homosexual activist group. A pastor was hauled before the courts for publishing a letter in a local paper calling pro-homosexual literature “psychologically and physiologically damaging” to young children. And even a political party was chastised for promoting Christian teaching on homosexuality.

Victory in Australia for Marriage!

The Australian opposition leader confirms: there will be no vote on SSM.

The Australian:

The Greens push to legalise same-sex marriage is doomed, with Tony Abbott confirming he will deny Liberal Party MPs a conscience vote on the issue, even if Labor grants its MPs a free vote.

The Opposition Leader's position, confirmed yesterday, means there is no chance that the present parliament could amend the Marriage Act, even if most Labor MPs support the change.

This is because a significant number of MPs from the Labor Right strongly oppose same-sex marriage and, if given the freedom to vote according to their conscience, would side with the Coalition.

Catholics in Scotland Send 100,000 Protest Cards Against SSM

The Scotsman:

The Catholic Church has warned government ministers that they face a major rebellion over same-sex marriage plans, after sending 100,000 “protest cards” to its parishioners.

The Church warned that the SNP would pay the price at the ballot box, with those practising the faith unlikely to back a party “that would dismantle the meaning of marriage”.

Peter Kearney, spokesman for the Catholic Church in Scotland, said feelings on the issue dwarfed opposition to parts of the offensive behaviour at football bill, which is aimed at ridding the game of sectarianism.

“In terms of an issue of importance to the Catholic Church, this is fundamental, utterly fundamental,” he said.

Former Editor of Numerous Top UK Papers: "Gay Marriage Is Not As Simple As David Cameron Believes"

Charles Moore is the former editor of the UK's The Daily Telegraph, The Sunday Telegraph and The Spectator. He writes in The Telegraph:

For the entire history of civilisation, marriage has been defined as being between a man and a woman. Throughout that history, almost all civilisations have regarded marriage as central to their survival.

So if you say that marriage should, in fact, be differently defined, you are saying something very big and bold. The onus of proof should surely not be on those who justify the status quo, but on you. You must show that you are right and that everyone else, for thousands of years, has been wrong.

One hopes that the Coalition can make a go of government in these difficult times. One understands why each partner needs to find issues that it can concede to the other. One also understands why David Cameron wishes to “rebrand” his Conservative Party. But can one feel completely easy when, driven by his political civil partnership with Nick Clegg, he tries to change the nature of marriage for ever?

Marriage Highlights from the Values Voter Summit, NOM Marriage News, October 14, 2011

NOM National Newsletter

My Dear Friends,

Let me spend a few moments reporting on events at last weekend's Values Voter Summit in Washington, DC.

Now in one sense this is a secondhand report. (Due to a family emergency I had to to cancel my own appearance and Maggie Gallagher stepped in for me on the panel devoted to same-sex marriage.)

But I think it's worth spending time on because of our larger mission here.

The mainstream media focused on a kerfuffle caused by a Baptist minister who introduced Gov. Rick Perry and urged born-again Christians to vote for Perry because of his religious faith.

NOM issued a press release afterwards that has a very important message. Here's the first part: "We cannot let presidential politics distract or divide us from the larger task of building a winning majority on values."

The race for the GOP nomination includes a number of fine men and women. Those of us in the marriage movement on the more Republican side of politics (we do not forget our many great friends for marriage who are Democrats, like Sen. Rev. Rubén Díaz!) are going to disagree on who the best candidate is, but we have to do so in a spirit that allows us to unite afterwards not only within one party but across party lines—to fight together to overturn gay marriage in Iowa and New Hampshire, for example.

The presidency is urgently important, but it's not the ultimate prize. Victory for the principles of the American Founding—and for God's truths about human nature!—is.

Here's what Bill Bennett had to say about the conflict:

The warm and good-humored response by the crowd to Bill Bennett's call for respect across religious differences was in itself a repudiation of the press narrative that social conservatives are intolerant of the religious differences among us.

Yes, theological differences are real and yes, they matter. We need an America tolerant enough to tolerate robust discussion of theological differences, and committed enough to religious liberty to respect our rights to explore who God is and what He requires of us—because these are the most important questions of all.

But these explorations should not, I would add, take place in a context which seems to call into question our shared rights as citizens. To God what is God's, to Caesar the things that belong to Caesar.

As I said in NOM's press release, "We can not let presidential politics divide us or distract us from the task of building a winning majority of people with shared values. In particular, members of the LDS church should not be attacked or made to feel unwelcome for their faith by the left or the right. ...People of all faiths, and no faith, are welcome to join us to fight to protect marriage as the union of husband and wife—Evangelicals, Catholics, Jews, LDS, Eastern Orthodox, African-Americans, Whites, Hispanics, we are the true diverse rainbow coalition: fighting for the rights of all Americans to vote for marriage."

We are going to continue to press all the candidates for specific commitments on what they are willing to do to protect marriage, and to protect the rights of citizens who are being defamed and harassed for their support for it.

The hatred directed at people who support marriage is becoming increasingly open.

One small sign of the times: Focus on the Family's president, Jim Daly, wrote a letter to the New York Times warning against calling every moral disagreement with gay marriage "hate."

"Hate is too big a word to be used with such little restraint," he said.

Here is how Dr. Katrina D. Foster (apparently a Lutheran minister from Long Island) responded to that civil and restrained note from Jim Daly in a column on the Huffington Post's Gay Voices site. She called her column, "Yes, Anti-LGBT Religious Groups are Hate Groups":

"As a devout, orthodox Christian and Jesus freak, I do not think using the word 'hate' to describe what Mr. Daly and the people at Focus on the Family and other organizations are trying to do is too strong. 1 John 4:20 puts it this way: 'Those who say, "I love God," and hate their brothers or sisters are liars.'

"Mr. Daly, you do hate gay people. You just hate to admit it." She then endorsed economic retaliation and exclusion as a good thing: "Mr. Daly may not liked to be called hateful, but he dislikes his funds to be taken away from him even more."

In the face of the wall of this kind of mindless hatred directed our way, how strongly will our candidates support us and our rights, as well as marriage?

2012 Candidates on Marriage

At the Values Voter Summit, most of the candidates explicitly said they support marriage.

Here's a rundown:

Ron Paul: nothing about marriage

Rick Perry (like Paul) didn't mention marriage specifically but he said, "The fabric of our society is not government, or individual freedom; it is the family. And the demise of the family is the demise of any great society."

Newt Gingrich: "On marriage, it should be quite clear, on issues like the Defense of Marriage Act, that we should simply say it can't be [repealed], as it simply—you—it's very clear in the Constitution." And also, "But I mean in a sense of arrogance, in a sense of imposing on the rest of us, whether it's one judge in California deciding he knows more than 8 million Californians about the definition of marriage."

Michele Bachmann: "And when we speak in defense of traditional marriage, it isn't because we want to control other people's lives. It's because we recognize the deep roots of natural law and of revealed law and other religious traditions that have united across the centuries, and in the shared belief that it was a holy God who designed marriage for man and woman as the most loving and best environment for the procreation of children." And also: "People said it would never be done, but in Minnesota I fought for seven years and persevered, and we won the issue of defining marriage as one man and one woman. And it will be on the ballot in the state of Minnesota in 2012 because, you see, with a proven fighter in the White House, we will finally win on the issue of life, on marriage, on family, on religious liberty. It's time that we score some victories for our movement."

Mitt Romney: "But we know that marriage is more than a personally rewarding social custom. It's also critical for the well-being of a civilization. That's why it's so important to preserve traditional marriage, the joining together of one man and one woman. And that's why I will appoint an attorney general who will defend the bipartisan law passed by Congress and signed by Bill Clinton, the Defense of Marriage Act."

Rick Santorum spoke for marriage and life with particular eloquence, and was rewarded with a surprise third-place finish in the straw poll: "And that means standing up and defending the institution of marriage as between one man and one woman—not backing away from it, standing up for it. And there's one candidate in this race who has gone to state after state and helped fight those battles not just for the federal marriage amendment, but understanding that the—the—what the left is trying to accomplish in marriage is what they did with abortion: pick off a few states, get the courts to say, ah, we can't have different laws on the issue such—fundamental as marriage, and then have the courts decide it. We must fight in every state to make sure that marriage remains between one man and one woman. And as president, I will do that."

Santorum, Bachmann, Romney and Perry have all signed NOM's marriage pledge, which includes a commitment to support a federal marriage amendment, to appoint pro-marriage Justices and attorney generals, and to take seriously the harassment of pro-marriage citizens in the public square.

But Herman Cain has refused to do so, and yet is emerging as a strong contender among many values voters.

Here's what Cain said at the Summit on Marriage:

Herman Cain: "I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. And I would not have asked the Department of Justice to not enforce it. I would have asked the Department of Justice to enforce the Defense of Marriage Act."

Is that good enough?

I don’t think so.

Why not?

Four years ago, remember that candidate Barack Obama claimed he supported traditional marriage too. The last four years are ongoing evidence that we need to demand more from the men and women who would be our president than ritual expressions of values; we need their commitment to act.

To date, the only specific commitment Herman Cain has made is that he would be willing to defend DOMA, a law passed by huge bipartisan majorities and signed into law by Bill Clinton, in court.

Being willing to defend the laws of the country is a pretty low bar for a president.

We need to have higher aspiration than that as a movement which represents not only the majority of the American people but the vast majority of Republican voters. At NOM, on your behalf, we continue to push to hear more than that for marriage from all the candidates in this race.

Maggie stepped in for me at the Values Voter Summit panel on same-sex marriage and hit it out of the ball park:

NOM’s own Thomas Peters also spoke on a Values Voter panel with Lila Rose featuring next-generation leaders on life and marriage.

Thomas reports:

"The breakout session was well-attended, maybe 80 people, mostly NextGen types. I was speaking for many when I said we must lead, because we have more of a future to save and to fight for! And I said we must also be vigilant that our right to speak the truth about fundamental things like life and marriage is preserved. We're natural online activists so don't forget to speak up for the fundamental truths of life and marriage online!"

Those of you who do not yet know Thomas Peters, let me make a prediction: You are going to hear a lot more about him in the coming weeks and months—and about other great young men and women who are increasingly recognizing that yes, it takes courage to defend marriage as the union of husband and wife and yes, that is precisely what they are called to do.

At the Values Voter Summit, House Speaker John Boehner reiterated his commitment to defend in court the Defense of Marriage Act, saying, "If the Justice Department isn't going to defend this act passed by Congress, then we will."
God bless him!

And we should thank him! Believe me, he's hearing from those who want gay marriage. He needs to know that we appreciate his courage and his decency in stepping forward to defend marriage and democracy from Obama's lawless refusal to defend either!

Thousands of you already have in response to NOM's email alert. Thank you!

If you have not, could you take a moment to go now and thank Speaker Boehner?

In New York this week, the four Republicans senators who betrayed their constituents to vote for gay marriage are getting a very public payoff. They're getting a fundraiser, according to the New York Times, which will raise more than forty pieces of silver—a million bucks. Expect to hear a lot about in in the mainstream media.

This is part of a sophisticated plan by major GOP donors to remake the Republican Party, as the Conservative Party has been remade in Great Britain—so that voters who care about marriage have no party to represent them, and therefore no voice.

God forbid it!

Truth forbid it!

You and I know that millions of decent, loving law-abiding American believe in the core truths expressed in Genesis (and repeated by Jesus): We are made male and female.

We are called to come together in love to commit ourselves not only to each other but to the future—to the children who are counting on us to stand up for the idea and the ideal that both mothers and fathers matter to their kids.

Together we are making history happen.
Thank you again—for your friendship, your prayers, your courage and your loyalty.

It's an honor to know you and to help serve as your voice for our shared values.

Faithfully,

Brian Brown

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

 

P.S. Can you help in the fight to defend marriage? Whether you can give $20 or $200, know that you are making a difference. You are making certain that your voice and your values are heard!

Contribute

Four New York State Senators and Their Same-Sex Marriage Money Dance

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 14, 2011
Contact: Mary Beth Hutchins (703-683-5004 x105, [email protected])


Senators James Alesi, Mark Grisanti, Roy McDonald and Stephen Saland Benefiting from Bloomberg-Hosted Fundraiser This Evening

New York, NY — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced it is running an online advertisement throughout New York state in response to a Bloomberg-held fundraiser this evening for the four GOP senators that betrayed the trust of New Yorkers last summer by exchanging a vote for same-sex marriage for campaign contributions.

The advertisement, called "Money Dance," is modeled after the practice of some brides and grooms dancing for money with supporters at their wedding. In this case, the four Senators -- Roy McDonald, Mark Grisanti, James Alesi and Stephen Saland - are dancing with wealthy contributors like Michael Bloomberg and Tim Gill who purchased their allegiance during the recent legislative session.

"These four state Senators have betrayed New Yorkers in their quest for wedding cash," said Brian Brown, president of NOM. "They abandoned their stated values and their own promises to voters. We want to expose these Senators and their same-sex marriage money dance. NOM and our 'Let the People Vote' coalition will not rest until these legislators are turned out of office and the people of New York are allowed to vote on the definition of marriage."

The online advertisement is the latest in a series of efforts aimed at picking off every New York legislator that did not stand up for their constituents and allow a vote of the people before redefining marriage. Earlier this month, NOM ran a full-page advertisement in The Capitol asking David Weprin how his gay marriage vote worked out for him, referencing his September loss in the 9th Congressional District race. The print advertisement went on to further ask, 'who will be next?' At the end of September NOM and the "Let the People Vote" coalition announced a series of billboards that are being displayed in the districts of Senators McDonald, Grisanti, Saland, Alesi and Shirley Huntely warning them, 'they're next', referring to the pledge NOM made to hold every legislator that voted to redefine marriage accountable. Prior to the billboard launch, NOM funded mailers into the districts of the five state Senators and organized rallies in four cities that drew over 15,000 people. NOM alone has committed $2 million to fund the "Let the People Vote" effort.

The "Let the People Vote" coalition (www.letthepeoplevote.com) was formed to bring together many diverse religious and ethnic communities around the central issue of traditional marriage to demand that New York voters, just like voters in 31 other states, be given the right to decide the definition of marriage

For more information visit www.LetThePeopleVote.com

Paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, www.nationformarriage.org. Not authorized by any candidate or any candidate's committee.

###

New Poll: 64% Don't Support SSM

Deseret News:

When it comes to polls about same-sex marriage, it's all about how you ask the question. A new national poll by Lawrence Research found that 64 percent of Americans feel that marriage should only be between one man and one woman. Thirty-three percent feel marriage should be redefined to include any two people.

... Maggie Gallagher, the president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy and the former president of the National Organization for Marriage, thinks Lawrence's poll results match the results at the ballot box when the question is put to voters. "People are becoming increasingly sensitive to not wanting to be perceived as hostile to gay people and that is affecting the polling," Gallagher said. She said this change has a lot to do with what she perceives as an enormous change in gay marriage advocates' rhetoric following the passage of Proposition 8. "In the past they acknowledged that not everyone who opposes gay marriage is a bigot or a hater or a discriminator. But the main message in the press now is that if you simply don't believe in gay marriage, that in itself, is enough to demonstrate that you have bigotry or animus," Gallagher said. "And people are becoming reluctant to tell pollsters what they really believe unless they have a signal from the pollster that it is safe to do so."

One thing in Lawrence's poll that may have made religious people feel "safe" was he was connecting the issue to religious questions.

After SSM, What Next? NYC Councilman Pushes for California-Style Pro-Gay History Curriculum

CitizenLink:

A New York City councilman on Tuesday introduced a resolution asking the city to adopt a new education curriculum — one that makes a point of promoting individuals’ sexuality.

An openly gay councilman from Queens asked the city’s Department of Education to buy new textbooks. The curriculum would be similar to one that will be taught in California beginning next year, where a new law mandates instruction on the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people to the social sciences. A petition drive to repeal the law failed to gather a significant number of signatures by today’s deadline.

The Rev. Jason McGuire, executive director of the conservative group New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, said the effort is to be expected after the state redefined marriage earlier this year.

Stephen Heaney: "Abortion, Divorce and Same-Sex Marriage: No Blood, No Foul?"

Stephen Heaney, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Saint Thomas, argues in Public Discourse that political legitimization of "private" sexual and marital choices causes much public harm, and that "we have been personally harmed by the regimes of abortion and easy divorce":

For as long as I have debated topics of grave social concern, a particular sort of argument has been insouciantly tossed about by those who just want the conversation to end. It frequently takes the following form: "How will legalizing X harm me? I'm not being forced to do X. I'll just keep on doing what I'm doing. Therefore I support the legalization of X."

... such a claim is self-serving. It only considers the harm done to me, while discounting as irrelevant the harm done to millions of other human lives--and the evidence of the harm caused to so many people by these two legalized atrocities is incontrovertible.

... such a claim conveniently accounts for only that kind of harm that the arguer is thinking about at the moment, such as serious and obvious physical or psychological harm, while passing over less serious but no less real harms, and discounting the reality of moral and social harm.

... We have been personally harmed by the regimes of abortion and easy divorce. We might not realize it. We might have survived it. We might choose to ignore it. We might even have recovered. But we have all been harmed.

Cartoon: Obama's Defense of Gay Marriage Act

The President may still claim his views on marriage are "evolving" but what about his undermining of DOMA?

Source: U.S. News & World Report

Drag Queen (and Single Dad) Against SSM?

The Chicago Tribune:

By the time Marcus Parker left his hometown of Chicago in 2005 for California, he was well known around the city's drag-queen show circuit as Flame Monroe, the 5-foot-8, stacked diva with the crimson wig and extra-blue comedy act.

What most people wouldn't guess about the flamboyant Parker, who returns to Chicago this weekend for several shows, is that he's a devoted single father who is careful to tone down the color around his young children.

... And he doesn't support gay marriage.

... "I don't think it's right when a (gay) couple has lived a life together and family members step in at the last minute to take (possessions) or make decisions. But gay marriage? No. The only reason gay people want to get married is because they can't. Let them, and the divorce rate would be higher than (that of) heteros." [...] I just don't think marriage between gays is right."

WaTimes: Social Conservatives Make Their Mark in Washington

And among them, pro-marriage conservatives especially:

Although the Family Research Council's Values Voter Summit wrapped up last weekend, social and evangelical activists are networking and appear ready to make sure their opinions are understood in 2012.

...“I’ve already had a handful of people come up to me and say that they changed who they wanted to vote for because of this information,” said Christopher Plante, the executive director of the National Organization for Marriage – Rhode Island, as he held up a spreadsheet with all of the candidates’ stances on several key values.

“People are grateful for this information. We need all the candidates to lead on marriage, not something else. Right now there are many who believe in marriage to be between one man and a woman. But, we don’t want them to just believe it. We need them to lead on it. So far, Rick Santorum is the only one who seems to be doing that,” Mr. Plante added. -- Washington Times

L.A. Group Attempts to Take Prop 8 Back to the Ballot

We predict this attempt to overturn Prop 8 will fail. That was, after all, the conclusion of Equality California when they examined the evidence. Still this group is going to try:

Love Honor Cherish will submit language to the California attorney general by Friday for a ballot measure to overturn Prop 8.

The attorney general will write a petition title and summary, and then LHC can collect voter signatures for 150 days.

The group would need to collect valid signatures from 807,615 registered California voters. -- Rex Wockner

National Gathering of Argentinean Law Professors Reject SSM as Unconstitutional

LifeSiteNews:

Law professors attending Argentina’s most important conference on civil law have voted to declare that the nation’s recently-passed homosexual “marriage” legislation is unconstitutional.

The legal scholars also recommended the prohibition of homosexual adoption, and condemned the legal concept of multiple mothers or fathers of the same child as incompatible with the nation’s civil code.

... The Symposium, which is the largest of its kind for civil attorneys in Argentina, reported its highest attendance to date this year, with over 2,200 participating, including professors of law, practicing attorneys, and law students. Only law professors have the right to vote.