Home
|
Contact Us
|
NOM BLOG

Op-Ed: "On Whose Side Does the Hate Really Lie?"

May 18, 2011 at 7:00 am

David Lanham writes to the News-Leader about the resignation of former gold medalist Peter Vidmar:

The Olympics, of course, are about sport, not same-sex marriage. But Vidmar chose to resign from his appointment, citing the needs of the U.S. athletes over his own. As a successful businessman, motivational speaker, author and journalist, he was probably also concerned about his livelihood. Certainly others have faced devastating harassment for their support of marriage and Prop 8 specifically.

This reminds us that the "gay rights" movement has nothing to do with rights at all. What these people want is to redefine marriage and make what has been for over two centuries considered abnormal and wrong by American society to now be something right and good. Those who disagree with their agenda are said to "hate" them. But what about their own vitriolic attacks against folks like Peter Vidmar? And remember, by supporting Proposition 8 Vidmar was agreeing with the majority position of Californians. So, on whose side does the hate really lie?

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Same Sex Marriage | Comments (2)

Rhode Island House Committee Approves Civil Unions Bill Nobody Likes

May 18, 2011 at 6:00 am

Via the AP:

Rep. Doreen Costa, R-North Kingstown, said she voted against the measure because no member of the public told her they supported it. "I've never seen so much opposition to a bill," she said.
...Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Cranston, is crafting the amendment. He said lawmakers should have the chance to vote on gay marriage.

"We've never enshrined discrimination in our laws, and that's what this (the civil union bill) does," he said. "People have worked so hard on this issue. This is the year, and this is the path to do it."

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Marriage, Rhode Island | Comments Off on Rhode Island House Committee Approves Civil Unions Bill Nobody Likes

Prominent Gay Blogger: Not educating kids about SSM "makes them ignorant, hateful little morons."

May 17, 2011 at 6:30 pm

Dear Marriage Supporter,

One of my staff members sent me this bluntly honest admission from a gay blogger last week:

"[I]n response [to NOM's ad] we say, "NOOO! We're not gonna make kids learn about homosexuality, we swear! It's not like we're trying to recruit your children or anything." But let's face it—that's a lie. We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it." (emphasis added)

Did that strike you the way it did me?

NOM's Consequences Ad Running in NYWhen we released our latest TV ad in New York on the consequences of gay marriage (you can watch it here), our hope was that the ad would open the eyes of New Yorkers unaware of how same-sex marriage will impact their lives and the lives of their children, and motivate voters to contact their legislators to oppose the bill.

But I didn't expect a well-known gay blogger to openly boast that our ad's claim that gay marriage will be taught in public schools is clearly true!

Our "Consequences" ad is clearly having an impact—and exposing the radical agenda that we are up against in protecting our children and our families. Can I count on you to give $20, $50, or even $500 today to help spread the word to even more Americans about the importance of protecting marriage?

Please use this link to make a secure online donation today!

Daniel Villarreal goes on to make the point even more forcefully:

"... Why would anybody get all up in arms about punishing teachers who mention queers in the classroom unless we wanted teachers to do just that? In response against the bill, . . . [activists] gave out hundreds of "Don't B H8N on the Homos" t-shirts, wristbands, pins and stickers to school children in front of TV cameras. Recruiting children? You bet we are." (Emphasis added.)

And he doesn't stop there (we've omitted the most offensive language):

"... Why would we push anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?... I for one certainly want tons of school children to learn that it's OK to be gay, that people of the same sex should be allowed to legally marry each other, and that anyone can kiss a person of the same sex without feeling like a freak. . . .

I and a lot of other people want to indoctrinate, recruit, teach, and expose children to queer sexuality AND THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT."

In fact he concludes, "not educating our kids about queer issues makes them ignorant, hateful little morons."

It saddens me to think about the consequences were we to not stand up to protect marriage. But at the same time—having just come from the powerful rally with Sen. Ruben Diaz in the Bronx on Sunday—I am inspired by what we can accomplish together.

Will you join me in standing up for marriage with your most generous gift today? Please use this link to make your donation right now.

SSM Blogger: 'not educating our kids about queer issues makes them ignorant, hateful little morons.'

Gay marriage is the centerpiece of an ambitious movement to use the power of government, including the public schools, to impose a new public morality in the minds of Americans, and especially our children. If we fail to defend marriage as decent, wholesome and pure, our children will soon live in a world in which traditional views of marriage are treated as hateful, discredited bigotry, whether parents like it or not.

Each of us has different gifts and abilities that we bring to this struggle. Whatever your gift, I urge you to find the way you can be most effective in fighting back against this new narrative that calls the good of marriage nothing more than evil bigotry.

For some, that may be talking to your local school board, or writing a letter to the editor of your local paper. For many, it means talking to friends and co-workers about the future awaiting us if we fail to defend marriage today. And for you it may mean making a gift to help support NOM's work in the public square.

Over the past several years, I have been privileged to see first-hand the impact NOM's work has had, giving voters an organized voice and literally changing the course of history in states like New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Maryland. And it is your donations that have made it possible, allowing NOM to be a catalyst for good, reaching out to voters through TV ads, radio ads, phone calls and emails in highly targeted campaigns that maximize the impact of each dollar.

For the first time, politicians have now seen that their votes on marriage will have consequences for their political future. Quite simply, money speaks in politics—and thanks to you, it's no longer just the pro-gay marriage groups that are able to put their money where their mouth is.

The stakes are high, and together we are making a tremendous impact for marriage. But there is much yet to be done, and that is why I'm asking you to consider a new commitment to the work of NOM today. This is an ongoing struggle, and it would mean so much to me if you would consider joining us as a monthly supporter with a gift of $10 or $25 or even $50 each month.

Some receiving this email are capable of even larger gifts, and if you are in a position to do so, I ask that you prayerfully consider supporting marriage with a gift of $500, or even $1000 or more.

Whatever your gifts and abilities, if we each do what we can, together we will protect the future of marriage for our children and our families.

Brian Brown

Faithfully,

Brian brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

P.S.: This spring has been exceptionally busy (and expensive!), as we've already succeeded in major campaigns to block gay marriage bills in Maryland and Rhode Island, and are still in the thick of things in New York. Your gift today will help to ensure that we have the resources to continue fighting for marriage throughout 2011.

Brian Brown
By Brian Brown | Posted in Same Sex Marriage | Comments (14)

New Marriage Brief: 10 Years Later, SSM in Netherlands Failing to Deliver

May 17, 2011 at 4:20 pm

William C. Duncan writes at NRO's The Corner blog:

It has been ten years since the Netherlands created same-sex marriage, and a new research brief from the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, relying primarily on information from Statistics Netherlands, provides a snapshot of the institutional strength of marriage a decade later. (The article does not address causation factors.) Its modest findings are that gay marriages are relatively rare, marriage rates are down, divorce rates are stable, and the out-of-wedlock birthrate is continuing to climb.

The brief concludes: “At a minimum the data from the Netherlands does suggest that the hopes of those making a conservative case for gay marriage — that it will strengthen marriage generally and dramatically increase the stability and fidelity among same-sex couples — are likely to be disappointed.”

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Culture, Europe, Marriage, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (9)

Gay Marriage: Can We Win?

May 17, 2011 at 3:07 pm

NOM Chairman Maggie Gallagher is participating in a symposium hosted by Patheos' Catholic Portal and Evangelical Portal entitled, "For Life and Family: Faith and the Future of Social Conservatism."

Can we win? The future is unknown. But let me tell you the present: This spring, we fought and won the battle against gay marriage in two of the deepest-blue states in the nation, Rhode Island and Maryland. I believe we are about to win, again, in New York. In each case we were told it was a done deal; gay marriage would be impossible to stop. It wasn't.

... Gay marriage advocates have stopped trying to persuade their fellow citizens that gay marriage is good and have started trying to persuade them to give up. Why is the "argument from despair" so prominent? Because victory in any war happens not when one side is annihilated but when one side gives up the will to fight. The same holds true of culture wars. My question is: Why do we even ask ourselves this question?

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Culture, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (17)

Sociologist Brad Wilcox: The “Elite Wisdom” on Moms & Dads is Dead Wrong

May 17, 2011 at 3:05 pm

Mercator.net reports on a recent lecture by University of Virginia sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox in Canada:

... Sociologist W Bradford Wilcox says that this “elite wisdom” is dead wrong. Moms and dads bring different and essential gifts to the parenting enterprise, as a growing body of social science research findings testifies. In a presentation called “Vive La Difference: Gender and Parenthood” in Canada recently, Prof Wilcox, Director of the National Marriage Project in the US and Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Virginia, said this evidence shows:

*Mothers and Fathers bring distinctive talents to the parenting enterprise; and,

*Children are most likely to thrive and even survive when they are raised by their own mother and father;

*Children long to know and be known by the man and woman who brought

You can find Prof Wilcox’s slide presentation at the Institute for Marriage and the Family Canada website and read a summary of the science behind what you always thought anyway -- namely, that although death and other misfortunes sometimes rob children of a father or mother, being brought up by their own married mom and dad is far and away the best thing for kids.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Parenting, Research/Study | Comments (1)

Another Dem Politician Admits He Lied to Voters About Gay Marriage

May 17, 2011 at 2:39 pm

Over at HuffPost, Jonathan Miller, who was once Treasurer of the state of Kentucky and recently left an appointive post as Secretary of Finance and Administration, comes out of the closet as a gay marriage supporter--after he left office, naturally.

He admits to being a little bit ashamed he did so only after leaving office. But he doesn't confess any shame at all about repeatedly lying to Kentucky voters in order to get elected.

"For the first decade of our marriage, living on the East Coast, we could be open about our beliefs. But then we decided to move back home and in 1998, I even made the youthful indiscretion of running for Congress.

There was simply no other option: I had to shove my gay marriage views into a back corner of my closet. My consultants advised that any deviation or hesitation would immediately make me unelectable ... When asked, I would parse my answers like a Clintonian deposition.

...Some will castigate me for waiting until it was too late to make any difference. I plead guilty.

But while such a gesture might have been noble and potentially educational, I determined that, on balance, it wasn't worth political hari-kari. There were too many battles on too many other fronts that I wanted to fight. Gay marriage is important, but so are poverty reduction, educational opportunity, environmental protection and so on. I'd be giving up on all of the latter to simply make a statement on the former."

Maggie Gallagher
By Maggie Gallagher | Posted in Same Sex Marriage | Comments (13)

Legal Watchdog Sues Obama's DOJ for Documents Detailing Decision Not to Defend DOMA; Files Prop 8 Brief

May 17, 2011 at 2:20 pm

From the Judicial Watch press release:

Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on April 29 against the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ)to obtain records related to the DOJ’s decision not to defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

... The Office of Information Policy and the Referral Unit both acknowledged receipt of Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests but have failed to respond to these requests within statutory allotted time frame. In fact, the DOJ has failed to release any records or indicate when a response is forthcoming, prompting Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.

Also, Judicial Watch is getting more involved in the Prop 8 litigation:

On May 2, 2011, Judicial Watch separately filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court for the State of California supporting the right of California citizens to defend Proposition 8 when elected officials fail to do so. Proposition 8 states that "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California" (Case No. S189476).

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in California, DOMA, Prop 8, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (4)

APIA: Pawlenty Must Support MN Marriage Amendment

May 17, 2011 at 2:17 pm

From American Principles in Action's press release:

Today, American Principles in Action urged former Minnesota Governor and presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty to publicly support the state’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman, which is up for a vote in the Minnesota House of Representatives tomorrow.

“Courts in states across the country are overturning laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman, but this amendment will ensure Minnesotans have a chance to protect marriage from activist judges,” said Frank Cannon, president of American Principles in Action.

“Gov. Pawlenty’s credibility as a social conservative is at stake as he continues to vie for the Republican nomination for president,” said Cannon. “Republican voters across the country will take note of whether or not he is a leader for marriage in his home state.”

Gov. Pawlenty has previously stated that traditional values such as marriage between a man and a woman are “universal” and are “embedded in our culture.”

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Election Watch 2012, Minnesota, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (2)

Minnesota Nice? Pro-SSM Legislators Get Downright Rude

May 17, 2011 at 12:00 pm

Minnesotans are nice people. That's why it was especially disheartening to witness the nasty jabs that legislators opposed to the Marriage Amendment hurled at the bill's supporters once it became clear that the Senate was indeed going to pass the bill (as it turned out, in a bi-partisan vote) on to the House.

UpTake Minnesota catalogued many of the accusations that were made during their live coverage of the debate via Twitter:

Sen Dibble: Angry, divisive campaign to denigrate gays will send message to MN schools that it's OK to bully.

Sen Pappas reads letter from German Jew comparing anti-gay marriage amend[ment] to Nazi revok[ing] of citizenship

Sen Harrington: I'm not comfortable using Leviticus to legislate since it also says slavery is OK.

Sen Goodwin: Think about how different Christianity would be if Jesus ask crowd to vote on stoning Mary Magdalene.

Sen. Berglin: At one point law said women were property of men when they got married. She's glad that was not put in [the] Constitution.

So, to review, in the combined opinion of the Senators mentioned above, people who believe Minnesotans should be able to vote on the definition of marriage are pro-bullying, Nazi-inspired, slavery-sympathetic, pro-stoning, anti-woman, and (of course) anti-gay bigots.

None of which is very nice, or at all true.

Will the House debate be a better example of Minnesota Nice? Stay tuned.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Minnesota, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (13)

Catholic Editor Responds to "Fringe Conservative" Label

May 17, 2011 at 11:03 am

The liberal press in Minnesota has been going after those who are supporting the marriage amendment effort, one paper calling them "fringe conservatives".

Joe Towalski, the editor of the Catholic Spirit and the Saint Cloud Visitor responds:

The Minnesota Independent noted in a recent article that newspapers throughout the state are coming out against a bill seeking to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. No editorial boards, it said, are supportive of the amendment.

That’s not true. This newspaper is supportive of the effort.

... The Winona Daily News characterizes the amendment initiative as pandering to the interests of “fringe conservatives.” A few, including the Star Tribune and the Mille Lacs Messenger, call it bigotry.

... [But] Ensuring the definition of marriage doesn’t change has nothing to do with hate. It is nothing “fringe” or radical. It is all about preserving an institution that best serves children and the common good.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Free Speech, Same Sex Marriage | Comments (2)

Pele's Brazilian Doctor Implants Unrelated Embryos in Unwitting Patients to Increase Success of IVF

May 17, 2011 at 10:55 am

IVF not only helps couples have children of their own--it sometimes helps them have other people's children.

Is this doctor's behavior a human rights violation or merely a technological innovation designed to increase success. Does biology matter?

I'm guessing it does to most people.  (Want to bet how many of these kids are the doctor's biological children?)

Maggie Gallagher
By Maggie Gallagher | Posted in Children, Science | Comments Off on Pele's Brazilian Doctor Implants Unrelated Embryos in Unwitting Patients to Increase Success of IVF

Gay Activists Stage "Kiss In" During Mass after Brazil High Court OKs Civil Unions

May 17, 2011 at 10:00 am

Almost two weeks ago a Judge on the Brazilian High Court ruled that gay civil unions did not violate their constitution:

Brazil’s Supreme Federal Tribunal has ruled that homosexual unions are equivalent to the “stable unions” of heterosexuals under national law, despite the Brazilian Constitution’s clear limitation of such unions to heterosexual couples.

“Stable unions,” which are roughly equivalent to “civil unions” in English-speaking countries, are arrangements “between a man and a woman”  who live together “as a family entity” according to article 226 of the Brazilian Constitution. Couples in stable unions have access to over one hundred privileges also given to married couples.

But the judge who had principal charge over the case, Carlos Ayres Britto, justified extending the explicitly heterosexual language to homosexual couples based on the Constitution’s prohibition of discrimination based on sex, and the fact that the Constitution does not prohibit homosexual relations --LifeSiteNews

Meanwhile, Wagner Moura, a Catholic blogger in Brazil, writes on his blog (Google Translate version) about gay activists who unfurled a rainbow banner on the steps of a Catholic Church while Mass was being celebrated inside, accompanied by loud music and a "kiss-in".

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Catholic Church, Law, Marriage, Religious Liberty | Comments (2)

UK Judge Demands Review of Damaging Divorce Laws

May 17, 2011 at 9:00 am

From the UK Telegraph:

Outdated family laws have fueled an “alarming” rise in marital breakdown, causing “profound” damage to millions of children, a High Court judge has warned

Sir Paul Coleridge called for an independent commission to reform divorce law, arguing that family relationships are now “unrecognisable” from the 1950s, when the last review was conducted.

He condemned successive governments for “ducking” politically contentious reforms with the result that pre-nuptial agreements and cohabiting relationships were being legitimised by “stealth”.

... Sir Paul estimated that 320,000 children enter the family law system each year, suggesting that more than 3 million children are now caught up in the legal process

“The scale of the problem is genuinely alarming,” he said. “The incidence of family breakdown is so terribly high now that the way in which family law is shaped and managed has, I believe, a direct and profound impact on the private lives of huge numbers of the population.

NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Divorce, United Kingdom | Comments (1)

When 80% of Divorces are "Forced", How the Church Can Help

May 17, 2011 at 8:00 am

Psychologist Hilary Towers, while discussing the opportunity provided by Newt Gingrich's presidential run to have a national debate on the reality of divorce, observes:

Data from the National Survey of Children (NSC) indicate that approximately 80% of divorce cases in this country are forced divorces.  In other words, the vast majority of divorces are situations in which one person puts an end to the marriage through legal coercion, even while the other is fighting to save it.  In a time when “self above all others” serves as the motto for our system of family law and our culture, one would be hard pressed to find a more relevant and pressing issue for the Catholic Church, which upholds the sanctity of lifelong marriage and does not acknowledge divorce. And yet to date, we seem content with viewing spousal abandonment as a mental health issue for the person left behind, rather than the danger to the institution of marriage it is.  We refer the abandoned to a “divorce coping group” and encourage them to carry their cross. This is not enough.
NOM
By NOM Staff | Posted in Catholic Church, Divorce, Election Watch 2012 | Comments (2)
Home NOM Blog Donate Advocacy Center
Copyright 2011