Do Rawlsian principles of "political liberalism" demand the legal recognition of same-sex romantic partnerhips as marriages? I suspect that many of Rawls's conservative critics, as well as his liberal supporters, would suppose that the answer must be yes. (For the conservative critics, that would be one more count against Rawls's general theory of justice and political morality.) But now comes my former student, Matthew O'Brien, who in a brilliant article just out in the British Journal of American Legal Studies argues that the answer is actually no. In fact, he maintains that Rawlsian principles, rigorously and consistently applied, forbid the re-definition of civil marriage to include same-sex partnerships. The article, entitled "Why Liberal Neutrality Prohibits Same-Sex Marriage: Rawls, Political Liberalism, and the Family," is available online here.
Last week, I told you about the odds we face in the four battleground states—outspent, scorned in the media, with gay marriage advocates confidently predicting victory.
But thanks to millions of Americans who've sacrificed their time and treasure to stand up for God's visions of marriage, pro-marriage messages are finally getting out: through churches and synagogues, through personal conversations, through social media, through letters to the editor—and through the ads crafted by NOM's own brilliant Frank Schubert. Now I'm here to tell you...
Our Ads Are Working!
Remember last week that I told you about the sudden turnaround in polling in Washington. Polls had gay marriage winning by as much as fourteen points, but after just one week of television ads the polls suddenly tightened, showing us within the margin of error and gay marriage advocates under 50 percent!
This week, more good news: in Maryland, the miracle continues!
Don't take my word for it, here's how the never-friendly MSM Los Angeles Times reported the breaking news:
Maryland, which just a month ago appeared poised to become the first state in the country to back gay marriage by popular vote, is now reported to be deadlocked on the issue, in part because of a drop in support from religious blacks.
Only a few weeks ago, polls were suggesting that Marylanders were leaning toward supporting gay marriage, but as November approached, the numbers tightened.
The change appears to be partly driven by black pastors in Maryland urging their congregations to vote against the measure.
A late September Baltimore Sun poll showed gay marriage ahead by ten percentage points, and had African-Americans supporting the idea 2 to 1.
Since then, voters in Maryland have been exposed to a media blitz, with both sides airing TV ads in an effort to swing undecided voters their way. The latest polling for the Sun, conducted Oct. 20-23 by the Annapolis, Md., firm OpinionWorks, now shows 50% of black voters against same-sex marriage, with 42% supporting the idea.
Funny—even though the LA Times can't help but report the swing, it really doesn't tell you how good the news is by focusing on just the black vote. So, let me put it simply:
Just a few weeks ago, the Baltimore Sun had gay marriage leading by ten points (49 percent to 39 percent); and now opposition to gay marriage has closed that gap to lead by one percentage point. Amazing!
The LA Times goes on to point to our secret weapon for marriage:
There is one man who gives supporters good reason to worry. Frank Schubert, the political strategist who helped engineer the defeat of same-sex marriage measures in California in 2008, Maine in 2009 and North Carolina in 2012, is leading the charge in Maryland as well.
"32-0 is a pretty good record," Schubert said, referring to the 32 states that have defeated ballot measures to legalize same-sex marriage. He also criticized what he calls "a concerted effort to convince black voters that as Democrats they should support Question 6" on the Maryland ballot out of loyalty to the party."
You and I know that something as fundamental and as sacred as marriage should not be reduced to partisan politics.
But do you want to know what's even worse? When partisan politicians try to get between a pastor and his people!
SSM Bullies Striking the Shepherd to Scatter the Flock
Amazingly, this is exactly what's happening in Maryland right now. Pro-gay marriage donors are mostly white and mostly socially liberal—some of them Republicans (like Ken Mehlman and Paul Singer); some of them incredibly rich (like New York City's Mayor Bloomberg); some of them incredibly Hollywood (like Brad Pitt, who just dissed his pro-marriage mom by donating $100,000 to push gay marriage). And these are the types that are now spending tons of money to run a radio ad urging black Christians to ignore their pastors—and using President Obama's voice to persuade them.
Spending white people's money to urge black Christians to ignore their pastors, and to put their faith in princes instead!
The Black Church has always been the conscience, not just of African-Americans, but of all Americans. Listen, then, to the incredibly offensive tactic used in this ad and tell me: doesn't it make your blood boil?
2012: The Marriage Election
Meanwhile, gay marriage activists are trying to attack Mitt Romney by circulating this video of him from 2004, saying he stood up against an effort to take "mom and dad" off Massachusetts birth certificates, affirming every child deserves a mom and dad if possible.
The miracles unfolding for marriage may well end up boosting Governor Romney in this election, just as we saw President Obama's pro-gay marriage position cost him support in North Carolina.
Take Minnesota.
No Republican candidate for President has won Minnesota since Richard Nixon's 49-state landslide against George McGovern in 1972.
And yet, a startling new Star Tribune poll released Sunday shows Mitt Romney in a statistical dead heat with President Obama—with the president under 50 percent!
National Review's Robert Costa notes that the marriage amendment battle in Minnesota is likely one reason for the momentum.
Democrats are nervous. For months, their electoral calculus has categorized Minnesota as reliably blue. This week, the Washington Post and ABC News reclassified it from "safely" Democrat to "lean Obama." To stanch the bleeding, Democrats are spending more, and sending in former president Bill Clinton, who will stump near the Twin Cities.
Obama adviser Jim Messina is pushing back; he told reporters on Monday that the idea Romney could win Minnesota is "wishful thinking." But Republicans' rising expectations are grounded in more than poll numbers. As Hot Air's Ed Morrissey reports, there are "two key referendums on the ballot," and they are dominating the debate and stoking participation.
One measure would amend the state constitution to require photo identification for voting, and the other would constitutionally define marriage as between a man and a woman. Outside groups on both sides have poured in money. These referendums, more than Republican Kurt Bills's underfunded challenge to Senator Amy Klobuchar, have Republicans enthused [emphases added].
Our own Frank Schubert just published a Halloween op-ed in The Hill urging Team Romney to capitalize on this momentum: "In the final stretch, social issues can help Romney," he writes. "With polls showing the presidential race to be dead even, Mitt Romney would do well to remind voters in key swing states of his position on social issues like marriage, life and religious liberty. They could tip the scale in this election."
[Of course, I know many of our fellow marriage champions in state battles will vote for Pres. Obama while voting against gay marriage. I want to say welcome and thank you! Marriage transcends partisan politics (or should!) and brings together an amazing coalition of people of all races, creeds, and even political parties to defend ultimate values.]
But here's the point Frank is making that I want to underline: Republicans should recognize that standing up for traditional values is an electoral asset, not a problem, an opportunity we can't afford to let slip!
As Frank puts it: "The Karl Rove wing of the GOP and the Republican elite have succeeded in keeping social issues off the table in this general election, deeming them to be ‘divisive.' They've understandably focused their campaign on the Obama record, especially as it relates to the economy. But Obama also has a record on social issues, and that record puts him at odds with a large majority of voters in key swing states. Unfortunately, voters in those states haven't heard much about the Obama record on marriage, life and religious liberty."
Other Major Voices Speaking Up On Marriage
Syndicated radio host Dennis Prager is a marriage champion, part of the amazing coalition across creeds for marriage. When Maggie Gallagher went on his show, he asked that she would make sure NOM passed along to you the chance to read his new column on marriage.
Let me tell you a little about Dennis. He's one smart dude, fluent in Russian and Hebrew; he has taught at Brooklyn College, was a Fellow at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, and worked as a media fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
In his recent piece on marriage, he writes eloquently about what history teaches us on marriage:
The history of left-wing policies has largely consisted of doing what feels good and compassionate without asking what the long-term consequences will be; what Professor Thomas Sowell calls "Stage One Thinking." […]
By redefining marriage to include same sex couples we are playing with sexual and societal fire. Just as the entitlement state passes on the cost of our good intentions to our children and grandchildren… so, too, same-sex marriage will pass along the consequences of our good intentions to our children and grandchildren—gender confusion and the loss of motherhood and fatherhood as values, just to cite two obvious consequences.
It is not enough to mean well in life. One must also do well. And the two are frequently not the same thing.
Let me close by sharing another miraculous blessing: The great Rev. Billy Graham is still with us, and his voice—one of America's great moral voices—is ringing still, and most recently ringing with God's truth about marriage!
On November 6, the day before my 94th birthday, our nation will hold one of the most critical elections in my lifetime. We are at a crossroads and there are profound moral issues at stake. I strongly urge you to vote for candidates who support the biblical definition of marriage between a man and woman, protect the sanctity of life, and defend our religious freedoms. The Bible speaks clearly on these crucial issues. Please join me in praying for America, that we will turn our hearts back toward God.
I pray that the good people of Minnesota will show their support for God's definition of marriage, between a man and a woman. I wholeheartedly endorse the Marriage Protection Amendment, and urge you to vote Yes to pass Amendment 1.
Billy Graham has never been a political preacher. By stepping forward now, he is underlining the serious and sacred nature of the battle we are fighting.
I just want to say thank you, Rev. Graham—and thank God for your blessed 90-year witness to kindness and to courage!
So many good people of all races, all creeds, all colors and all political parties will be inspired by your witness to once against stand up for God's truth for marriage.
We Need Your Help In These Final Days!
NOM is putting everything we have into these victories.
Of course, as always, I want to acknowledge and all the good organizations out there fighting for marriage. Marriage is too great to be fought by only one person or one organization.
But take a look at these news stories, and you'll see just how deeply NOM is involved in these fights, how much we are putting in to winning these victories for marriage, to being your voice for God's values.
In Iowa, where a fourth pro-gay marriage judge is now facing the voters three years after he ruled to impose gay marriage on the state, this World-Herald story lists the many groups working to oust David Wiggins: Citizen Link, Rick Santorum's new Patriot Voices, CatholicVote.org are all helping The Family Leader fight in this cause. But the same article also notes that, of the $248,000 spent in the campaign to date, "[NOM] has spent about $140,000, most of it on television ads advocating Wiggins' ouster."
Opponents of same-sex marriage raised nearly $950,000 in October, a major push toward the end of the campaign as voters get ready to head to the polls Nov. 6.
The bulk of the money came from the National Organization for Marriage, which donated $800,000, and the Knights of Columbus, which chipped in $100,000, according to a campaign finance report filed with the state just before midnight Friday.
In Minnesota, the Star Tribune reports on Oct. 31 that of the $3.7 million the pro-Minnesota for Marriage raised to fight for the marriage amendment, "The National Organization for Marriage has poured $1.65 million into Minnesota for Marriage, and nearly all of that came this month, new campaign finance records show. The group gave another $225,000 on Wednesday."
In Washington state, the National Catholic Register reported on Oct 31: "Preserve Marriage Washington, the state campaign organization leading the effort to block the passage of a state law legalizing same-sex ‘marriage,' raised about $2.4 million, including $1.1 million from the National Organization for Marriage.
We are throwing everything we have—heart, soul, body and time and bank-account—into this fight to keep what God has created: marriage as the union of husband and wife; marriage as the foundation of a society ordered to the good of children; marriage as a living emblem of the love the Creator has for us all.
Here's Kelly Yanta in Minnesota speaking for millions about what you and I believe in standing for marriage:
These last few days are quite a whirlwind. Tonight, I'm in Minnesota, where I'll be debating Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson on the Minnesota marriage amendment at 7pm. The debate, sponsored by Minnesota Public Radio, is free and open to the public, so if you live in the Minneapolis area, come down to the Fitzgerald Theater in St. Paul at 7pm for a lively debate (details here).
Many of our friends and family will be informing themselves about the issues and getting ready to vote this weekend. Let's make sure they see this visual graphic educating them about how to vote to protect marriage by sharing it on our Facebook wall, Twitter feed and with our email list!
You can share it via Facebook (and access the full-size version) here.
Today, Minnesota for Marriage announced the release of two new radio ads. The ads will run in English and Spanish. The ads point out that people who believe in traditional marriage will face consequences if marriage is redefined in Minnesota. Some of the consequences included small businesses fined, people fired, charities closed down and churches sued.
... The Spanish ad emphasizes consequences to children as well stating that “Marriage is about children and family. It is our most important social institution. If marriage were redefined, there would be consequences for Minnesotans. The most affected would be our children who could be taught about gay marriage in school, against the desires of parents.” It also points out that “Supporting marriage as the union of a man and a woman does not make you anti-gay but pro-marriage.”Both ads encourage listeners to “vote YES on Amendment 1, the marriage protection amendment.”
I know you're probably getting bombarded with emails this campaign season, so I'll make this brief.
You know that we've always been up against the media, Hollywood elites and a small but powerful cadre of billionaires who are all trying to push their gay marriage agenda on the country. And recently, corporate America has jumped in the fray, backing a same-sex marriage agenda that is simply bad for business.
But now, another monolith has joined them: Unions.
Please watch the story of Sarah Rowe and hear her tell, in her own words, how her union openly endorsed same-sex marriage and pressured its members to do likewise:
Here's just one quote from Sarah:
It was made known [by my union] that faith shouldn't be a part of the
discussion in the union meeting [which] made it more difficult for people
to voice their actual opinion.
"...With just a few days left before the election let me summarize what we believe exactly. Number one we believe that God is the author of marriage. He created marriage for the benefit of couples but also for the next generation. Traditional marriage has take hits from divorce and other failings but fundamentally the institution of marriage has served society well for thousands of years. We believe that children need both a mom and a dad and that marriage is our best way of encouraging that result. In fact the overwhelming body of evidence establishes that children do best when raised by the two people responsible for bringing them into the world, their parents. Marriage is at risk of being redefined by political activists, unaccountable judges and ambitious politicians with no voter input. We believe there are major consequences to society of marriage is redefined..."
A new SurveyUSA poll out today has the Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment leading 48%-47% with 5% undecided.
We will need at least 50%+1 to win on Election Day (failing to vote on the Amendment automatically counts as a "no" vote).
Once again, only 16% of Republicans oppose the Amendment but 27% of Democrats favor it. The marriage amendment also registers strong support in all areas of the state except the twin cities metro region.
More evidence we have a winning coalition in place to deliver victory next Tuesday, with your support!
A national organization emerging as a driving force in the effort to block same-sex marriage around the country is the single-largest contributor to the group trying to pass the Minnesota marriage amendment.
The National Organization for Marriage has poured $1.65 million into Minnesota for Marriage, and nearly all of that came this month, new campaign finance records show. The group gave another $225,000 on Wednesday.
Today, Minnesota For Marriage released its latest campaign finance report outlining that the committee has raised $3.6 million for the period January 1, 2012 through October 22, 2012. Since the October 22nd cutoff date for this report, Minnesota For Marriage has reported additional contributions of over $660,000. The number of contributors grew dramatically as well with thousands of new donors.
“We are delighted that our 2012 donor contributions more than doubled since our last report,” continued Helmberger. “The surge in the number of contributors and contributions has allowed us to step up our TV, billboard, and radio ads that focus on what happens to individuals, small businesses, churches – and especially children – when same-sex marriage has been imposed elsewhere.”
By NOM Staff|Posted in Marriage, Minnesota, Same Sex Marriage|Comments Off on StarTribune: NOM Gives $1.6 Million to Minnesota Amendment
Gary Cecil III includes a few quotes by NOM's Thomas Peters in The Signal (the student newspaper of the University of Houston-Clear Lake):
"...Thirty-two states when given the chance have voted to protect marriage,” said Thomas Peters, cultural director of NOM. “Gay marriage has primarily been pushed with this claim that it is ‘inevitable,’ even though it goes down in defeat time and time again.”
NOM’s pledge also supports appointing federal judges who do not support same-sex marriage and putting the decision to repeal gay marriage in states that have permitted it to a popular vote.
“It’s important to prevent gay marriage because gay unions are not marriages,” Peters said. “The public purpose of marriage is and has always been to unite men and women together, and to unite them to whatever children they may have . . . any child introduced into a same-sex unit is deprived of either his or her mother or father.”"
"...Peters argues gay marriage is really not about benefits anymore and points out even in states that have granted same-sex couples all the legal rights of marriage through civil unions, activists are still attempting to redefine marriage.
“Gay unions are not marriages and however long this fiction may be perpetuated in law, the more harm to society and the next generation will result,” Peters said. “If we erase the idea and if the law treats the idea as akin to bigotry that moms and dads each matter and each contribute something unique to the well-being of children, we have lost a core human truth and society and culture will suffer as a result. Gay people have the right to live as they choose, but they do not have the right to redefine marriage for the rest of us."
Today on Public Discourse, Matt Franck discusses new analyses that confirm Mark Regnerus's findings. The second in a two-part series.
"Yesterday on Public Discourse, I described the controversy that followed the publication of the New Family Structures Study (NFSS), led by University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus. During a summer of unusual abuse, Regnerus remained largely silent but with his head unbowed. As autumn arrived, he found himself vindicated as an honest scientist by his university, with continued support from the journal editor who published his research.
In the November 2012 issue of Social Science Research, Regnerus has published a new article: “Parental same-sex relationships, family instability, and subsequent life outcomes for adult children: Answering critics of the new family structures study with additional analyses.”... How many children were raised by two women staying together from the child’s first birthday to his or her eighteenth? Just two. And how many such cases were there in the FGR category—of children raised by two men together for their whole childhood? Zero. This, out of an initial population of 15,000.I recite these numbers to make a point of my own that fairly leaps off the pages of Regnerus’s work: that family instability is the characteristic experience of those whose parents have same-sex relationships. This is what Regnerus is getting at when he says that critics who want him to treat stability as a “control variable” are actually “controlling for the pathways.” To go on an endless search for a sizable random sample of long-term, stable same-sex couples raising children is to miss the social reality in front of us, namely that they are conspicuously missing from the lives of children whose parents have same-sex relationships..."
At a debate last week with his two opponents in the 21st Senate District, Grisanti flat out lied about his record on same-sex marriage, claiming that he "did not campaign against marriage equality in 2010," when challenged for flip-flopping on the issue.
In 2008, I personally had a phone conversation with him in which he pledged support for marriage and gratefully accepted money from NOM. Two years later, in 2010, former Erie County executive Joel Giambra, credited with orchestrating Grisanti's successful senate campaign, attributed Grisanti's victory in part to voter's concern about his opponent's support for same-sex marriage.
The record is clear: Mark Grisanti pledged to support marriage, then changed his vote in exchange for power and campaign contributions.
And now he is outright lying to the people of Western New York so he can continue to cash in.
The New York Senate Republican Campaign Committee knows its majority is at risk, and has pumped more than a half million dollars into Grisanti's reelection effort, including $350,000 in just the past month. Despite being massively outspent, NOM-backed Conservative Party candidate Charles Swanick is waging an effective grassroots campaign, knocking on more than 7,000 doors in the district and reaching out directly to voters.
Many New Yorkers are digging out from Sandy's aftermath, waiting for power to be restored, and working to repair their homes. But for those of us who were spared major damage from the storm, our investment today is all the more critical. Please make a generous contribution to the NOM PAC New York today.
We've already helped New Yorkers fire two of the four Republicans who voted for same-sex marriage. Help finish the job on November 6th! We can pull it off, but only with your generous help to fund our get out the vote efforts in these final days of the campaign.
No one likes being the bearer of bad news—certainly I don't! But I have to tell you what our opponents are up to in the four states voting on marriage next Tuesday.
You see, they are spooked by recent polls showing us with momentum on our side, and so they have unleashed an avalanche of lies and harassment in a desperate attempt to score their first state victory and avoid four more crushing defeats.
Here's just a sample of the myths and falsehoods our opponents are filling the airwaves (and your mailboxes) with every day:
In Washington State, our opponents are airing ads claiming that if we do not redefine marriage, individuals in a same-sex domestic partnership will be denied hospital visitation rights (Washington law says they cannot be denied).
Our opponents are sending out mailers to senior citizens claiming they will lose their health care and pay higher taxes on their Social Security benefits if gay marriage is not legalized (the Washington State Secretary of State Voters Guide refutes their claim, and the media says the claims are "misleading" and fail the "political smell test").
In addition, a man has been arrested and charged with a hate crime for his attack on a grandmother who was volunteering to protect marriage. Our allies have set up a Facebook album showing the "vandalism, vulgarities and violence" perpetuated by our opponents throughout this campaign. And gay marriage activists have been caught red-handed with dozens of stolen Reject R-74 yard signs in their possession.
Now do you see what I mean? This is what we are up against.
(I'm happy to report we have raised over $75,000 from almost 900 donors like you!)
Can you bear to hear more bad news?
In Maine, a family-run farm had to take down one of our "Vote NO on Question 1" signs after they encountered harassment and intimidation from gay marriage activists. They were targeted simply for sharing their Christian beliefs on marriage.
In Maryland, the chief diversity officer of Gallaudet University, the first African-American, deaf woman to receive a PhD from that institution, was summarily put on leave simply because she signed a petition to allow the people of Maryland to vote on marriage.
In Minnesota, our opponents are claiming that there is "no difference" between children raised by their mom and dad, and children raised by any two people, when the latest, most extensive research indicates that nothing substitutes for being raised by your biological parents joined in marriage.
I could also share with you example after example of our pro-marriage yard signs and billboards being vandalized and defaced, in each of these four states.
I know the only way to bring an end to such lies and harassment is to score definitive victories for marriage at the ballot box across the country next Tuesday.
We don't have liberal millionaires and billionaires, Hollywood celebrities or wealthy pro-gay marriage CEOs funding our campaign.
We have honest, brave people like you.
I couldn't be more proud to be part of this with you. Please respond with generosity.
Together, we will overcome the lies of our spooked opponents and counter their avalanche of distortions. We will stand up for the TRUTH of marriage—and with your help the truth will win out.
A Statement by Evangelist Billy Graham on the Proposed Minnesota Marriage Protection Amendment
Oct. 31, 2012
Montreat, NC—“For more than 50 years, the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association was based in Minneapolis and we were blessed by the support of thousands of Minnesotans who helped us spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ around the world. As a former resident with strong personal and ministry ties to the North Star State, I pray that the good people of Minnesota will show their support for God's definition of marriage, between a man and a woman. I wholeheartedly endorse the Marriage Protection Amendment, and urge you to vote Yes to pass Amendment 1.”
NRO's Robert Costa notes that one of the reasons a new poll shows Mitt Romney within the margin of error with Barack Obama in Minnesota (a state Obama won by 10 points in 2008) is the simultaneous Marriage Protection Amendment:
"...A Star Tribune poll released Sunday shows a dead heat, with Obama at 47 percent and Romney at 44 percent. This shocker elated state Republicans, who have been frustrated for decades. (Democrats have won Minnesota since 1972.) To capitalize on the momentum, the Romney campaign recently spent a small sum on television ads.
Democrats are nervous. For months, their electoral calculus has categorized Minnesota as reliably blue. This week, the Washington Post and ABC News reclassified it from “safely” Democrat to “lean Obama.” To stanch the bleeding, Democrats are spending more, and sending in former president Bill Clinton, who will stump near the Twin Cities.
Obama adviser Jim Messina is pushing back; he told reporters on Monday that the idea Romney could win Minnesota is “wishful thinking.” But Republicans’ rising expectations are grounded in more than poll numbers. As Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey reports, there are “two key referendums on the ballot,” and they are dominating the debate and stoking participation.
One measure would amend the state constitution to require photo identification for voting, and the other would constitutionally define marriage as between a man and a woman. Outside groups on both sides have poured in money. These referendums, more than Republican Kurt Bills’s underfunded challenge to Senator Amy Klobuchar, have Republicans enthused."
NOM’s pledge also supports appointing federal judges who do not support same-sex marriage and putting the decision to repeal gay marriage in states that have permitted it to a popular vote.
