NOM BLOG

NYC No Place for You or Me

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

"Stay out of New York City."

That is effectively the message that a City Councilman named Daniel Dromm has sent to you, me, and millions of pro-marriage Americans — including the millions who already live in the city that never sleeps. And none of us, least of all New Yorkers, can allow ourselves to remain silent about it.

Dromm sent his message by way of remarks to the Huffington Post, when he said of anyone who believes in marriage as the union of one man and one woman:

We don't need bigots coming to New York City. They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community. [...] We don't need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves. They need to wake up and see reality.

"Not welcome here." Yes, you read that right. An individual's own privately-held beliefs, if they conflict with Mr. Drumm's radical new orthodoxy, even if those beliefs are never publicly expressed, make that person guilty of a "thought-crime" and label him or her a "bigot" that doesn't belong in the Big Apple!

What spurred Dromm's remarks? The announcement that Chick-fil-A had plans to expand its operations into New York City. Dromm is one of those intolerant few who still cling bitterly to a misremembered moment in 2012 when Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy was reported in the press expressing his personal belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

In Dromm's and others' imaginations, this meant that Chick-fil-A was an "anti-gay company" and that Cathy and the many thousands who work for him deserve punishment. You may remember how, at the time, several cities mayors and councilmembers said that Chick-fil-A was unwelcome in their jurisdictions. But Dromm's recent remarks go even further: he's effectively said that anyone who believes in marriage, regardless of how privately they hold these beliefs, is a "bigot" who doesn't belong!

I shudder to think I've lived to see the day when a public official in our great nation can make such an outrageously intolerant statement and not be taken to task in every quarter for such an un-American and uncivil position. These remarks should have stirred public outcry and a flurry of media attention: but instead we hear deafening silence from the media, which is tantamount to a tacit approval.

What does this say about our media culture? When Brendan Eich was appointed as the new CEO of Mozilla, and it came to light that years before he had given a donation to Proposition 8, a few activists on Twitter expressed disapproval. But the media eagerly leapt to the task of fanning that flame and ignited a true firestorm in the press that eventually ended with Eich's being forced to step down from his position.

But when the shoe is on the other foot, we don't hear a peep from the press. Where is the national outcry over the news coming last week from Portland, Oregon, about Chauncy Childs and the new business she's trying to start?

You haven't heard of her? I'm not surprised. That's because she's not a gay activist. She's not a radical leftist trying to redefine marriage and family to suit her own personal desires. Instead, she's a pro-marriage individual who posted on her private Facebook page some expressions of her beliefs.

So you probably haven't heard how gay activists are trying to force her business closed before it even opens its doors. They've even been posting lists of vendors that trade with her small shop, Moreland Farmers Pantry, and calling for a boycott of those other businesses until they sever ties with Mrs. Childs. One local restaurant owner, a man who actually supports same-sex ‘marriage,' spoke up against the bullying targeted at Mrs. Childs — and now his restaurant has been targeted by a separate boycott!

Is this the environment we want to pass on to our children and grandchildren? An environment where belief in marriage as God designed it is made into a "thought crime" and the sole criterion by which one can be excluded from a company position, a business relationship, or even a whole city community?

Of course not. Absolutely not. But the culture isn't going to turn around on its own. We need to stand up and speak out.

Here's what you can do.

So here's what you can do today to respond to these latest outrages waged against people like you and me who believe in marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

If you live in New York, send a strong message to the City Council that Mr. Dromm's remarks should be condemned, and the City should apologize to the millions of New Yorkers that have been insulted and hurt by this display of gross intolerance.

For those of us who do not live in New York, we can make our voices heard with this summer's March for Marriage on June 19th. We are working hard to make sure we bring as many people to the Capitol as possible, to show that a groundswell of support still exists in our country for the values you and I believe in.

But of course, the March requires a great deal of resources and planning, and we can use your help. Please consider making a gift to the March for Marriage today and help us to spread the word about this event which comes at such a critical time in the public debate over marriage.

We need to show the radical activists out to redefine marriage that their tactics of intimidation and bullying won't work — that they aren't going to silence us or crowd us out of the public square. On the contrary, we're going to take to the public square even more literally, marching in the streets of our capitol against their brash attempts to curtail our rights of free speech, free assembly, and free exercise.

Thank you for standing — and Marching — with us!

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown

National Organization for Marriage Condemns New York City Councilman’s “Outrageous, Intolerant” Remarks, Demands an Apology and Retraction from Entire Council

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 14, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"What Councilman Dromm has effectively said here is that anyone who believes in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is unwelcome in New York City. Mr. Dromm has alienated and insulted millions of New Yorkers." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) issued a strong condemnation of recently reported remarks by New York City Councilman Daniel Dromm which the organization characterized as "outrageous and intolerant." The organization called upon Dromm to apologize for his words, and for the City Council to condemn the remarks and clarify that they do not reflect the City's values and views.

Dromm's remarks, reported in an April 9th article on The Huffington Post, were in response to the announcement by Chick-fil-A of the company's plans to expand operations into New York City. Dromm was reported as saying, "We don't need bigots coming to New York City. They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community. […] We don't need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves. They need to wake up and see reality."

Brian Brown, NOM's President responded to the comments with condemnation. "These remarks are outrageous and intolerant, and sadly seem to be part of a trend developing in the public debate surrounding this issue," Brown said. "When Dan Cathy's pro-marriage views were first reported in 2012, we saw mayors and city councils saying similar things—it was a disgraceful circus then, and it is now."

But Brown said that Dromm's remarks go even further than previous attempts to punish Chick-fil-A for its CEO's personal views.

"What Dromm has effectively said here is that anyone who believes in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is unwelcome in New York City," Brown noted. "His remarks, coming amidst a climate of such unseemly attacks on pro-marriage people as we saw with the Mozilla controversy last week, simply reinforce a growing manifestation of hostility and intimidation in the public square toward folks with traditional values. Christians and others are now, it seems, going to be considered guilty of 'thought-crimes' and threatened with all manner of reprisals simply for holding their beliefs."

Brown called on the City Council to condemn Dromm's statements and to issue a formal apology to New Yorkers: "Mr. Dromm has alienated and insulted millions of New Yorkers and made them feel like they don't belong in their own home city. The Council should correct this and extend an apology immediately and undo the hurt and wrong that's been done."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Did This Councilman Really Just Tell Millions of New Yorkers They're Unwelcome There? Yes. Yes He Did.

We've shared with you before this insightful article by Ryan Anderson at Heritage about the recent resignation of Brendan Eich from Mozilla. In it, Ryan remarked:

The debate over the meaning and purpose of marriage will continue. We should conduct it in a civil manner. Bullies may win for a while, but theirs is a scorched-earth policy. They poison democratic discourse and fray the bonds on which democracy itself ultimately depends.

Even those who disagree with each other about morally charged issues of public policy need to be able to live together.

Councilman Daniel DrommBut lest we think that Eich's ouster is an outlier, a rare case, consider this more recent news out of New York City. Via the Huffington Post, a gay city councilman is quoted as protesting the entrance of an unwanted new presence into his city. From his remarks here, who might you guess he's talking about?

"We don’t need bigots coming to New York City," Councilman Daniel Dromm, who is openly gay, told HuffPost. "They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community."

What radical group could provoke such a fiery response and merit being slurred as "bigots", you ask? Well, unbelievable as it may seem... Chick-fil-A. And yet the company hardly seems like it should be so unwelcome to a sane observer.

Of course, the reason for Dromm's intolerance of the company is that its CEO personally values biblical beliefs about marriage as solely being the union of one man and one woman.

Chick-fil-A, NYC

But what's most horrifying in Dromm's remarks is his final say on the matter. You would think that maybe his first statement of unwelcomeness was a knee-jerk and misinformed reaction. What if he were told that Chick-fil-A's CEO has repeatedly said that he has no intention of bringing the company into the political debate surrounding the issue of marriage?

From HuffPost [emphasis added]:

... Dromm, the city councilman, said there was no place for Chick-fil-A in New York, even if it remains out of the political fray.

“We don’t need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves,” he said. “They need to wake up and see reality.”

Not only is the sleight of "bigot," directed toward those who hold marriage to be the union of a man and a woman, completely unfair, mean-spirited, and wide of the mark. More than that: here we have the most compelling proof one could want of Ryan Anderson's assertion that the gay rights community is engaged in a "scorched earth" policy of bigotry and intolerance.

It is a "thought policy" regime in the making, and if anyone thinks a lesson was learned with the Mozilla controversy, he or she needs only consider this later story to realize that Eich's treatment was only a template for the radical homosexual lobby's plans for the future. For now, it's chilling enough to know that an elected city councilman in New York has just told millions of his fellow residents that they are unwelcome there simply on account of their pro-marriage values.

They're Lying Again.

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

The Mozilla controversy continues to draw commentary and attention around the web and throughout the media. Predictably, all this activity calls for setting the record straight on some points of misinformation, just as the always-stilted media narrative demands balance from the voices that you won't see on the late night talk shows.

The Devil is in the (Misremembered) Details

At Slate last Friday, columnist Mark Joseph Stern — who "covers science, the law, and LGBTQ issues" — writes about Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich's resignation and the Proposition 8 campaign, in an article that undoubtedly deals with LGBTQ issues but seems uninformed by science and misinformed about the law. The article is also fast and loose with the facts about the campaign to which Mr. Eich donated $1,000.00 in 2008.

Stern's piece — entitled "Just a Reminder: The Campaign for Prop 8 Was Unprecedentedly Cruel" — bears this central thesis:

[I]t's easy to forget the vicious tactics of the pro-Prop 8 campaign. Or, I should say, it's easy to forget them if you're not gay — because almost every gay person I know remembers the passage of Prop 8 as the most traumatic and degrading anti-gay event in recent American history.

The tactics used by pro-Prop 8 campaigners were not merely homophobic. They were laser-focused to exploit Californians' deepest and most irrational fears about gay people, indoctrinating an entire state with cruelly anti-gay propaganda.

Stern supports this thesis with four clips from advertisements supposedly run by the campaign to pass Prop. 8, charging ahead to the conclusion that "The campaign's strategy was to debase gay families as deviant and unhealthy while insinuating that gay people are engaged in a full-scale campaign to convert children to their cause. This strategy worked."

But is this conclusion valid? Is the evidence admissible? Or is Mr. Stern engaged in his own underhanded campaign to mischaracterize and misrepresent historical facts?

Frank Schubert, NOM's National Political Director, had the following to say about Stern's piece — and you'll notice from his first sentence that he speaks as one very qualified to address the matter:

I managed the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign and am intimately familiar with the advertising. With the exception of the ad featuring the Pepperdine professor, all the other examples cited by [Mr. Stern] as Prop 8 ads are in fact NOT Prop 8 ads. They were not produced by the campaign, the campaign had nothing to do with them and they never aired on television. They were produced by various individuals on their own and were videos that they distributed with no involvement from the campaign. This is a normal thing in any major campaign like Prop 8. Certainly President Obama cannot be held accountable for the content of independent videos that were produced by individual supporters of his election, and the same holds true for our campaign.

As to the ad featuring the Pepperdine professor, it was a true and correct ad that included citations to support its contentions [emphasis added].

This is an important insight because it brings fluttering down the entire house of cards Stern has built up as a rationale for why Brendan Eich's resignation (for all intents and purposes, a compelled resignation) is somehow justifiable.

In another wonderful piece published this week on the Eich controversy, the Heritage Foundation's Ryan Anderson cites President Obama as an example of another point:

The outrageous treatment of Eich is the result of one private, personal campaign contribution to support marriage as a male-female union, a view affirmed at the time by President Barack Obama, then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, and countless other prominent officials. After all, Prop 8 passed with the support of 7 million California voters.

So was President Obama a bigot back when he supported marriage as the union of a man and woman? And is characterizing political disagreement on this issue — no matter how thoughtfully expressed — as hate speech really the way to find common ground and peaceful co-existence?

Obviously, the answer to Ryan's rhetorical question is an emphatic "NO." As Ryan says, "The debate over the meaning and purpose of marriage will continue. We should conduct it in a civil manner. Bullies may win for a while, but theirs is a scorched-earth policy. They poison democratic discourse and fray the bonds on which democracy itself ultimately depends [emphasis added]."

Undemocratic and Hypocritical

The leader in the public effort to remove Mr. Eich for his contribution to the Prop 8 Campaign was the online dating site OkCupid. OkCupid was among the first to call for Mr. Eich's resignation and for the public to remove Firefox from their computers.

However, among the misremembered details in this story is that Sam Yagan, co-founder and CEO of OkCupid donated $500.00 to the congressional campaign of Chris Cannon in 2004. Mr. Cannon is a supporter of traditional marriage, having supported a constitutional amendment to define marriage as one man and one woman when he was in Congress.

How can one justify that Mr. Yagan has kept his post while supporting traditional marriage and Mr. Eich has not? You can't. The radical advocates of redefining marriage are hypocrites, remembering only the details of history that further their cause. If supporters of traditional marriage are wounded in the process, all the better.

This is not idle sensationalism: this issue has struck right to the very roots of our democratic system. This is why NOM is calling on people to stand up and to say, "Enough is enough!" We cannot allow this culture of intimidation and intolerance, this "poisoning" of the public discourse, to continue.

So we're inviting all men and women of good will to visit www.KeepTheRepublicAndMarriage.com and make a public statement that we will not be bullied and pushed out of the public square. We will continue to exercise our rights as citizens to donate, to vote, to speak up, and to demonstrate on behalf of the value of marriage, in defiance of the McCarthyesque "thought police" who are trying to silence us.

It isn't without reason that some level-headed individuals are raising such dire warnings about what this whole Mozilla fiasco portends.

Mollie Hemingway, in an excellent article published in The Federalist, uses the political thought of Vaclav Havel to raise a warning about how "group think" enables totalitarian tendencies, and how dissent is needed urgently in such circumstances. She warns that even some of those who have participated in campaigns to redefine marriage probably never fully grasped the implications of their actions:

Did we mindlessly put up red equal signs when we hadn't even thought about what marriage is? Did we rush to fit in by telling others we supported same-sex marriage? Did we even go so far as to characterize as "bigots" or as "Hitlers" those who held views about the importance of natural marriage?

[...]

...The dissidents are the ones who, by refusing to put the sign up, or refusing to recant, shine a huge light on the system, including the ones who go along to get along. All of a sudden those Facebook signs, those reflexive statements, those cries of "Bigot!" look less like shows of strength and more like shows of weakness.

Meanwhile, news this week came to my attention of one great example of the courage to stand up and speak out in favor of marriage: an example in the form of some college-age young men and women!

"You Have A Voice"

A new group at Notre Dame University, the Cardinal Newman Society reports, is making news for a petition to the administration of the school asking its leadership "to take up the defense of marriage at this pivotal moment in the national discussion surrounding [the] foundational institution [of marriage]."

The group is called "Students for Child-Oriented Policy" (SCOP), and one of its cofounders — a student named Tiernan Kane — explains the petition's purpose this way:

The Catholic Church's teaching on marriage, which is universally intelligible to human reason, is informed by a tradition of philosophical reflection that reaches back at least as far as Plato.... As the nation's premier Catholic university, Notre Dame has the ability, and thus the responsibility, to contribute to — indeed, to lead — public discourse about marriage.

Another co-founder, a senior named Michael Bradley, expressed very succinctly why he thinks it's important that the school's leadership speak up in defense of marriage: "Notre Dame, you have a voice, and it would mean a lot."

Well, this is clearly a case of students becoming the teachers, because Michael's message is a lesson and reminder for each of us, too: "You have a voice."

And there is no lack of opportunity for using that voice!

You can join the many other Americans who have taken a stand at KeepTheRepublicAndMarriage.com today and make a public declaration that you stand for marriage and will continue to do so.

But you can also use your voice by helping us to spread the word and promote the 2014 March for Marriage!

I was very pleased this week that two leading Catholic figures in the field of family and marriage issues lent their voices in support of the March: Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo and Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco.

In a letter to their fellow Bishops nationwide, they wrote:

[T]his year's March for Marriage will provide an ideal occasion for participants to celebrate and give public witness to the unique meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman at a time when the religious liberties and conscience rights of those who promote and defend marriage are increasingly threatened. ... We kindly ask that you promote the march in your diocese and parishes and encourage participation where possible.

Well, today, I kindly ask the same of you.

Please help us to promote the march and to encourage participation by sharing the many resources you'll find at the brand-new March for Marriage website.

And, please, by whatever portion your means allow, consider a contribution today to help us make the March as great a success as possible.

You have a voice. Together, let's show the bullies and thugs who want to censor our pro-marriage views that your voice is not alone — that it is, in fact, many millions strong — and that it simply will not be silenced.

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown

ICYMI: New Heritage Research Piece Explains Why the Analogy between Same-sex Marriage and Interracial Marriage is a False One

From Ryan Anderson, on The Foundry blog at Heritage:

Bride and GroomIs opposition to same-sex marriage at all like opposition to interracial marriage? One refrain in debates over marriage policy is that laws designating marriage as exclusively the union of male and female are today’s equivalent of bans on interracial marriage. Some further argue that protecting the freedom to speak and act publicly on the basis of a religious belief that marriage is the union of a man and woman amounts to the kind of laws that enforced race-based segregation.

These claims are wrong on several counts, as I explain in a new Backgrounder Report... “Marriage, Reason, and Religious Liberty: Much Ado About Sex, Nothing to Do with Race.

You can read Ryan's full blog piece here, or read the larger report here.

Standing Up. Fighting Back.

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

The more I think about the situation surrounding Mozilla's termination of new CEO Brendan Eich over a political contribution he made six years ago, the more alarmed I become.

In 2008, Eich donated $1,000 to the campaign to pass Proposition 8 in California and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. For that, he's been convicted of an imagined hate crime by the radical homosexual activist community.

We must stand up to this outrageous assault on not just our values — but on the fundamental principles of free speech and our very democratic process! We cannot let a fringe group of radicals create an environment that will prohibit citizens from engaging in their right to enter the political arena without fear of reprisals!

And that is why we are asking people to go to KeepTheRepublicAndMarriage.com and make a donation — of any amount — adding your name to the thousands who have taken a public stance for marriage, refusing to be silenced!

Ryan Anderson from the Heritage Foundation sums up the impact of this development in the title of a piece he wrote recently: "Eich is out. So is tolerance." He asks, "is characterizing political disagreement on this issue — no matter how thoughtfully expressed — as hate speech really the way to find common ground and peaceful co-existence?"

Unwilling to acknowledge this [the marriage debate] as a significant question on which reasonable people of goodwill can disagree, some advocates of redefining marriage increasingly characterize those with whom they disagree as "enemies of the human race." They've sent a clear message: If you stand up for marriage, we will demonize and marginalize you.

I'm asking you today to say, "I will stand for what is right in the public square. I will be counted publicly as one who supports marriage as the union of one man and one woman." Make this happen by going to KeepTheRepublicAndMarriage.com and taking your stand.

I also recently had the pleasure of reading a blog post by Catholic blogger Rebecca Hamilton, who is also a member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives. She hits the nail on the head with a passionate piece she penned about Eich's downfall. This issue is about so much more than the debate over marriage. Hamilton wrote:

The issue here is the First Amendment right of Americans to petition their government, including by means of making donations to causes and issues they believe in, without fear of organized reprisals from a bunch of — here comes the word folks — haters.

This whole thing is getting awfully close to pressuring, bullying and threatening people about how they vote in an election. In fact, I'm pretty sure that if it wasn't for the secret ballot, that's exactly what the "equality" for us, "inclusiveness" for us, but not for anyone else crowd would be doing right now.

Indeed, this kind of freedom-hating campaign is a very chilling example to witness of the sheer intolerance and bigotry of those pushing same-sex ‘marriage' on our nation. It seems as if their real goal is to push Christians and others completely out of the public square.

We cannot let them do that!

Please stand with these two courageous Americans and fight back against this unconscionable behavior and deplorable tactics which are so severely damaging marriage, free speech and our very democratic process. As we know, the only way to stop bullies is to stand up to them.

Specifically, I'm asking you to do what Sen. Hamilton did: first, she deleted the Mozilla Firefox browser from her computer, and then she made a contribution to NOM.

As Ryan observed, "The debate over the meaning and purpose of marriage will continue. We should conduct it in a civil manner. Bullies may win for a while, but theirs is a scorched-earth policy. They poison democratic discourse and fray the bonds on which democracy itself ultimately depends."

This is our hope — knowing that this kind of intolerance and uncivil behavior simply cannot go on for much longer before the American people put their foot down and say enough is enough.

Will you be one of them?

Faithfully,

Pope: "The image of God is the married couple: the man and the woman."

From CNSNews:

Pope FrancisDuring his General Audience speech at St. Peter’s Square on Apr. 2, before a crowd estimated at 45,000, Pope Francis first cited Genesis, saying, "God created man in his own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them. … Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."

"The image of God is the married couple: the man and the woman; not only the man, not only the woman, but both of them together," said the Pope. "God’s covenant with us is represented in that covenant between man and woman. And this is very beautiful."

"When a man and a woman celebrate the Sacrament of Matrimony, God as it were 'is mirrored' in them; He impresses in them his own features and the indelible character of his love," said Pope Francis. "Marriage is the icon of God's love for us."

Read more here.

Alabama Legislators Call for U.S. Constitution to Be Amended to Define and Protect Marriage

The Montgomery Advertiser reported recently that a resolution sponsored by Alabama State Representative Richard Laird passed the Alabama House, calling for an Article V convention to amend the Constitution of the United States:

Alabama FlagThe resolution, sponsored by Rep. Richard Laird, I-Roanoke, quotes a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex unions, and calls marriage “a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman.” The resolution also cites several court cases, including five from the 19th century. It goes on to say that the U.S. Supreme Court “officially severed its respect for marriage” last year, when it struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prevented the recognition of same-sex spouses under federal laws.

Laird’s resolution calls for an Article V convention, which would require 34 states to ask Congress to call a convention to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. According to the resolution, the convention would specifically propose an amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and bar legal recognition of any other form of marriage.

Read more here.

March for Marriage Website Now Live!

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

The alarming news about the resignation — or, more aptly, termination — of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich is bringing to light the enormity of the threat that redefining marriage poses not just to marriage, but to the individual citizens who believe in it.

Indeed, defending marriage is inextricably tied to defending our religious liberties and, indeed, all of our precious first amendment rights. And that defense is core to our mission here at NOM.

Americans should be at liberty to voice their support for the institution of marriage without fear of reprisal or discrimination.

Standing up in defiant reaffirmation of these liberties is, as I have explained before, one of the main reasons we are marching for marriage again this year. The March for Marriage will take place in Washington, D.C. on June 19th, beginning at 11:00 am. And today, I'm happy to announce that our brand new 2014 March for Marriage website is up and running. Check it out!

On the site, you'll find all the resources you need to get involved and participate in this year's March, including:

In addition, you can view pictures from last year's march, read the March for Marriage news feed and (in development — check back soon!) shop at the online store for March for Marriage swag!

And, as always, we could really use your help in the form of institutional sponsorship or a fully tax-deductible donation in support of these historic efforts.

We're going to continue standing up to the bullies and haters who want you and me to shut up and get out of the public square. If they haven't realized it already, they'll get the idea pretty soon: we're not going away, and neither is the truth about marriage!

Will you please sign up to be a part of the movement today?

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown

"The post-totalitarian system demands conformity, uniformity, and discipline"

In a brilliant piece by Mollie Hemingway at The Federalistshe draws upon the thinking of Czech leader Vaclav Havel (who once observed that "the post-totalitarian system demands conformity, uniformity, and discipline") to comment upon the recent dust-up at Mozilla over Brendan Eich's views on marriage.

Hemingway's piece is entitled "The Rise of the Same-sex Marriage Dissidents," and you should read the entire thing today. Here's a snippet:

Havel-FirefoxTo explain how dissent works, Havel introduced the manager of a hypothetical fruit-and-vegetable shop who places in his window, among the onions and carrots, the slogan: “Workers of the world, unite!” He’s not actually enthusiastic about the sign’s message. It’s just one of the things that people in a post-totalitarian system do even if they “never think about” what it means. He does it because everyone does it. It’s what you do to get along in life and live “in harmony with society.” (For our purposes, you can imagine that slogan is a red equal sign that you put up on your Facebook page.)

[...]

Did we mindlessly put up red equal signs when we hadn’t even thought about what marriage is? Did we rush to fit in by telling others we supported same-sex marriage? Did we even go so far as to characterize as “bigots” or as “Hitlers” those who held views about the importance of natural marriage?

[...]

In the greengrocer scenario, Havel notes that if the text of the sign read “I am afraid and therefore unquestioningly obedient,” he might be embarrassed and ashamed to put it up. The dissidents are the ones who, by refusing to put the sign up, or refusing to recant, shine a huge light on the system, including the ones who go along to get along. All of a sudden those Facebook signs, those reflexive statements, those cries of “Bigot!” look less like shows of strength and more like shows of weakness.

If you haven't yet followed NOM's call-to-action over the Eich controversy, please take some time to do so today.

"Notre Dame, you have a voice..."

A group of plucky students at Notre Dame made news this week with a petition to the University officials "to take up the defense of marriage at this pivotal moment in the national discussion surrounding this foundational institution."

Notre DameThe Cardinal Newman Society provides more details:

The petition was created by members of the newly formed Students for Child-Oriented Policy (SCOP), made up of undergraduate and graduate students at the University...

[...]

A co-founder of the group, Tiernan Kane, told The Cardinal Newman Society that he believes the university should take the lead on marriage.

"The Catholic Church's teaching on marriage, which is universally intelligible to human reason, is informed by a tradition of philosophical reflection that reaches back at least as far as Plato," [Kane] said. "As the nation's premier Catholic university, Notre Dame has the ability, and thus the responsibility, to contribute to--indeed, to lead--public discourse about marriage."

[...]

Senior Michael Bradley, a co-founder of the group, told The Cardinal Newman Society that the administration has been "entirely mute on marriage" while publicly supporting the Dream Act and other contested political issues.  [Bradley] said, "Notre Dame, you have a voice, and it would mean a lot in defense of Church teaching."

Bravo to these brave young men and women!

National Organization for Marriage: 2014 March for Marriage Promises to be "Greatly Successful," Early Responses Enthusiastic

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 8, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"The March for Marriage is our way of showing that there still exists in this country deep and wide support for the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Our nation's youth, in particular, need to see that they are not alone in cherishing the values that have been passed down to them." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) is organizing a "March for Marriage" in the nation's capital on June 19th of this year. Last year, the first ever "March for Marriage" drew several thousands to the National Mall to express support for marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Event organizers say this year's event is expected to be even larger and more successful.

"The March for Marriage is our way of showing that there still exists in this country deep and wide support for the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said Brown, NOM's president. "Our nation's youth, in particular, need to see that they are not alone in cherishing the values that have been passed down to them, and that they mustn't stay silent in the face of a small, aggressive lobby and a bullying media bent on furthering an agenda."

Brown said that this week has brought encouraging signs of growing enthusiasm and support for the March. Specifically, he cited an April 7 letter co-signed by two Catholic prelates at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and sent to the Catholic Bishops of the nation, in which the two officials said that they "are very grateful for this opportunity to express [their] support for the March for Marriage and to encourage participation in this event."

In their respective capacities as Chairmen of the USCCB's Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth and Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage, Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo and Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco wrote to their fellow Bishops: "[T]his year's March for Marriage will provide an ideal occasion for participants to celebrate and give public witness to the unique meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman at a time when the religious liberties and conscience rights of those who promote and defend marriage are increasingly threatened. ... We kindly ask that you promote the march in your diocese and parishes and encourage participation where possible."

Brown said that many other pro-family organizations and faith groups are coalescing behind the March for Marriage initiative, and that he anticipates that their support will lend to a "greatly successful" event.

The March for Marriage website is https://www.marriagemarch.org/. The Bishops' letter can be found here.

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

The Mask is Off

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

The bullies who now control the gay marriage movement have claimed another scalp in their never-ending quest to silence people of faith and others who continue to support the belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. They've forced Brendan Eich, the inventor of Javascript and CEO at Mozilla (the company that makes the Firefox web browser) to leave the company he has helped lead for many years. His crime? Back in 2008 Eich contributed $1,000 to support Proposition 8 defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Their actions escalate a pattern of behavior that makes it crystal clear that the mask is off any pretense of tolerance for different opinions on marriage. The message is clear: no matter your talents, accomplishments and capabilities, opposition to 'gay marriage' utterly disqualifies you from corporate leadership and employment, and even meaningful participation in civil society.

This is not the first episode of this type of totalitarian aggression by the gay 'marriage' thought police. When Dan Cathy, CEO of Chick-fil-A, expressed his support for true marriage, there were calls for his company to be banned in cities such as Chicago, Boston and Washington, DC. Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty fame was suspended by the A&E television network for expressing his support for biblical principles of marriage.

These are merely the best known of the victims. There are many, many others you don't hear much about, like the manager of a Mexican restaurant, the operator of an ice cream parlor, and an executive with a musical theatre company. They all committed the same "crime" — publicly supporting true marriage.

Folks, we're at the point where we either surrender or we stand up.

A commenter on the forced resignation of Brendan Eich had a great suggestion as a way of responding: first, she deleted the Mozilla Firefox browser from her computer, and then she made a contribution to NOM.

The only way to stop bullies is to stand up to them. That's why we're asking you to take a public stance and join with thousands of others at the Keep The Republic And Marriage website. By making a donation to NOM of any amount, you will be demonstrating that you will not be cowered into silence or bullied into submission, and that you will fight for the right guaranteed to every American under the constitution to speak out freely in support of true marriage.

Please help us send a powerful message to the country that this type of bullying and totalitarian behavior will not be tolerated. Thank you for acting today.

National Organization for Marriage Calls On Consumers to Remove Mozilla Firefox Browser in Protest of Removal of Mozilla’s CEO For Supporting Marriage

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


This is a McCarthyesque witch hunt that makes the term 'thought police' seem modest. We urge all consumers to remove Mozilla's Firefox web browser from their computers as a sign of protest." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today called on Americans to remove the web browser Mozilla Firefox from their personal computers to protest the company forcing out its CEO over his support of Proposition 8, the 2008 campaign to preserve marriage in California as the union of one man and one woman. NOM called the dismissal of Brendan Eich as CEO of Mozilla a "McCarthyesque witch hunt" that reflects the desire of gay rights activists to punish anyone in society who fails to support their agenda of redefining marriage.

"When Brendon Eich made his modest contribution to support Proposition 8, Barack Obama was on the ballot as a candidate who said he believed marriage was the union of one man and one woman. Now Eich has been the target of a vicious character attack by gay activists who have forced him out of the company he has helped lead for years," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "This is a McCarthyesque witch hunt that makes the term 'thought police' seem modest. We urge all consumers to remove Mozilla's Firefox web browser from their computers as a sign of protest."

Brown noted that when gay activists targeted the CEO of the Chick-fil-A company for expressing his support of marriage, the mayors of cities such as Chicago, Boston and Washington, DC declared that the company would not be permitted to do business in their cities. He also noted that the A&E television network suspended Phil Robertson from the Duck Dynasty show when Robertson, a prominent Christian, expressed his support for marriage.

"This attack to deny Mr. Eich his livelihood for supporting true marriage is a continuation of the shameful pattern we have consistently seen from gay activists. It basically says to all those in America and around the world who believe in a view of marriage that is consistent with the teachings of their faith that they are all bigots and haters and there is no place for them in civil society. This is the totalitarian worldview we will all be under if marriage ultimately is redefined in the law."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

The National Organization for Marriage Condemns Judge's Indication to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages in Ohio

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

The following statement should be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage(NOM).

Washington, D.C. — "We condemn the indication from Judge Timothy Black that he will order the state of Ohio to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere in violation of the Ohio constitution. This is an affront to the rule of law and to the people of Ohio who voted overwhelmingly to define marriage solely as the union of one man and one woman. The judge joins a list of others who have shamefully substituted their own views for the considered judgment of the people of America. We call on the state to be ready to file a vigorous appeal of this coming ruling, and for the US Supreme Court to move expeditiously to rule on this issue. Less than a year ago, the US Supreme Court held that it is up to the states to define marriage, and the federal government could not substitute its own definition of marriage for the judgment of the states. Judge Black and other federal judges have twisted this ruling into something unrecognizable. We call on the US Supreme Court to establish for good that the sovereign states have the ability to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).