NOM BLOG

One More Day

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

We have now entered the closing hours of our unique matching gift campaign, and I want to urge all of our pro-marriage supporters to dig deep today and contribute if they haven't already, before the clock runs out on this great opportunity.

Please, if you haven't donated yet—or even if you have, but are able to make a second contribution—won't you kindly consider a gift to NOM to help us gear up for the next several months of defending marriage at the ballot box, in the courts, and throughout the public square? Every dollar you give will be matched — dollar for dollar — to support the cuase of defending marriage.

As I've said before, the next few months are a critical time for the marriage debate in America:

  • With a third of the Senate up for reelection, we have the chance to reclaim control of Congress for a pro-marriage majority.
  • With new evidence having emerged about the misdeeds of political activists within the I.R.S., we will be pressing our leaders in Washington to act on these facts and bring to justice all who have acted to silence the free speech of conservative individuals and groups.
  • With the Supreme Court having considered five pending marriage cases in conference just yesterday, we expect any day that they could announce which of these cases they will be taking up in the new year, and NOM will be ready to help give marriage the legal defense it needs and deserves.

The fourth quarter of the year is a busy time for all of us, and for NOM especially this during this election cycle under a second-term Presidential administration that has been disastrously hostile to marriage and family values.

I urge you to take stock today and to figure out what you are able to contribute to NOM for this make-or-break period in the defense of marriage in America. Don't let the opportunity to have your gift DOUBLED instantly slip away!

I am so grateful to those of you who have given already, and for all of your support in times past. It is my honor and humble privilege to be able to stand with you in this civilization-defining battle for such a noble cause.

Over the next few weeks, I know many of you will be contributing to campaigns financially and in other tangible ways: canvassing neighborhoods, knocking door-to-door, registering voters, cold-calling constituents.

But today is the last chance you have to give to the cause of marriage and double the impact of your gift—I can't promise that we'll have another such opportunity before the end of the year.

So please click here to contribute your most generous gift and have it instantly matched by a generous donor who stands with us in this fight. Together, we're going to make a difference in Washington and across our nation, and ensure marriage is well-represented in the political battles and public debates that are heating up.

Thank you again, for all of your kindness and support.

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


Meese and Anderson in WaPo on Marriage Laws: "The people and their elected representatives should be making these decisions"

In the Washington Post opinion pages, former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese  III and his Heritage colleague Ryan Anderson have penned an important piece highlighting some too-little reported legal opinions from federal court judges that make the case for leaving determinations about marriage policy to the states and the democratic process.

The two scholars write:

Meese and Anderson Marriage LawsThis month, in a widely celebrated opinion written by Judge Richard Posner, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit declared that it had “no reason to think [the governments of Indiana and Wisconsin] have a ‘reasonable basis’ for forbidding same-sex marriage.”

This is remarkable. According to this court, the millions of citizens who passed marriage amendments in more than 30 states were all bigots acting on no reasonable basis when they supported marriage as the union of a man and woman — just as President Obama, Vice President Biden, former secretary of state Hillary Clinton and most members of Congress all did when these laws were passed.

While generating less fanfare, the day before Posner’s opinion was released, U.S. District Judge Martin L.C. Feldman upheld Louisiana’s marriage law — a constitutional amendment passed by 78 percent of the voters. Two federal appellate judges — Paul V. Niemeyer of the 4th Circuit and Paul J. Kelly Jr. of the 10th Circuit — issued strong dissenting opinions this summer on why state laws defining marriage as a male-female union are constitutional. As these marriage cases make their way to the Supreme Court, very likely during the term about to begin, the justices should heed the reasoning of these judges.

Read the rest of this excellent article today, and share it with your friends!

What I'm Up To Today

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

I need to be brief this week, because I am in Washington, D.C. attending the Values Voter Summit and there's more to do and see here than there are hours in a day!

If you have a chance, you can tune in to watch the livestream of this great event here on our blog:

"Click here to watch live!"

I am thrilled to be at this wonderful event catching up with so many of NOM's friends and partners, like Senator Rick Santorum and Dr. Pat Fagan—and of course the event organizers from Family Research Council.

Before I get back into the action here, though, let me alert you to a few important news items this week:

NOM Announces Campaign to Oppose Pro-SSM GOP Candidates

Yesterday, NOM—along with FRC and CitizenLink—sent a letter to Capitol Hill announcing to the leadership of the Republican Party that our organizations would be actively opposing the campaigns to elect three Republican candidates—two to the House of Representatives and one to the Senate—who break ranks with the Republican platform on the important issues of the sanctity of life and the meaning of marriage.

If you want to learn to learn about this new campaign, please go read our press release from yesterday which is posted here.

New Poll Shows Support for Same-sex Marriage is Flagging

Earlier this week, Pew Research Center released the results of a new poll which — in the words of the Associated Press article about the survey — showed that "support for same-sex marriage could be leveling off."

The data shows that support for redefining marriage has dropped by five points in the past seven months, while opposition has increased by two points. This represents the biggest shift in public opinion on this issue that the Pew Center has found since 2006, and it is only the second time in the past five years that their data has shown support for the traditional marriage position gaining ground.

This shift in opinion corresponds with the rash of federal court decisions we've seen throughout the country overturning states' marriage laws, so it can be hoped that this signals that the American people are finally fed up with having their democratic authority usurped and their will as expressed through voting ignored by activist judges.

NOM Presents Evidence of Collusion in Oregon Marriage Suit

Also this week, NOM has filed an important court document in Oregon. As you know, we've been trying to get the court to grant NOM standing to intervene in the case there on behalf of our members in the state, since otherwise the marriage amendment will not receive the defense it needs and deserves.

With this new filing, NOM has demonstrated that from the very beginning in this case the Attorney General—sworn to uphold and defend the law!—has in fact been colluding with the plaintiffs to invalidate Oregon's marriage amendment. We've known this all along, but the collusion goes much deeper than even we ever could have imagined, and our new filing demonstrates this.

You can read more about this new development here from our Chairman, Professor John Eastman.

San Francisco Catholic Newspaper Sets the Record Straight

Finally, if you're looking for some wonderful reading today, look no further than this masterful piece published this week in Catholic San Francisco. This Special Report exposes the dishonesty and insidious manipulation involved in the use of the term "hate" by HRC and the Southern Poverty Law Center and others to describe pro-marriage individuals and groups.

The article quotes this great and succinct statement from NOM's old friend attorney Charles LiMandri, which could serve as a sort of thesis statement for the report: "Disagreement is the new litmus test to be vilified as a ‘hater.'"

I encourage you to read this special report today in its entirety, and kudos to Catholic San Francisco for a great and hard-hitting exposé.

And don't forget, when you have some free time, to tune in to the Values Voter Summit and follow this wonderful event.

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


Prominent Pro-Family Organizations Announce Campaign To Oppose Republican Candidates In Three Top Races Because Of Their Support For Same-sex 'Marriage' and Abortion

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 25, 2014

Contacts:
Sue Hopkins for CitizenLink: (719) 278-4400
Darin Miller / J.P. Duffy for Family Research Council: (202) 637-4615/4679
Elizabeth Ray / Matille Thebolt for National Organization for Marriage: (703) 683-5004


citizenlinklogofrcactionlogo
nom_logo

Washington, DC — Three of the nation's top pro-family groups have announced an unprecedented campaign against three top Republican candidates for federal office because the candidates are supporters of same-sex 'marriage' and abortion. The National Organization for Marriage, Family Research Council Action and CitizenLink announced they will urge voters not to support Republican House candidates Carl DeMaio (CA-52) and Richard Tisei (MA-6), and will urge Oregon voters not to support US Senate candidate Monica Wehby.

"The Republican Party platform is a 'statement of who we are and what we believe.' Thus, the platform supports the truth of marriage as the union of husband and wife, and recognizes the sanctity and dignity of human life. This is what Republicans believe," said Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). "It is extremely disappointing to see Republican leaders in Washington help push the election of candidates who reject the party's principled positions on these and other core issues. We cannot sit by when people calling themselves Republicans seek high office while espousing positions that are antithetical to the overwhelming majority of Republicans."

In a letter to top Republican leaders including House Speaker John Boehner and Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell, the pro-family organizations said it was a "grave error" in "advancing candidates who do not hold core Republican beliefs and, in fact, are working to actively alienate the Republican base."

The groups pledged in their letter to, "mount a concerted effort to urge voters to refuse to cast ballots for them in the November election." The two House races are considered top priorities to pick up seats for GOP House leaders, and the Oregon Senate race is one of several that could determine control of the US Senate.

"Pundits are perplexed that this isn't a wave election, but the reason seems clear," said Tom Minnery, president of CitizenLink. "Democrats are running hard on their social issue beliefs and Republicans are silent on theirs. How better to demoralize a voting bloc?"

###

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

To schedule an interview with FRCAction, please contact Darin Miller at 202-637-4615 or J.P. Duffy at 202-637-4679; by email at [email protected].

To schedule an interview with Tom Minnery, president of CitizenLink, please contact Sue Hopkins at 719-278-4400.

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).

WATCH LIVE: Values Voter Summit 2014

The Values Voter Summit is just days away! The annual Summit—which provides a forum to inform and mobilize citizens across America to preserve the bedrock values of traditional marriage, religious liberty, sanctity of life and limited government that make our nation strong—will be held from Sept. 26-28 in Washington D.C.

If you're not able to attend, you can watch the live feed all weekend right from your home or office.

Friday, Sept. 26 Live Feed:

Saturday, Sept. 27 Live Feed:

VVS copy

Are You Fed Up With Washington?

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Are you frustrated with politics and politicians? I certainly am.

It seems like there's no accountability... that all too often elected officials don't live up to their promises or even outright break them.

Well, you and I have the opportunity to change that this November!

Won't you please consider making a donation of $35, $50, $100 or even $500 or more today and help NOM execute our plan to hold politicians accountable and elect marriage champions to office?

Please remember that through the end of September we have a matching gift in effect that will DOUBLE every dollar you contribute!

I know we can make an impact this November... because we've done it before!

In 2012, just one year after the state of New York redefined marriage (on the backs of seven state senators who lied to their constituents about their positions — selling out their voters for the promises of major campaign contributions from the same-sex ‘marriage' lobby) NOM led a coalition of local groups that successfully defeated five of those seven state senators!

Among the newly elected state senators was marriage champion David Storobin from Brooklyn. Mr. Storobin was a young Republican who had never previously held office running in a district that was comprised of five times more registered Democrats than Republicans. But he won, because he made marriage a central part of his campaign.

And what was the first bill introduced by Mr. Storobin when he arrived in Albany? A state Defense of Marriage Act to correct the definition of marriage in New York!

Just imagine the impact of electing many, many more public servants like Senator Storobin! With your help, we can this November — this time, taking over the United States Senate with a majority of marriage champions!

Won't you please join us today by making a generous donation, knowing that your contribution will be matched dollar-for-dollar?

Remember: the future of marriage in America is still very much up for grabs. Just this week, the Pew Research Center released poll data that showed, in the words of the Washington Post, that "support for gay marriage may be leveling off." There's nothing inevitable about marriage being redefined, any more than there is about having a liberal-controlled Senate. At least, not as long as there are people like you willing to stand up and make a difference!

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


PS: To counteract the pernicious attack on marriage coming from the courts, the Obama Administration and the cultural and media elites in our country, we must mobilize a grassroots network of millions to stand up to their radical ideology and say: enough is enough! Won't you please join us today by making a generous donation of $35, $50, $100 or even $500 to help us elect marriage champions to the United States Senate? Remember, your contribution will be matched, dollar-for-dollar, DOUBLING the impact of your gift! But only if you act soon. Thank you in advance.

Poll Shows Support for Redefining Marriage Has Stagnated

According to the results of a new Pew Research Center survey, "support for same-sex marriage could be leveling off," reports the Associated Press. Some other findings of the survey are significant:

Pew Poll SS Weddings[N]early three-quarters of Americans said religious influence in public life was waning and most saw that as a negative trend. About half of respondents said churches and houses of worship should speak out more on public issues.

Nearly half of all the respondents said businesses that provide services for weddings, such as florists, should be allowed to deny service to same-sex couples if the owners have religious objections. The Pew survey also found the percentage of people who consider gay relationships sinful had increased from 45 percent a year ago to 50 percent last month, although other surveys have found that people with religious objections don't always oppose legal recognition for gay relationships.

[...]

[Jessica Martinez, a researcher in Pew's Religion and Public Life Project] said the drop in support in the Pew poll was not driven by any particular religious or political group in the sample, but was a change across the board. Pew used similar groups of respondents in terms of political and religious views for both surveys, she said. The number of Americans who told Pew they were undecided on gay marriage increased from 7 percent in February to 10 percent last month.

You can review all the survey results here or read a press synopsis here.

The Next Six Months

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter

I want first of all to express my gratitude to the many people that have donated to our matching gift challenge over the last 24 hours.

If you haven't taken advantage of this great opportunity to double the impact of your gift, won't you please do so today?

We are about to enter a crucial time for marriage in our country, and NOM needs your help to ensure that we can remain active in the fight to protect that most basic unit of our entire social order, the marriage-based family.

Just think for a minute of the momentous changes the next six months might bring in the fight for marriage in America:

  • Thirty-six Senate seats are up for reelection in November, including at least a dozen held by vulnerable Democrats. This is an opportunity to gain a pro-marriage majority for the Senate and halt the Obama administration's attempts to run roughshod over the values and truths that we hold dear!
  • With new details having recently come to light in the I.R.S. scandal, Congress will be able hopefully to finally get to the bottom of the corruption in the agency. We will continue to urge our leaders in Washington to ensure justice for NOM and the many other groups and individuals who were unfairly targeted and harassed by this out-of-control bureaucracy that stuck its nose into the political realm where it didn't belong.
  • The Supreme Court will be meeting in conference on September 29th to discuss at least 5 pending court challenges to States' marriage laws. All indications are that the Supreme Court will take up the issue of marriage once again in this term—and we need to make sure that the Justices know how many millions of Americans still believe in marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

In short, as you can see, we have plenty of work to do over the next few months!

That's why I need you to recommit to NOM's critical and irreplaceable mission today with your most generous donation, which will be instantly doubled through the kind matching pledge we've received from one of our most dedicated supporters!

It may seem like you've heard this before, but it is the plain truth that right now the stakes literally could not be higher: the next six months may determine the future of marriage in America for generations to come!

Please stand with us in this crucial time, and through your kind financial gift, help us ensure that your values have a voice in the halls of power and in the public square now when it is most needed!

Thanks in advance for your generosity, and for all you do to support and defend marriage.

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


P.S.: Remember, the chance to double the impact of your donation is a limited-time event; so please donate by October 1st so we can be sure to take full advantage of this great opportunity! Thank you, again.

The Next Few Months Are Critical

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

As I wrote to you in a letter recently, the critical, upcoming November elections are just a couple of short months away. And NOM is gearing up to make an impact!

But before getting into that, I want to reiterate the fantastic news I shared with you in my recent letter...

A dedicated donor has extended his generous matching gift, agreeing to match every donation received dollar-for-dollar!

By renewing your financial commitment to NOM today, the value of your gift will DOUBLE, giving your hard-earned dollars TWICE the impact in the fight to defend marriage! But the offer will only last for donations received in the third quarter of the year — before October 1st.

The summer months are always lean, and we now have some ground to make up. We have a ways to go to reach our quarterly projections — an additional $447,398. That means, if you donate today and help us raise the $223,699 we need by the end of the month, a single donor will donate that same amount to NOM!

Because your gift is matched dollar for dollar, every single donation helps out enormously and adds up very quickly. Anything you could do to help would be greatly appreciated.

Marriage Supporter, can I count on you to please help us take full advantage of this tremendous opportunity by clicking here right away to make a generous donation of $35, $50, $100 or even $500?

It's never been more critically important or opportune that you do so... especially with the November elections looming when we have an incredible opportunity to shift the balance of power within the United States Senate.

NOM has plans in motion to immediately impact several key races in the coming months — provided we can raise the necessary funds.

We will be building a visible, nationwide, grassroots infrastructure dedicated to defending marriage through advertising, online outreach, mailers and get-out-the-vote efforts.

In addition, we are in the midst of developing and deploying new, powerful and hard-hitting messaging — challenging the prevailing narratives and themes driving the same-sex ‘marriage' movement and exposing critical falsehoods in their argument.

But NOM needs your help to continue to stand up and fight back! Won't you please make a generous gift right away, knowing that your donation — of whatever amount — will be matched dollar-for-dollar?

We're seeing the furious attacks against marriage taking place all around us every day... radical activists seeking out hand-picked, liberal judges throughout the country and launching lawsuits against marriage laws in virtually every state... major corporations taking positions to endorse marriage redefinition — even throwing their financial weight behind the movement — despite the fact that millions of consumers and existing customers believe in marriage...

It's frustrating, I know. Sometimes, people feel powerless. But you and I know that it's merely another call to action... because marriage is worth defending — always!

Remember, if you act now you are taking advantage of our limited-time matching gift, which will instantly DOUBLE the size and impact of your gift! It's an incredible opportunity that we must take advantage of.

We CAN retake the Senate... We CAN elect marriage champions and ensure that the GOP remains strong on marriage... We CAN make a resounding statement that the Supreme Court will hear BEFORE they rule on the future of marriage in America.

But we need your help to fully realize this matching gift opportunity, ensuring that we have the resources we need to WIN this November!

Won't you please join me in standing up in defense of marriage by making a generous donation today to help NOM give voice to our values and fight back against the storm assaulting marriage?

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


PS: This new matching gift opportunity will only last until September 30th, so please click here to make a generous donation to support NOM and our mission of protecting marriage and the faith communities that sustain it today! Every dollar you donate will be instantly matched, dollar-for-dollar!

As we approach the November elections with the real possibility of turning the United States Senate into a body that will not only stand up for marriage, but also stand up to the Obama Administration's relentless executive assault against marriage, we need your financial support to ensure we have the funds necessary to engage in the key electoral fights around the country.

Pope Francis: Marriage Shows "The Reciprocity of Differences"

In Rome on Sunday, Pope Francis presided over the marriage of 20 couples at Saint Peter's Basilica. In his remarks during the celebration, the Holy Father spoke beautifully about the meaning of marriage and family. From The National Catholic Register [emphasis added]:

Pope FrancisMarriage, [the Pope said]... is about "man and woman walking together, wherein the husband helps his wife to become ever more a woman, and wherein the woman has the task of helping her husband to become ever more a man."

"Here we see the reciprocity of differences," he said.

[...]

"It is impossible to quantify the strength and depth of humanity contained in a family," he said, as demonstrated through the "mutual help, educational support, relationships developing as family members mature, the sharing of joys and difficulties."

"Families are the first place in which we are formed as persons and, at the same time, the ‘bricks’ for the building up of society."

Read more here.

NOM Keeping Up Fight for the People of Oregon

Oregon State CapitolOregonians have been so far shamefully denied their fundamental rights and role as citizens in a self-determinative democracy by a system of judicial tyranny run amok, but NOM is continuing our fight there to get the people of Oregon their day in court and ensure that they values are represented in the matter of how marriage is defined.

OregonLive reports:

Despite a string of legal defeats, the National Organization for Marriage is continuing its battle against the May 19 federal court decision overturning Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage.

Two weeks after a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the group's attempt to intervene in the case, the National Organization for Marriage on Wednesday asked the full Ninth Circuit Court to reconsider the decision.

You can read the rest of the article here.

"A New Totalitarianism is Developing Under the Cloak of Freedom."

A fascinating interview was published yesterday in The Catholic World Report that you won't want to miss.

In it, German sociologist Gabriele Kuby talks about her new book, The Global Sexual Revolution: The Destruction of Freedom in the Name of Freedom. Here's a brief sample of what she has to say:

Gabriele KubyWhen the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 we all had this hope of freedom and entering an era beyond ideology. But while we were delighting in that hope, powerful forces prepared for the next step of the global sexual revolution. Don’t ask me who these forces are, but I see this revolution taking place at a global scale, with a clear intent to destroy the basis of the family. The destruction of the family uproots every single human being. We become atomized human beings who can be manipulated to do anything.

A new totalitarianism is developing under the cloak of freedom.

Read the whole interview here.

A Major Victory

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Earlier this week, a federal district judge in Louisiana issued a key decision finding that the marriage amendment passed in 2004 by 78% of the voters of that state does not run afoul of the U.S. Constitution's guarantees of Equal Protection and Due Process. Accordingly, Judge Feldman ruled against the several plaintiffs' claims that the amendment is unconstitutional.

This is a major victory for marriage that should be celebrated.

Of course, if you've been depending on the major media outlets for your news, you'll have found precious little attention paid to this pivotal decision. The media has chosen instead to focus on a very poorly reasoned decision by a three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that was basically lifted from the template of so many such rulings since the Windsor decision in 2012.

In the 7th Circuit case, Judge Richard Posner crafted one of the most ideologically-driven and personally invested rulings I've ever read from a federal justice—and that's saying something!

Garrett Epps, writing for The Atlantic, put the matter quite colorfully—and accurately—in his article contrasting the decision with the Louisiana case [emphasis added]:

Posner finds the states' justifications so irrational that he almost becomes unhinged himself.

[...]

It is a roaring steam engine of an opinion, at times exhilarating and at other times puzzling. Is it likely to change minds? No. Its flip dismissal of the political process argument makes it less persuasive than it could have been....

In contrast to this decision, Judge Martin Feldman of Louisiana crafted a lucid and careful legal argument for why the State of Louisiana not only has a rational basis for regulating marriage by defining it as the union of one man and one woman, but also in doing so is acting precisely the way that Justice Kennedy in Windsor said States can and should act!

In his analysis of Feldman's decision for The Daily Signal, Ryan Anderson explains:

Feldman ruled that, consistent with the U.S. Constitution, citizens and their elected officials should get to define marriage, and they can define it as the union of man and woman if they choose to.

[...]

Feldman cites the Supreme Court's decision in the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case, U.S. v. Windsor, as support that Louisiana has the right to define marriage for itself. Feldman writes: "Windsor repeatedly and emphatically reaffirmed the longstanding principle that the authority to regulate the subject of domestic relations belongs to the states, subject to indistinct future constitutional guarantees that in Windsor were, by its expressed limits, left open and rather inexact."

Feldman's decision is a far cry from Posner's, as the former looks carefully at the cases with binding precedent and reasons from the Constitution and rational analysis of facts; whereas the latter is a shameful display of animus and hostility toward anyone who dares agree with nearly all of human civilization throughout all of history and throughout most of the world today that there's something special about the conjugal union of husband and wife.

Indeed, the craziest moments of Posner's decision are not merely ludicrous and poorly reasoned, they're scandalously offensive.

For example, he insinuates that the people of Indiana and Wisconsin—whose marriage laws his decision strikes down—were acting against children's welfare by instantiating in law the ideal that kids have both a mother and a father!

But it gets even worse than that.

To take another—and perhaps the most egregious—example: We know that the tradition of marriage as the union of husband and wife is nearly universal to the human experience; it is a tradition honorably celebrated and sincerely believed in by nearly every religious tradition and philosophy, throughout history and in our own day. It constitutes a deeply held belief for literally billions of people worldwide.

Well, Posner compares that tradition to cannibalism and ritualistic suicide!

Mr. Epps says Judge Posner comes almost unhinged. I might question whether he's not underestimating things somewhat.

Marriage Supporter, you should be outraged, as I am, that the deeply held beliefs of millions of Americans like us can be subjected to such calumny by high-level judiciary official in our land. We should be disgusted to find the votes of millions of Americans to protect marriage and the interests of children in having a mom and a dad compared libelously to something as grotesque as cannibalism!

But, in light of this insidious attack, we should also be grateful and all the more thrilled for the cool-headed common sense of judges like Martin Feldman whose decision is like a breath of fresh air let into a dank and stale cellar.

Please share this decision with your family and friends, and read it yourself today, and be encouraged!

The redefinition of marriage is not inevitable—not by a long shot.

Even a writer like Epps, who admits he is on the side of redefining marriage, admitted of Feldman's decision that it was clearly and closely based on Justice Kennedy's reasoning in Windsor.

Epps recognizes as much because it is hard not to do so—just as it is not hard to recognize, as Epps does, that Posner's decision by contrast is "puzzling," to use perhaps the politest applicable term.

When the Supreme Court considers this matter again—as they will certainly do—they won't miss what anyone can plainly see. They won't miss that decisions like Feldman's are based in a careful and discerning reading of the law, without a personal agenda to push or axe to grind; and that decisions like Posner's are ideological screeds frankly unworthy of the very institution of the Judiciary.

So, take heart. And read the wonderful and victorious decision from Louisiana. It will be a wonderful resource and encouragement to you as, with us at NOM and with so many of your fellow citizens, you continue to stand up bravely and speak out boldly about what marriage is and why marriage matters!

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


National Organization for Marriage Says Louisiana Marriage Decision Proves That It Is Perfectly Legal For States to Define Marriage As The Union of One Man and One Woman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 3, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"This is a great win for the cause of marriage, coming as it does on the heels of other pro-marriage court victories, that puts the lie to the claim that it is inevitable the US Supreme Court will redefine marriage. To the contrary, we believe they will leave this issue with the states." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today praised federal court Judge Martin Feldman for ruling today that the US Constitution does not preclude the state of Louisiana from defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and that voters made a rational decision in doing so when they adopted the state's marriage amendment. Feldman becomes the third federal judge to have ruled that traditional marriage laws are not unconstitutional, and the first since the US Supreme Court issued their decision invalidating a section of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. A state judge in Tennessee has also ruled that the US constitution does not prohibit states from defining marriage a one man and one woman.

"Here we see the house of cards collapsing that supported the myth that redefining marriage is inevitable," said Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "This decision by Judge Feldman in Louisiana is a great win for the cause of marriage, coming as it does on the heels of other pro-marriage court victories, that puts the lie to the claim that it is inevitable the US Supreme Court will redefine marriage. To the contrary, we believe they will leave this issue with the states."

In his ruling issued today, Judge Feldman wrote that "Louisiana's definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and the limitation on recognition of same-sex marriages permitted by law in other states ... do not infringe the guarantees of the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the United States Constitution... The defendants have shown that Louisiana's decision to neither permit nor recognize same-sex marriage, formed in the arena of the democratic process, is supported by a rational basis."

"Judge Feldman has authored a powerful opinion that points the US Supreme Court in the direction of upholding state marriage laws and constitutional amendments," Brown said. "He finds what should be obvious to everyone, that states have a legitimate concern in 'linking marriage to children with intact families.' It is perfectly appropriate for voters to determine if they wish to decide for themselves whether they wish to redefine this age-old institution that has served society so well. Overwhelmingly, voters have rejected redefining marriage, and we expect the US Supreme Court to do so as well."

Feldman becomes the third federal judge to uphold traditional marriage laws, joining judges in Nevada and Hawaii. Last month a judge in Tennessee ruled that the US Constitution does not prohibit Tennessee from adopting a marriage amendment defining marriage as 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).

Two Roads

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

A couple of court cases have attracted some interest this week, and they provide an interesting contrast highlighting why we are both concerned about the future of marriage in America, but also optimistic in the long run.

Oregon

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied NOM's motion this week to intervene to defend the state's marriage amendment in court.

Because the state Attorney General and Governor both abandoned their sworn duty to defend the law, NOM was left as the sole entity willing to publicly defend the statute on behalf of our members within the state of Oregon. We filed the appeal on behalf of our supporters, who did not wish to be named publicly, fearing reprisal.

There is well-established precedent for this under the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of NAACP v. Alabama allowing membership organizations to pursue the interests of their members when there are substantial hurdles to the members litigating in their own name, such as the real threats of harassment and violence that have been manifested elsewhere in the country around the marriage issue.

Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit did not agree and denied our motion, saying that we lacked legal standing.

Which raises the question: in America today, who DOES represent the interests of the voters? Elected officials who have sworn oaths of office to do so are refusing to do so when the issue is perceived to run counter to the popular culture. And when that happens, what can the voters do?

It's a serious crisis begun by the Supreme Court's decision last summer that the defendants of Proposition 8 didn't have legal standing which is now calling into question the entire validity and purpose of the referendum process — the truest form of democracy in our great Republic.

Of course, the legal process isn't necessarily over, and NOM will be exploring whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc with the full Ninth Circuit or whether we will seek review in the Supreme Court itself.

Because, right now, the sovereign act of the people of Oregon — voting in 2006 to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman — went entirely undefended by the elected officials of Oregon, an abdication of duty that resulted in the long-standing understanding of marriage in Oregon being rewritten by a single federal court judge.

The policy fight over the definition of marriage is something that should ultimately be resolved by the people, not unelected judges. For now, Oregonians have been denied their voice on that important policy issue, and that is truly regrettable.

North Dakota

In contrast to Oregon, we have the example of the leaders in North Dakota. Like so many other states, North Dakota's marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is under attack in federal court.

But the actions of the Governor and Attorney General in defense of the law have been exemplary to this point. They recently filed a response to the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment in the case that outlines — brilliantly — so many of the critical and compelling arguments in defense of marriage.

Among many other critically important points, they make a few that I would like to highlight here:

The case involves two conflicting marriage institutions that cannot coexist.

As I mentioned in my email on Wednesday, they point out that "this case involves two mutually exclusive and profoundly different marriage institutions, marriage institutions that serve separate, distinct, and conflicting societal purposes."

In fact, in making the argument, they cite the minority opinion of Justice Alito in the Windsor case of last summer — an opinion that cites NOM co-founder Robert P. George's book, What Is Marriage? in making precisely that point!

They correctly point out that "North Dakota can have only one social institution denominated 'marriage.' It cannot simultaneously provide the historically proven valuable social benefits of man-woman marriage and the asserted benefits of the new genderless marriage. One necessarily displaces or precludes the other."

The States have the power to define marriage.

It should be obvious, but in light of the blatant activism of federal judges recently, it must be pointed out. So they do: "In cases spanning three centuries, the Supreme Court has emphasized that '[t]he whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belongs to the laws of the states, and not to the laws of the United States.'"

Furthermore, nothing in federal constitutional law requires North Dakota to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

The media likes to say that last year, the Defense of Marriage Act was struck down in the Windsor case. But that's simply not true — only ONE of the FOUR sections of DOMA was struck down — the section that dealt with the federal government's recognition of marriage. The other three sections are still the law of the land — including Section Two, which clearly says states do NOT have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Perhaps most importantly, they point out that:

North Dakota marriage law does not violate either the Due Process Clause or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

The defendants point out that "[t]he due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a charter for restructuring [marriage] by judicial legislation." (see Supreme Court case, Baker v. Nelson).

In fact, they further point out that "Windsor also makes no mention of Baker and certainly does not inform lower courts that they are no longer bound by Baker. Windsor dealt with the constitutionality of a federal law defining marriage, not a state law" [emphasis added].

I realize that this is quite a bit technical, but I wanted to let you see that marriage can and IS receiving a phenomenal defense in court.

As cases like the one in North Dakota make their way up to the Supreme Court in the coming months, rest assured that NOM will be doing everything we can to support the defense of marriage in the courts and throughout society. If you are able this Labor Day weekend, could you please consider making a generous contribution to support our efforts to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it?

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown

PS: Enjoy your Labor Day weekend!