We Pledge $2 Million to Reverse SSM in New York - Will You Stand With Us?

Last night we were sold out by the Republican Party in New York.  Shortly before 10:30 last night, the New York Senate voted 33 to 29 in favor of same-sex marriage. Four Republicans – Jim Alesi, Roy McDonald, Steve Saland, and Mark Grisanti provided the margin of passage.

But this fight is far from over. In response to last night's vote, I have doubled our pledge to New York, committing at least $2 million dollars to make sure that New York Republicans understand that voting for gay marriage has consequences.

Marriage isn't a partisan issue – in fact, the hero of the past month has been Democratic Senator Ruben Diaz, a courageous friend who has withstood threats, bigotry and hatred while working tirelessly to protect and defend marriage. NOM pledges to stand with Senator Diaz and any Democrat who would share his courage in standing for marriage.

But the responsibility today rests squarely with the Republican Party. The Republican Party has torn up its contract with the voters who trusted them.  When Democrats are in control, they regularly refuse to permit a vote on a marriage amendment. When they are in the minority, they may even leave the state to prevent a vote when their base disapproves. And yet tonight, the Republican Party has sold out, and it is the Republican Party that will pay the worst price for this vote to redefine marriage.

Selling out your principles to get elected is wrong.  Selling out your principles to get the other guy elected is just plain dumb.

It's time to change the way business is done in Albany. Politicians who campaign one way on marriage, and then vote the other, need to understand: betraying and misleading voters has consequences, too.  We are not giving in – to the contrary, we begin today in a renewed push for a constitutional amendment that would give the people of New York the right to vote on marriage.  

In order to give the people of New York that right, we're going to have to change the leadership in Albany, bringing new pro-marriage majorities to both houses of the New York Legislature. That's why NOM is committing at least $2 million to New York in 2012, both through independent expenditures and through NOM PAC New York. 

Will you join us with a generous donation to NOM PAC New York? With your help, this battle has just begun. Your gift of $50, $100, or even $1000 or more will help get us off to a powerful start. In the next sixteen months we will change the faces of Albany.

And the first order of business will be to replace the senators who betrayed us last night.

Thank you for standing with us.


  1. Ariel Joshua Thorn
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

    Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said, “Rarely have you seen political advocates pushing for this like they did in New York. To me, what’s amazing is that (defenders of traditional marriage) held out as long as they did. Support for traditional marriage is still extremely strong!" Stop calling it traditional marriage. Its 'God's definition of marriage" Use that instead to remind people & we will win.

  2. frank keen
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

    I am thoughly disgusted of what happened in New York last night, and now that got their dirty little sights set on My State, New Jersey,..... I Don't Think So, These pieces of scum must be defeated at all cost, this is a fight we cannot afford to lose, for our children and grandchildrens furture,.....the stake are much too high,.....In a Holy AssumptionCatholic School in Absecon, New Jersey they are already teaching children as young as 12 years old Gay Sex classes,and even show pictures how Gay and Lesibeans make love, one shows oral sex being given to another man, and the parents were not to be told of these classes being taught. This is called tolerence,.....B.S. This is what will happen in all schools if this Gay Homosexual Marriage Is not stopped. This is a sexual perverted social diease that this scum wants spead into all our school's,.....I am sick and tired of thes damm dirty hollywood scum trying to force their way of sick life style down all our throats......I am tired of being called Bigiot, Hitler, Racist, and other foul names I cannot print here.....and it must stop NOW!!!!

  3. Lynn Stuart
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Marriage is one man and one woman that is they way God made it and the way it should stay. If it was suppose to be two of the same sex way didn't God just make another man He already had one

  4. John
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 9:57 pm | Permalink

    I'm proud to be called all the names that they want to say, I know I'm for traditional vaules-They are the Monsters that must be stopped and the Judas's who supported them-This all started with Obama who wants a Gay USA

  5. Jane
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

    It's pretty obvious what happened with this travesty. The Republicans decided to sell out for marriage if the religious protections were added in. The so-called protections were supposed to appease those who are concerned about having to cave in to the gay agenda.None of the NY Republicans care anything about traditional marriage. They may talk the talk but that's about it. They said whatever they had to say to get our votes.They probably all got golden handshakes from the LGBT crowd. But we'll remember next year. We'll send them a message that no Republican will ever forget in my lifetime. As for the Democrats, Kruger is a known homosexual so no surprise there. He goes with his best friend's son. The only Democrat I have any respect for is Senator Diaz. I know that man was harassed and threatened and that it was all covered up by the media. He has a spine and some values. Maybe he should run on the Republican ticket next time.

  6. Dan
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

    It's so interesting how supposed christians forget that "God created us ALL in his image". Keeping that in mind, here's a study that was released this past May 31st by leading Neurologists. This is science people, and the study shows that sexual orientation is not a choice, it's neurological from birth. Therefore what you claim is a "mistake" has then got to be blamed on God. For God created us all in his image. It's interesting too, that not one person when asked can come up with an answer as to how marriage equality affects your personal marriage. It doesn't increase or decrease your chances of divorce, it doesn't interfere in any way with your personal relationship, if it did you'd be able to come up with an answer - but you can't. Think of the money you waste on a continual basis fighting this inevitable thing that is going to eventually happen. You could use that money to feed children that are homeless and starving because their parents can't get work. These are the families you should be worrying about. Or how about the heterosexual adult pedophiles that prey on young children both boys and girls. Why aren't you doing anything to go after the Catholic church who hides these sexually abusive priests over and over again.
    Anyway, I hope you'll at least read this article on this study, this scientific study that proves sexual orientation is not a choice but neurological.

  7. John
    Posted June 25, 2011 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

    Cuomo= Wolf, Republican turncoats= new sheep slaughtered

  8. Mark Shepard
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 12:17 am | Permalink

    This issue demonstrates the dangers when government is the granter of rights or definer of deep cultural concepts. Rights and concepts are secure when rooted in something that does not shift - "the laws of nature and nature's God," to ...borrow from the document that began the American experiment in liberty. If instead such things are entrusted to a group of men and/or women to define, liberty will fade, the culture will breakdown and tyranny will see the invitation.

  9. Ron
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 12:56 am | Permalink

    Marriage is a civil right as well as a religious rite. What New York did was to extend the civil part of marriage to all New Yorkers. Marriage equality will not affect traditional marriage one iota. If you oppose same-sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex. Otherwise, live and let live.

  10. MRC
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 12:57 am | Permalink

    Dan, thanks for the article. I'm not sure I consider research on homosexuality performed by a San Francisco researcher completely unbiased on this issue, but let's say it is. At first glance, this sounds reminiscent of the Simon LeVay research which was eventually debunked and this may very well be debunked in time too (and may already have rebuttals out there) but I'm short on time to research it so, for now, please consider these points:

    First, there's nothing in the research to prove these alleged brain differences are from birth as claimed in the article. I'm only reading about *adults* they are studying. Without a baseline from infancy, how would we know whether their brains changed or were like that from birth? And how could such a baseline ever be created when the brain is ever changing in size from birth to adult? And is it that innate deviations in the brains caused a correlating deviation in sexual thoughts or, is that continually engaging in specific sexual thoughts results in correlating brains for those who engage in those thoughts, or could there be some other possibility? Even a layman like me can see there's way too much assumption going on in this "scientific" study.

    Second, we know the multiple studies on twins strongly suggest a good dose of post-birth influence is at work in the cause. And when you consider the strong psychological connection between twins, we would expect this ratio to be much higher than just half, so this too is further evidence against a psychological cause being the primary one.

    Third, this conclusion requires invalidating the many who state they successfully changed their sexual orientation. Are they all liars? How can we say "oh, you were never truly homosexual to begin with" while not considering the possibility that such is the case for *all* who identify as homosexual?

    Fourth, one of the most obvious problems for the LGBT camp to overcome with the "it's not a choice" argument are practicing bisexuals. Obviously, if one is attracted to both genders, that person could *choose* to only have sex with the opposite gender. In fact, they could exercise some self-control and commit to 1 special person of the opposite gender and enjoy a monogamous marriage with that person. But instead, practicing bisexuals *choose* not to do this and instead *choose* to engage in both homo and hetero sex.

    Fifth, at the end of the day, all sexual behavior is a choice. We can choose to engage in it or not. We live in a fallen world. We all have many temptations we must batttle. SSA isn't the only one.

    Sixth, even if it was innate, that doesn't compel the state to endorse it. Many things are rooted in an innate cause of some type, whether it's predispostion to alcholism or something else.

  11. MRC
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 1:23 am | Permalink

    Just wanted to add this for further reading. It sheds a lot of light on the "mystery":

    I agree with their position on one's right to obtain help in overcoming SSA if one desires it. No one should disagree - after all, isn't having the "right" to be what one wants to be one of the core tenants of the HS lobby?

  12. joe
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 1:42 am | Permalink

    Forget the BS studies talking trying to disprove that homosexuality is chosen.

    Read why they really want "gay marriage" its not for "equal treatment" it's to continue to undermine all of our traditional values:

  13. NAJ
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 3:16 am | Permalink

    What happened to a government for the people by the people? Why aren't Americans being given the chance to vote on these types of issues?
    Our government has become a place for whoremongers and we really think these people can make good choices for us when most are only thinking about the lobbyist dollar and who's wife or girlfriend they are going to be spending the night with?
    They have all but forgotten what our country was founded on .."In God We Trust"....Gods law clearly states marriage is between a man and woman.

  14. SamJones
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 5:40 am | Permalink

    All behaviors are a choice, Dan. There are all kinds of behavioral urges, sexual or otherwise, all of which have just as much of a claim of being genetic. But there is not one of them that forces us to act on them.

    Besides, there have been many people who have switched their sexual behavior from gay to straight throughout their lives, something you cannot do with race or gender. Not to mention the fact that there are countless identical twins in which one twin is gay and the other is straight. If homosexuality were determined by DNA, that would be impossible.

    Many homosexuals have changed not only thier behavior but also their orientation. Thousands of ex-homosexuals testify of their change, and renowned Columbia University psychiatrist, Dr. Robert Spitzer, documented those changes. His studies shows that some highly motivated individuals can change their orientation from gay to straight through reorientation therapy.

    And Spitzer is no propagandist for the religious right. In face, he was considered a hero by gay activists for getting homosexuality declassified as a mental disorder in 1973.

    The notion that people are "born" gay is based more an article of faith than fact.

  15. KevinMich
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    MRC, better to accept homosexuality as normal and good, than imply it should be changed. The only reason anyone would want to change his or her sexual orientation is social disapproval. Instead of asking others to change in order to meet our personal views, we should learn to accept others for who they are.

  16. Doug
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 10:32 am | Permalink

    I just read that one of the senators voted yes because it was destroying his family, as his wife's gay son had disowned them both. It was too close to home for him, "now it was personal".

    It also seems that the GOP will eventually go down in flames going against this thing with the tide turning with the people of the US. With the fact NY doesn't have an initiative process to vote this win down, how do you expect to deal with getting this decision reversed in 2012?

    Financial support? I am ambivalent with such things in place. Any words of wisdom on this?

  17. SamJones
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    There is progress on the subject of an initiative process in NYS.

  18. bman
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

    @Dan: This is science people, and the study shows that sexual orientation is not a choice, it's neurological from birth.

    The person in the article who said its "from birth," is Dr. Jerome Goldstein who is himself gay and who has been a gay activist over 40 years.

    When asked in an interview how certain he was about the meaning of the 2008 research done by Dr. Ivanka Savic-Berglund and Dr. Per Lindström of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm he replied,

    "I've read some of the critiques. But to me, the statistical significance of her studies is beyond question. As to absolute proof, only time will tell.""

    The fact he mentioned these "critiques" suggests he regards them as valid scientific criticisms, and that is why he says "time will tell" whether his view is right.

    And so your claim, "this is science people" is premature at best because the meaning of the research is still in dispute.

    Also, another article on the same 2008 research said it did not prove sexual orientation was biological. :

    Savic's team has yet to confirm whether the differences in brain shape are responsible for sexual orientation, or are a consequence of it. To find out, they have begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation.

    "These differences might be laid down during brain development in the womb, or they could happen after birth, though it could very likely be a combination of the two," said Savic.

    Another critique of their research (different from the one linked above), looked closely at the "plus or minus" range given by the researchers.

    Based on that margin of error, about 28% of men with a high heterosexual rating could also have the "female" brain trait (in females both halves of the brain are generally the same size but in men they are different sizes). As follows,

    But wait a minute. There are those ± thingies, the "standard deviations". If the cerebral-hemisphere volumes are distributed "normally", as we would expect, and if the estimates of means and standard deviations in the table were actually the true population values, then we can calculate what the expected distribution of hemispheric volumes (and the expected distribution of hemispheric asymmetries) will look like, for individuals within each sex-by-sexual orientation category. And when we do that, a completely different picture emerges.

    ...Rightward hemispheric asymmetry was found in the brains of 18 of 25 heterosexual males and 17 of 20 homosexual females, but in only 11 of 25 heterosexual females and 10 of 20 homosexual males.

    That raises some questions. If 18 out of 25 heterosexual men have right-larger-than-left brain hemispheres, it means the remaining 7 out of 25 (28%) do not. Therefore, the trait itself does not establish sexual orientation since its not strictly aligned with a difference in orientation. Indeed, Dr. Jerome Goldstein even said as much in his interview "....sexual orientation is exceedingly complex and not...explained by demonstrable anatomic brain differences..."

    By the same token, the above critique showed that 50% of gay men can also have the "normal" male trait (right hemisphere -larger-than left). In that case, what does their homosexuality trace to?

    I am not trained in MRI or statistics and must rely on the critiques, so my comments here are tentative. Nevertheless, they seem to be a strong argument against your claim.

  19. Tatoy Vee
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    @ Dan = Marriage Equality? May you please explain what Marriage Equality means? To my little understanding what gays and lesbians really want are changes in the law that will allow them that they can visit each other in the hospital, have confidentiality access in their medical records, claim them as dependents, have joint financial accounts, all legal stuff that any state can legislate and make into law by a "Civil Union." ....but NO, gays and lesbians are greedy, and selfish! They do not want Civil Unions but instead they want to change albeit destroy the concept of Marriage as an Institution, a union of A Man and A Women only....

  20. Aaron Jackson
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

    In response to Dan post, 6/25/11-10:20pm.
    Dan, while attending a prestigous University, I was told by a researchers with many scientific publications to their credit; that anyone doing research or a scientific can make a study or project compelling if it serves their best interest or a paid advocate best interest.

    The report you referenced is clearly one of these studies because the ppl who did it overlooked basic human instincts or development and redirected to their area of interest. A great many doctors, medical professionals, and pyschologists are gay like the gay judge that presided of the Prop 8 bill in California. Now, stick that in you pipe and read it.

    Also, you and your study are obvious neen ka poops to believe or publish such hogwash. How is it that all of sudden that everyone neuro logical genes started making ppl homosexuality when the gay movement increase. It's simple, it has nothing to do with neurology, but psychology.

    Homosexuality is a trend, fad, and natural sexual replacement behavior pushed into existance by sexual perverts and people in the sexual movie industry who no longer wanted to work for normal routes and channels to be emotional or sexually satified.

  21. Doug
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 7:11 pm | Permalink

    The idea that sexual orientation is a choice is unsubstantiated. No one to my knowledge has done so, gay or straight, so that idea is fantasy at best. To be able to make a mental choice one day to entirely change your sexual chemical nature is about as likely as deciding to walk on water at whim. We don't need someone to tell us the science behind why the sun is yellow or the grass is green, it is obvious. As is with sexual orientation. To prove it is meaningless. just ask those who own their sexuality, there is your proof. If someone has ever said they have changed sexual orientation at will, bring it. Until someone does, the accusation that it's a choice has no rational basis in fact and is a projection of nonsense at best.
    With that being said, it seems that right wingers want to look at the sex act. They are not homophobic as many might state, but they are homo-neurotic, having inner issues with the natural template of human sexuality. Gays don't have an issue, it's those that have issues with homosexuality that have the problem. Children don't squirm at the truth, they squirm at those teachers and parents that squirm at the truth, thus doing them a great injustice when it comes to learning about human sexuality.
    If you want to raise a homo-neurotic child, keep it up. And if they are gay you have double trouble to deal with within the family unit.
    The more I look at the neurotic sexual tendencies of the religious right, the more I see these people love each other, that the RR is looking at sex, and not the love.
    God has strong statements about promiscuity orgies etc, but that is not what gay marriage is about, it's about love. That is why we are losing. Breaking hearts is not God's or Jesus' way.
    I therefore am going to start looking above the belt at a group that is naturally part of the human sexual template, and then decide if I am still in support of discrimination against these folk and nature.
    If gays say they are gay from birth with no other gay saying the opposite, and they form strong bonds of love and well being, well, I'm feeling more and more like a dumb ass to question it. Seems God is allowing them to marry their hearts and bodies together. Maybe those Bible verses were about infidelity more than the actual sex act. No one could know better than God himself and he seems to be speaking volumes right now by letting all his people love and marry.

  22. Rick Vee
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    Folks, keep this in perspective. We are seeing the results of the Leftover Left pushing a Leftist agenda in a predominantly Leftist state. That being said, victory was delivered to the homosexuals by virtue of false Republicans (RINO's or Republicans in Name Only).

    In my opinion such folk are worse than open Leftists. The Open Leftist is clear about his agenda, whereas a RINO is a liar and deceiver . He or she takes your money and your power through depection and perverts both into something which is 180 degrees from what you had been promised.

    I can only counsel VERY careful vetting of their replacements so we are no subjected to one lying RINO after the next.

    But in any event, let us begin the RINO hunt and eradicate them.

  23. bman
    Posted June 26, 2011 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

    @Doug "The idea that sexual orientation is a choice is unsubstantiated...."

    The question of whether orientation is determined by necessity of nature or by choice is actually moot since law can not see the heart and can only judge actions.

    You noted that "right wingers" view the sex "act" as a choice.

    So, the question is not whether same sex orientation is biologically determined or not, but its whether it benefits or hurts society to promote same sex behavior to its youth.

  24. Posted June 27, 2011 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    Same sex marriage is not marriage. Same sex orientation is a disorder that is now stepping into the destruction of the principle of marriage has always been as evidenced by natural law.

    To act upon a disordered sexual drive is truly to cave in to a critical vice, causing harm to those surrounding us, but worst of all , to the one with the disorder. It is a disorder that destroys the self above all. An alcoholic ought not drive his disordered drinking as "central" to his lifestyle, but rather commit to saying "NO" to what is not Good for him or for those affected by his disordered behavior. Just as homosexual persons ought not drive such a powerful drive as Sex into a realm of disordered situations. What is most destructive here in the "same sex" lifestyle, is that it is rooted in pride in such a disorder, a vice that deceives their very dignity. At this onset, we see their ignorance towards the structure of family. The natural order of the place for a mother and the place of a father in light of those most innocent, children. The sexual perversion that is created by those same sex couples extending their disorder to the most innocent and small among us, is yet another unforgivable violence done to the child. Same sex unions, accepted by "LAW" is quite the evidence that this "government" we live in today has lost all its sens of Law, of moral structure, as well as mistaking "Freedom" with "License". God is our creator, not lawmakers, therefore, we need to defend Natural Law, and defend laws pertinent to that and holding up to those principles of Life, family, especially marriage, which are CORE to a healthy civilization/communion of people.

  25. Randy E King
    Posted June 27, 2011 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    So; according to the research provided by same-sex enthusiasts, it is rationale to conclude that same-sex activity is a form of mental retardation.

  26. LPAT
    Posted June 27, 2011 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

    Well, to the guy who writes "man was created in God's image." That is correct. The operative word is "was." SIN broke that. Now, man *is* created in the "image of SIN" hence for this cause The NEW ADAM -- The Lord Jesus Christ -- The Only Begotten Son of God makes clear that through HIM man must be "born again." Meaning, He has come to "restore God's Image" in our lives. Thusly, Homosexuality, rather the Homosexual is created in the "image of SIN" and like all the rest of us SINNERS -- we must be BORN AGAIN in Jesus Christ that we are restored by His shed blood, its cleansing power and the sanctification of The Holy Ghost indwelling will once again restore "God's Image" in our lives. Homosexuality is the "image of Sin" not the "image of God." And, thusly, (gay) "marriage" I like to say "shamarriage" is the image of Sin plainly. For we not what God has established as the "image of Marriage" -- Jesus Christ reminds us of this in Matthew 19: "From the beginning God created Male & Female and these two (the twain) shall be one flesh... what God has brought together let no man put asunder (negate, separated, depart from, undermine, attack, remove, resist and divide). "

  27. Posted June 28, 2011 at 2:43 pm | Permalink

    The "Christian" agenda is just as bad if not worse than the "Gay" agenda. You ALL need to get a grip on reality. This is The United States of America. This is not some religiously controlled government. Keep ALL religion out of the operation of government. PERIOD !!