My Dear Friends,
She Called You a "Coward"!
This is the week the gay-marriage movement is trying to break you and me. Pushing forward full-bore in Washington, Maryland, New Jersey, New Hampshire—NOM has never had a week where we've sent out so many action alerts to so many people.
This is the week we take up the gauntlet laid down by the First Lady of Maryland, who had the nerve to tell a gay rights group that those who oppose gay marriage are "cowards." (The governor had to go on an apology tour for that remark).
Even as they threaten the jobs, the businesses, and the livelihoods of people willing to stand for the great truths of Genesis—even as they bask in the accolades of Hollywood and a complacent media—even as they wallow in the silver coins flung into their campaign chests by billionaire gay-marriage backers—they call you and me "cowards"?
Here's how the people of Maryland responded, at a rally you'll never see on Fox News or ABC News—thousands, led by the black church, flooded Annapolis to make it clear that they will never give up the fight for what's right.
Listen as a brave clergyman stands up to government power and the epithets of the governor's wife:
"Never in human history has marriage been defined as two men. Never in human history has marriage been defined as two women. Who has the right to redefine it?"
The crowd shouts: "No one!"
"This is reckless social experimentation. Marriage is the fundamental cell of society. If you mess with marriage, you threaten the very future of humanity. We ask our government to do their job. Fix the problems we already have. Don't make new ones! Do your job!"
Do your job. Fix the budget. Get the economy back to work. Solve problems, don't create them, and don't blame the people for refusing to accept your insults or your epithets as a substitute for rational argument.
Up in New Hampshire the same spirit of courage was demonstrated by Rep. Paul Ingbretson, who takes the gay marriage activists to task for what he calls "usurpation by redefinition":
We all know that the New Hampshire Supreme Court did a great disservice to the people of the state in their Claremont education opinions when they redefined out of thin air the word "cherish" in our Constitution (Part II, Art. 83) to "must fund." We've been paying the price ever since for that unconstitutional redefinition. Part of that price is that it encouraged the Democrat majority's willy-nilly usurpation-by-redefinition of the Constitution's word "marriage" in their "gay marriage" legislation a couple years ago.
Since 1784 the New Hampshire Constitution has included Marriage in Part II, Art. 76. Because that article includes the word Marriage, its required meaning is the 1784 definition. (Some would argue that since the word is capitalized, the actual definition precedes our Constitution.) In any case, the Constitutional definition of Marriage in New Hampshire has been, and still is, the 1784 definition: one man and one woman. In an arrogant "usurpation-by-statute" the Constitutional definition was altered two years ago.
Both Maggie Gallagher and Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse have penned eloquent responses to the claim that libertarians should support same-sex marriage. These are being distributed to legislators in New Hampshire now as we help the people of New Hampshire fight to overturn gay marriage in New Hampshire. (You can read them here [pdf] and here [pdf]).
Reading these state constitutions, which were drafted by men who founded our Republic, is an education in itself.
Here's how the drafters of the New Hampshire "live free or die" state constitution understood the grounding of religious liberty—in morality and piety:
"As morality and piety, rightly grounded on high principles, will give the best and greatest security to government, and will lay, in the hearts of men, the strongest obligations to due subjection; and as the knowledge of these is most likely to be propagated through a society, therefore, the several parishes, bodies, corporate, or religious societies shall at all times have the right of electing their own teachers, and of contracting with them for their support or maintenance, or both."
The Washington state senate just passed a gay marriage bill, which is being railroaded through without a vote of the people. In Washington, as in Maine and California we will fight for the people's rights by overturning this unjust law.
Meanwhile in New Jersey, even as Gov. Christie bravely promised to veto a same-sex marriage bill he undercut his own claim to be standing by his campaign promises by appointing to the New Jersey Supreme Court an outspoken advocate of gay marriage who equates traditional views of marriage to slavery.
In 2009, Bruce Harris sent an email to State Senator Joe Pennacchio urging him to vote for gay marriage:
When I hear someone say that they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman because that's the way it's always been, I think of the many "traditions" that deprived people of their civil rights for centuries: prohibitions on interracial marriage, slavery, (which is even provided for in the Bible), segregation, the subservience of women, to name just a few of these "traditions."
I hope that you consider my request that you re-evaluate your position and, if after viewing the videos, reading Governor Whitman's letter and thinking again about this issue of civil rights you still oppose same-sex marriage on grounds other than religion I would appreciate it if you'd explain your position to me. And, if the basis of your opposition is religious, then I suggest that you do what the US Constitution mandates—and that is to maintain a separation between the state and religion.
These are not the words of a judicial conservative, a man who believes in common sense, strict construction of the state constitution—in other words, the kind of judge Gov. Christie promised to appoint to the court.
A man who cannot tell the difference between supporting our traditional understanding of marriage and wanting to enslave a people lacks common sense and judicial temperament.
Please use the form below to urge Governor Christie to fix this terrible mistake by withdrawing the nomination of Bruce Harris for the New Jersey Supreme Court. Then tell your friends, and ask them to send a message of their own.
That message—marriage equals hatred and bigotry—is now being used against Gov. Christie for his support for marriage. The campaign to vilify and exclude millions of Americans from the mainstream because we stand up for marriage is ongoing and intensifying.
Ted Olson, the formerly conservative legal eagle who is now in court fighting to overturn Prop 8, wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal calling attention to the unjust attack on the Koch brothers by the President of the United States.
Here's the letter I would like to write in response: "Ted Olson is right about the Kochs and the misuse of government power by Pres. Obama 'to damage or demean one's political enemies.' It's ironic that this call to decency comes from a man who went to court to get the government to demean 7 million Californians who voted for Prop 8 as irrational bigots."
This is a spiritual battle. That's why, even when as in this week, the times look tough, our opponents try to overwhelm us with insults and defeats—we know this is temporary. We know Who will win this fight, in the end.
It was Dostoevsky who wrote, "Beauty is mysterious as well as terrible. God and devil are fighting there, and the battlefield is the heart of man."
For the beauty that is marriage, for the idea that we are made male and female—for a Reason—for these deep and great truths about who we are as people, and as a People—we will never give up. We will never stop fighting.
And we will, with the grace of God and your help, win.
This message has been authorized and paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006, Brian Brown, President. This message has not been authorized or approved by any candidate.
34 Comments
What Mr. Harris fails
to realize is this: just because it's in the Bible doesn't automatically make it law. Polygamy is in the Bible--it's illegal. Same-sex marriage has NEVER been condoned in the Bible, though some will say that the relationship between David and Jonathan might have been.
I have a cousin who is lesbian. Do I hate her? Absolutely not! I don't believe in beatting up or killing these people. They are just as worthy of the right to life as every one else in this country. They need prayers, not ridicule!
NOM 4 life!
Chelsea
"Even as they threaten the jobs, the businesses, and the livelihoods of people willing to stand for the great truths of Genesis"
Okay. Let's pretend for a second that the great truth of Genesis is "God does not much care for homosexual persons, even though He did create them.. He, er screwed up or something," instead of "God created the world."
Even in this fictional reality, you remain the group ACTIVELY TRYING TO DO THOSE THINGS TO OTHERS.
God did not create homosexual people. He created us male and female and our own biology clearly shows he made us heterosexual.
The sodomites chose their homosexuality freely and voluntarily, it was the choice they made.
This is wonderful! The more blatantly bigoted people speak out the more allies the LGBT community get. John Noe, you ought to go speak out, the ugliness of your behavior will give SSM more supporters.
God is simply the essentially incomprehensible ultimate cause of existence,of the laws of physics,of evolution,and so forth.Not an anthropomorphized author of untraceable "sacred texts".
This universe,and our species,are not perfect.Flaws abound.Homosexual orientation is one of them,and attempts to defend homosexual activity another.But we must strive to better ourselves and our behavior,and treating wrong as right can play no part.Standards of conduct are not "bigotry",and any "LGBT community" must disband and renounce all its aims.
MARRIAGE IS A HUMAN RIGHT, NOT A STRAIGHT PRIVILEGE.
@Mikee J
So by going out and making one's opinion on the issue of traditional marriage known, that makes one a bigot? How does that draw more allies to the opposition of those who support traditional marriage?
@Mikee J, I'll answer your question. Anytime a person thinks one group of people should be treated differently than another group, they are a bigot. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs and opinions, but that does not mean you are not discriminating against someone. Also forcing ones opinions or beliefs down other peoples throats is never exceptable. And people who are on the fence about SSM are becoming disgusted with certain people who are so open about their hate for gays that they are opening up their minds to marriage equality.
@Zack I'll answer your question. Anytime a person thinks one group of people should be treated differently than another group, they are a bigot. Everyone has the right to their own beliefs and opinions, but that does not mean you are not discriminating against someone. Also forcing ones opinions or beliefs down other peoples throats is never exceptable. And people who are on the fence about SSM are becoming disgusted with certain people who are so open about their hate for gays that they are opening up their minds to marriage equality.
John Noe - God created male (mostly heterosexual with a small percentage homosexual) and female (again mostly heterosexual with a small percentage homosexual). The Lord works in mysterious ways. His ways are not our ways. He made a very diverse world.
"When I hear someone say that they believe marriage is only between a man and a woman because that's the way it's always been, I think of the many "traditions" that deprived people of their civil rights for centuries..."
I think of other traditions...that all men and women are equal, that people (including children) are not property, and that every human being has transcendent value...and marriage, which is why marriage needs to be protected as a civil right instead of being radically revised by unrepresentative government officials.
@Zack..because there are alot of people who are on the fence about SSM and when anti-gay groups try and force their beliefs and opinions on the rest of the country, many people have a change of heart and become more accepting. I know many friends and family members that have become disgusted with certain tactics used by politicians and anti-gay groups and therefore have opened their minds to gay marriage.
Where does the Word of God say that God made people homosexual?
Looks like that "coward" remark has only strengthened the resolve to resist the SS"M" hypocrites.
Mr. Incredible - Does the Bible go into detail abut the diversity of the Lord's handiwork - his people? People have been born gay in all cultures throughout history.
Mr Incredible, the bible kind of leaves out the billions of years that earlier life forms inhabited the earth including dinosaurs. Most of which died out long before man ever stood erect. We know you religionists take extra license to explain how that all happened in those magical 7 days, but now you need the bible to be more explicit when it comes to gays. Typical.
The religious argument and the word marriage.
There is no marriage 'equality'.
In one all the organs of the human species are joined together.
In the other they are not.
In one all the chromosomes of the human species are represented.
In the other they are not.
In one all of human kind is represented with the two half's of humanity present.
In the other it is not.
In one a human life might be created because of the union.
In the other it can not.
In one, no one else and nothing else is needed to create a nation.
In the other this possibility does not exist.
In one both reproductive organs naturally and instinctively prepare themselves to come together.
In the other they do not.
In one some physical attributes of each person can be seen in their off spring.
In the other they can not.
In one DNA of each person can be found in their off spring.
In the other it can not.
In one the child can see biological traits of himself in both his parents.
In the other he can not.
A natural and instinctive desire to stay together because of the biological connection can exist.
In the other it can not.
In one the child can know that he is physically unique to his parents.
In the other he can not.
In one the child can know that his parents are physically unique to him.
In the other he can not.
In one the child can know that his body and life came from the union of his two parents.
In the other he can not.
In one the symbol of the reproductive union of humankind can be represented.
In the other it can not.
These above things are also part of a definition of marriage.
Marriage cannot be equal between any two people; that is just a fact.
One word for all, is not equality for all. It will be the creation of inequality.
You can take your religion and religious teachings and throw them out the window.
You can take your god or gods and throw them out the window.
You can take your personal beliefs and do what you want with them.
But the above does not change.
And any and all arguments and faiths, and religions, and beliefs that can be used to safeguard and protect such a basic fundamental truth, are valid.
For a society not to allow words to distinguish a difference on this subject which revolves around the very existence of human life is to suppress, oppress and to be dishonest to its the people, (for manipulative and marketing interests and for 'revenge').
THEY CALLED ME A COWARD?!?! I WILL SHOW THEM BY GIVING NOM MONEY!!!
(does that actually work?)
Marlon,marriage exists to unite male to female and the right to it exists only in that context.
Kate,the recognition of certain behaviors as more worthy of promotion than others is not "bigotry" against a "group" defined by desire to engage in the less worthy behaviors.A bigot believes a target group can't change their behavior...if you think "gays" can't realize same-sex sex is wrong,you are being bigoted against them!
JR, niether the Bible, or any scientific research confirms that people are "born gay." The thousands of ex-gays that are out there are living proof that the "born that way" claim is a myth.
Great video clip. Good to see people fighting hard to save the word and the idea of Marriage. Thank you for my futur children - that they might at least be able to choose between two different unions. And that they might but a word to what it is they long for.
Son of Adam, what proof do you have that it's a choice? None of course, and yet all the medical and psychiatric communities also do not believe its a choice. What makes you right other than bieng anti-gay to start with?
Mike J,nothing can justify same-sex sexual activity regardless of whether inclination toward it is a choice.
"Son of Adam, what proof do you have that it's a choice? None of course, and yet all the medical and psychiatric communities also do not believe its a choice. What makes you right other than bieng anti-gay to start with?"
Do you mean to tell me that the thousands of ex-gays who testify to their change is not proof enough for you? What about the thousands of identical twins in which one is straight and the other is gay, which would be impossible if homosexuality is genetic?
So until these medical and psychiatric communities can prove that all these people are liars, I have no reason to believe that their claims are based on anything else but political correctness influenced by the cash of special interest groups.
Great point Son of Adam:
Here is another proof that it is impossible to be born that way. The only way genes or a genetic condition is passed onto the next generation is through human reproduction. However these people do not procreate. What ever genes a homosexual had is gone after they die since they did not procreate.
Hence: If there ever was a homosexual gene it would have passed out years ago and not gone on since there was no reproduction.
In fact, there is nothing in the Word of God that tells us "God made people homosexual."
In fact, it's just the opposite; He created everybody heterosexual, and some chose to go homosexual, against God's wishes.
I'd rather say that the species having two sexes determines opposite-sex sexual relationships to be its exclusive norm,and human reason should lead us to deplore all failures to adhere to that norm and acknowledge the obligation to such adherence.It's perfectly possible for some to have an involuntary inclination toward violating it (a flaw,we are none of us perfect!)but they still should suppress that inclination.
"In fact, it's just the opposite; He created everybody heterosexual, and some chose to go homosexual, against God's wishes." In fact, there is nothing in the Word of God that confirms. The Word of God is not fact. People take it on faith.
Louis, I'm troubled by your phrasing, "having two sees determines."
Who, or what, is doing the determining?
sees ----> sexes
They take, on faith, the fact of the Word of God.
The fact of there being two sexes determines that sexual activity ought only to be between individuals of opposite sexes...sexes exist for each other.Any departure from that norm is irrational.
Now I get it.
The very fact of compatible differences and the way they work together to produce something new in their union is proof in and of itself.
I get it and I like that.
From Genesis:
"Male and female He created them; and G-d blessed them, and G-d said unto them, "Be fruitful and multiply."
"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave until his wife; and they shall be as one flesh."