Consequences of a Vote, NOM Marriage News


NOM National Newsletter

NOM Marriage News

My Dear Friends,

Votes have consequences.

We just endorsed a Democrat for the New York state Senate, Chuck Swanick.

Here's what I said in our press release:

"In response to those who say that electing Mr. Swanick could cost Dean Skelos his majority in the Senate we say, 'we don't care,'" Brown said. "Mark Grisanti's political career will be ended over same-sex marriage, and he might take Dean Skelos with him. But that is Skelos' own doing for having allowed the same-sex marriage bill to come to a vote in the Senate. We are committed to electing a pro-marriage majority, not protecting Republicans like Mark Grisanti who betray our core values."

NOM said it intends to participate in legislative contests throughout the state as part of its $2 million commitment to make sure the voters of New York are able to vote to restore marriage in New York. In addition to Grisanti, the group plans to oppose Senators James Alesi, Roy McDonald, Stephen Saland and Shirley Huntley, and support those who voted against redefining marriage such as Ruben Diaz.

"We are on a crusade to reclaim the people's right to vote on marriage. We will work with legislators of any party, like Chuck Swanick and the courageous Democratic Senator Ruben Diaz, who will stand for the truth of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. We're committed to achieving a majority for marriage, not any particular partisan majority," Brown concluded.

Votes have consequences.

That's what Buffalo Senator Mark Grisanti is learning, as one of the four Buffalo Republicans whose flip to vote for gay marriage in New York is turning into a real flop with the voters.

The Erie County Conservative Party has announced he won't have the Conservative Party's backing in this election.

(Grisanti's electoral troubles aren't helped by press coverage of his involvement in the equivalent of a barroom fight in a local casino.)

Meanwhile, NY State Sen. Roy McDonald, another Republican who betrayed his promise to the people with his vote for gay marriage, was the next to take an embarrassing hit. His hometown Wilton GOP Committee endorsed his opponent, Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin, for the GOP nomination.

New York's Capitol Confidential headline sums it up: pro-marriage forces are "piling on" New York's flip-flopping senators.

PolitickerNY also noticed that NOM is helping out in the race to replace another flip-flopping (and otherwise disgraced) State Sen. Carl Kruger, in the special election for his Brooklyn seat.

Part of the amazing multi-racial, interfaith coalition for marriage swung into action, as major Orthodox Jewish rabbis came out hard against Lew Fidler, who supports gay marriage. We helped them get
their message out on marriage, as Politicker reports:

"We Need A Senator Who Supports Torah Values," the ad's headline reads, before going after the Democratic candidate. "Lew Fidler voted to support same-gender 'marriage,' a forbidden act under the Torah."

The ad's featured photo is the Republican candidate, attorney David Storobin, standing in between Majority Leader Dean Skelos and State Senator Marty Golden, surrounded by Rabbis. Below is a photo of Mr. Storobin with Rabbi Yisroel Belsky, who the New York Times once described as "prominent and influential." According to the ad, Rabbi Belsky says it is forbidden "to provide public recognition or any kind of assistance to Lew Fidler ... Rabbi Yisroel Belsky endorses David Storobin, who will support Torah Values."

New York was the springboard for a new nationwide push to impose gay marriage, against the will of the voters. We are fighting hard in Washington, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey—and more states will follow.

This is a two-step punch to try to knock marriage supporters out of the ring—fueled by Republican betrayals which are rewarded by pro-gay-marriage cash in the political arena.

But the people are fighting back with votes on marriage in Minnesota and North Carolina.

In Washington state the Family Policy Institute of Washington, led by Joseph Backholm, has filed a referendum to roll back gay marriage.

This week in Maryland the black churches fought back big time, with the Maryland Marriage Alliance filing a referendum to overturn Maryland's just-passed gay marriage law.

Maryland Marriage Alliance Press Conference

These black pastors are men of great courage and determination. They are fired up at this assault on Biblical values regarding marriage in the name of faux civil rights.

Even the Washington Post noticed the anomaly of these civil rights heroes being slandered as haters and bigots by white liberals:

All of a sudden, they are bigots and haters—they who stood tall against discrimination, who marched and sat in, who knew better than most the pain of being told they were less than others. They are black men, successful ministers, leaders of their community. But with Maryland poised to become the eighth state in the nation to legalize same-sex marriage, they hear people—politicians, activists, even members of their own congregations—telling them they are on the wrong side of history, and that's not where they usually live.

...Nathaniel Thomas spent decades as an administrator in Howard University's student affairs office, counseling young people not only about their course work but also about their personal quests for justice. He came to the ministry at the dawn of middle age, eager to help people, and especially fellow black men, discover in the word of God a path out of despair.

Over the past couple of years, as Thomas and dozens of other black clergymen in Prince George's County have stood on the front line of the campaign against same-sex marriage, he has come to see the revolution at hand—in his view, a rebellion against religion and tradition—as an assault on the sustainability of the black family.

Which is why Thomas and his friend Reynold Carr, director of the Prince George's Baptist Association, are gearing up for the next battle, a statewide ballot referendum in November to challenge the legalization of same-sex marriage, which the state House of Delegates approved last Friday.

...Thomas and the 77 other Baptist ministers in the association do not see same-sex marriage as a civil rights matter. Rather, they say, it is a question of Scripture, of whether a country based on Judeo-Christian principles will honor what's written in Romans or decide to make secular decisions about what's right. In Maryland, as in California and New York, opinion polls have shown that although a majority of white voters support recognition of same-sex marriage, a majority of blacks oppose it, often on religious grounds.

It takes real courage to stand up for Biblical values against the forces now geared to redefine our society. I am humbled at the honor of fighting shoulder to shoulder with giants such as these.

Meanwhile up north, we are helping out big-time with a push to take back territory in New Hampshire.

Here's how the Manchester Union Leader covered the story:

"I think the Legislature has a chance to right the tremendous wrong of forcing this thing through a few years ago," Brown said.

Asked what the $250,000 will be used for, Brown said: "We'll expose those candidates who decided to undermine marriage."

Plans include running independent TV ads as well as donating directly to legislators' campaigns this year.

"There are limits on what we can do with direct contributions, whereas with independent expenditures or issue ads, we can spend unlimited funds," Brown said.

In 2010, NOM spent more than $1 million, including running ads critical of Republican gubernatorial candidate Bill Binnie. NOM expects to spend about $15 million nationally this year, backed by donations from 60,000 supporters.

"We're a national group, but we've got thousands of supporters in New Hampshire, and we work hand in hand in New Hampshire," Brown said.

Then the New York Times reports on February 29 on pro-marriage chances: "A repeal bill appears to have a good chance of passing in the state House and Senate, which are both controlled by Republicans. The bigger question is whether they can muster enough votes to overcome a promised veto from Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat."


With all eyes on the GOP nomination fight, I'm grateful to be able to remind you that Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, the two top contenders for the GOP nomination, have both committed to being marriage champions by signing NOM's Marriage Pledge. (So has Newt Gingrich!)

National elections have consequences too. With Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act headed to the Supreme Court, the stakes this November could not be higher.

President Obama sent his Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius—fresh from her new campaign to force Christian schools, charities, hospitals and even Salvation Army soup kitchens to help fund abortion-inducing drugs—to oppose the marriage amendment in North Carolina. She said it was "hugely important" to defeat the marriage protection amendment in North Carolina—a sure sign that they are "hugely" worried they are going to lose.

Wow, is this tone-deaf on Obama's part! He sent to North Carolina a woman most known for imposing on the rights of people of faith, to headline the opposition to the marriage amendment.

When we warn that gay marriage will have consequences for religious liberty, Kathleeen Sebelius is more of a confirmation than a refutation of voters' concerns.

The campaign by Obama to redefine reality so he can impose his values on us all has just begun.

This is a fitting reminder to us all: Votes do have big consequences—for all our values.

I promise you: At NOM we won't back down from a fight, no matter how tough the going gets, or what hateful names they try to throw at us.

I know I'm standing up for millions of decent, loving, law-abiding Americans like you whose values are rooted in God's word and common sense.

At NOM we will fight for your values until we win.

Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization, are not tax-deductible. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept contributions from business corporations, labor unions, foreign nationals, or federal contractors; however, it may accept contributions from federally registered political action committees. Donations may be used for political purposes such as supporting or opposing candidates. No funds will be earmarked or reserved for any political purpose.

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.


  1. Ash
    Posted March 1, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Permalink

    And I'll continue to stand with you, NOM. Thanks for all that you do.

  2. Peter McDermott
    Posted March 1, 2012 at 9:15 pm | Permalink

    "Votes have consequences."

    Discrimination has consequences.

  3. Stefan
    Posted March 1, 2012 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    All that said, marriage equality is the law in NY and will stay that way regardless of who gets elected. NOM, it's a losing battle but I know you'll never stop trying because you just can't stand it.

  4. Zack
    Posted March 1, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Permalink


    I know you'd like to think it's a losing battle. You say same-sex marriage is sweeping over this country...only 8 states have legalized it. New Hampshire is poised to repeal it, Maryland is going to repeal it via referendum and Washington may or may not keep it once it's on the ballot. On top of that, Minnesota and North Carolina are going to amend marriage amendments. Pennsylvania is next along with Indiana.

  5. Skooter McGoo
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 12:44 am | Permalink

    Marriage licenses are issued by the state, not the church. No religion is necessary for a marriage to be legal, valid or recognized.

  6. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 1:17 am | Permalink

    The opposition is outnumbered. Their only chance is to silence us, something they'll never accomplish.

  7. Randy E King
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    The opposition staked its entire future on a reality distortion field. In their 'Alice in Wonderland' world up is down, down is up, words can mean what you want them to mean, there is no discernible difference between men and women, and children are pets.

    Or to quote a unnamed baby-boomer:

    "No one was ever supposed to be younger than us"

  8. JR
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 10:09 am | Permalink

    Barb - Why do you refer to those who favor marriage equality as "the opposition"? I assume you are heterosexual and married to someone of the opposite sex. No one who favors marriage equality wants to change that. For some equality supporters, there is simply a desire to rightfully have what is currently denied to them but permitted for others. It is very simple.

  9. ResistSSA
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 11:43 am | Permalink

    JR - Homosexuals are not being denied anything that any other individual has. They can all get married; they choose not to. That's a fact.

  10. Posted March 2, 2012 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    "No one who favors marriage equality wants to change that. For some equality supporters, there is simply a desire to rightfully have what is currently denied to them but permitted for others."

    You can find a piece of legislation which denies marriage to someone because of their sexual orientation? if you cannot, then you have no just cause, and no rational argument.

  11. Ash
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    I appreciate the marriage supporters constantly correcting the falsehoods of the opposition. Keep it up. We can't let them succeed in their mind games and twisting of words. If they want to talk to us, they'll just have to tell the truth: "marriage as it is currently defined does not accommodate my sexual desires. Instead of simply passing on marriage, as do others who don't like marriage's structure and norms, I want marriage changed to accommodate my sexual desires, and mine alone."

    Now, we all know that this isn't an inspiring rally cry for their cause, and it doesn't pull on the heart strings as the "we are being denied" tripe. But it's the truth, and I'm glad marriage supporters are holding them to it.

  12. TC Matthews
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    ""marriage as it is currently defined does not accommodate my sexual desires. Instead of simply passing on marriage, as do others who don't like marriage's structure and norms, I want marriage changed to accommodate my sexual desires, and mine alone.""

    Great way to say it.

  13. littlestripes
    Posted March 2, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    "You can find a piece of legislation which denies marriage to someone because of their sexual orientation?"

    Uuuuh. Prop-8. DOMA, the federal legislation. And other states also have legislation that denies same-sex marriage, based on sexual orientation.

  14. Posted March 2, 2012 at 9:49 pm | Permalink

    Littlestripes, can you please show the actual language in either Prop 8, DOMA, or any state marriage legislation which specifically prohibits a person who self-identifies as "gay" from seeking or acquiring a marriage license? Or any person who engages in homosexual sex? Or any piece of legislation which requires an individual to publicly divulge their sexual orientation in order to acquire a marriage license?

    If you cannot, then you have no just cause, and you have no rational argument. In fact, your argument is based entirely on emotional identity politics, and serves only the segment of the population which self-identifies as "gay," while affecting the entire population. How is that "equality?"

    Marriage is organized around sex, not sexual orientation.

  15. The.Truth
    Posted March 3, 2012 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    Zack, that is eight more states than less than a decade ago, and soon the must populous state in the nation will have marriage equality restored by the U.S. Supreme Court. And the latest public opinion polls there show 59 percent in favor of same gender marriage equality.

    NH will not repeal. Maine will approve. Minnesota may reject an amendment. Washington is likely to retain. And probably Maryland too. NJ could override given major public approval for SSM. As much as you guys desperately want to convince yourselves otherwise it is inevitable nationwide.

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.