NOM BLOG

Video: Is Gay Marriage A Civil Right? African-American and Latino Leaders Speak for Themselves

 

Watch this video and it's pretty clear that African-American and Latino leaders who oppose same-sex marriage are doing so out of deep conviction, like other Americans:

22 Comments

  1. MrRoivas
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

    There were many people who had deep convictions that Jew like me are greedy scum who deserve to be cleansed or converted.

    A deep conviction means nothing good if the conviction is nasty.

  2. Daniel
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Do we determine civil rights by public opinion now?

  3. Michael
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    I was unaware the Black church needs to sign off on something before it's allowed to be a civil rights issue.

  4. Cherie
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 6:40 pm | Permalink

    It is absolutely NOT a Civil Rights issue! Period! Marriage is defined by God as between one man and one woman. Civil Union is another thing. Have at it, but it is NOT marriage. You don't try to redefine a word as something is is not.

  5. Posted April 24, 2012 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

    Wow! It brought tears to my eyes! Awesome, just inspiring and so empowering. God is moving in the hearts of good men! Praise the Lord! My story at http://www.hope7.highpowersites.net

  6. Zack
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    Nom. You know theyre all uncle toms who are only good for votes. Thats how the left likes it.

    And to the last two posts, the left is usurping the civil rights movement to make it seem like their struggles are the same as blacks. You liberals need to open a history book.

  7. GZeus
    Posted April 24, 2012 at 11:04 pm | Permalink

    First, the term Civil Rights does not belong to blacks. It has a long history. Second, while the struggle for equality is not identical to blacks, both groups have been the victims of discrimination in this country. Both minorities have been beaten, killed, denied housing and/or employment, ridiculed, tortured, raped and abused because the majority thought them less than human. Oftentimes, based on religion.

  8. Daughter of Eve
    Posted April 25, 2012 at 12:48 am | Permalink

    GZeus, the same could be said of Mormons.

    But it's not a good reason to introduce sex segregation and inequality into the institution of marriage.

  9. Daniel
    Posted April 25, 2012 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

    Daughter of Eve writes:

    But it's not a good reason to introduce sex segregation and inequality into the institution of marriage.

    I agree - is this being contemplated? Please elaborate on the proposed "forced separation" of the sexes that is of concern. And of the "inequality" that we risk introducing into the institution of marriage. Thanks!

  10. Denver
    Posted April 25, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Permalink

    well at least we know now that we need black church leaders to sign off on any issue of equality. Hmm, that's sad that NOM has decided to raise the race card. Looking forward to the day that this organization is bankrupt financially. they sure do ask for money ALOT! We"ll se how long that lasts. they are already bankrupt in the idea that everyone is equal

  11. Ash
    Posted April 25, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

    Excellent ad.

  12. Posted April 26, 2012 at 12:19 am | Permalink

    "Sex segregation," as in a woman not being equally represented in each and every marriage union, thus causing a segregation of the sexes.

  13. Posted April 26, 2012 at 12:20 am | Permalink

    "they are already bankrupt in the idea that everyone is equal"

    Not so--NOM understands that marriage law already allows all adults to equally enter into marriage, regardless of their sexual orientation, as is just and fair. NOM simply supports the need for all marriage unions to equally represent both men and women, by including one of each sex in each union. Now that's equality.

  14. Nathaniel
    Posted April 26, 2012 at 5:50 am | Permalink

    I don't think I've ever seen anything as stupid before.

  15. Daniel
    Posted April 26, 2012 at 7:32 am | Permalink

    Daughter of Eve writes:

    "Sex segregation," as in a woman not being equally represented in each and every marriage union, thus causing a segregation of the sexes.

    Thank you for the clarification - I appreciate your meaning. But you skipped over a vital concept: force. Vital because segregation a the forced separation of things.

    To my knowledge, nobody is being forced into a same-sex marriage, in which they might be separated from the opposite-sex person they would have otherwise married. And if this were to happen, wouldn't it be immediately invalid and subject to annulment anyways?

    Allowing same-sex couples to marry is not a use of force. If anything, it is an eases the legal force that seeks to separate.

  16. Daniel
    Posted April 26, 2012 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    Daughter of Eve: NOM understands that marriage law already allows all adults to equally enter into marriage, regardless of their sexual orientation, as is just and fair.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but I *think* your reasoning is something like anyone can marry, as long as it is to somebody of the opposite sex. Here's the inequality in that rationale.

    Consider an analogy: in our recent past, the physical structure of public spaces was rather hostile to people in wheelchairs. From city halls to county courthouse to public schools, you might find buildings that were only accessible by stairway. Sometimes even multi-story buildings lacking an elevator. Parking spaces and doorways wide enough to accommodate a person, but not wide enough to accommodate a wheelchair.

    And, thankfully, the law recognized the inequity; while it *might* have been possible for people in wheelchairs to navigate through all these obstacles and somehow gain sufficient (if diminished) access to these spaces, they most certainly did not have equal access. So the government acted, and signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act - a law that rights this inequity - and which, by the way, extends not only to public spaces but also private employers.

    But there WAS opposition - mostly based on the vast expense to implement the law. Some said it would hurt small business. Some claimed it would be a massive heading to the majority, while only marginally helping a small minority. But, to to my knowledge, there was no serious advancement of the argument that public places are already equally accessible to everyone ... so long as they use the stairs. Because that would be a ridiculous - and heartless - position.

    And so it is with marriage - the union of two lives into one. The unconditional, life-long commitment between two persons who promise to share all of life and love, home and hearth, body and soul. Exclusive access to the inner heart and mind, as well as the body, of the partner. For a person with same-sex orientation, the capacity for this type of relationship is with a person of the same sex - and absent with a member of the opposite sex. To tell a homosexual they may marry, so long as they choose a partner with whom a spousal relationship is virtually impossible is like telling a person in the wheelchair to go ahead and use the stairs.

  17. Rob Fuller
    Posted April 26, 2012 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

    @ MrRoivas:
    "There were many people who had deep convictions that Jew like me are greedy scum who deserve to be cleansed or converted"
    -----------------------------------
    The biblical fact is, bruh, that ALL of us need to be "cleansed or converted - Jew and Gentile alike...
    The conviction is altogether RIGHTEOUS. It is only the alternative which is "nasty"...

    -----------------------------------
    @ Daniel:
    "Do we determine civil rights by public opinion now?"
    -----------------------------------
    Apparently so. Ironically, it was God who determined this originally, as noted in the Scriptures...

    @ Cherie:

    I was unaware the Black church needs to sign off on something before it's allowed to be a civil rights issue.
    -----------------------------------
    Bein' as they are the inaugural group of ppl who fought for same, yes; their opinion is of CONSIDERABLE weight...

    -----------------------------------
    @ Zack:
    "And to the last two posts, the left is usurping the civil rights movement to make it seem like their struggles are the same as blacks. You liberals need to open a history book."
    -----------------------------------
    Indeed.

    @ GZeus
    "...the term Civil Rights does not belong to blacks. It has a long history...(etc.)...
    -----------------------------------
    You admit the term is not idenitical, and yet you go on to try and MAKE them equivalent. You are intellectually dishonest in doing so.
    Shame on you.
    -----------------------------------
    @ Daughter of Eve
    "Not so--NOM understands that marriage law already allows all adults to equally enter into marriage, regardless of their sexual orientation, as is just and fair. NOM simply supports the need for all marriage unions to equally represent both men and women, by including one of each sex in each union. Now that's equality.
    -----------------------------------
    AMEN, sister!...

    @ Nathaniel:
    "I don't think I've ever seen anything as stupid before."
    -----------------------------------
    Then you have managed to totally escape the Left's argument in favor of gay "marriage", and FAILED to understand the Right's viewpoint as regards said issue.
    Congratulations.

  18. DC
    Posted April 27, 2012 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    Thank God for those who still believe in what was ordained by God since the beginning of time. Marriage between one man and one woman. Praise God!!!

  19. Daniel
    Posted April 27, 2012 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    Rob Fuller writes:

    @ Daniel:
    "Do we determine civil rights by public opinion now?"
    -----------------------------------
    Apparently so. Ironically, it was God who determined this originally, as noted in the Scriptures...

    For your edification, the a few definitions:

    Civil - Of or relating to ordinary citizens and their concerns, as distinct from military or ecclesiastical matters.

    Right - A moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way

    Civil Rights - right or rights belonging to a person by reason of citizenship including especially the fundamental freedoms and privileges guaranteed by the 13th and 14th amendments and subsequent acts of Congress including the right to legal and social and economic equality

  20. Bernard Slobodnik
    Posted April 27, 2012 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    I can tell that NOM has some trolls that follow their videos to click the dislike button as many times as possible on youtube. I have shared it to my fb profile and asked my friends to click the like button. May God bless NOM for making these videos and for the wonderful and blessed work that they do.

  21. Nemo
    Posted April 27, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    This made my eyes water, It is great to see the diversity that is against the homosexual agenda; which is a great evil that is, and will destroy our nation. Any time we disobey GOD's law there are consequences...

    "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." -Genesis 2:24

    "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
    " -Galatians 6:7

    "Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people." -Proverbs 14:34

    May the LORD have mercy on us,

  22. Chris
    Posted April 28, 2012 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    Man can try to alter God's order and holy laws by passing immoral laws, but man can never change the truth. God always will recognize one kind of marriage: one man and one woman bound together by God Himself. (Read Jesus affirming the Genesis account of marriage in Matthew 19:4-6)
    The truth is that in America homosexuals can already enter into their own false version of marriage (unlike in many nations where it is illegal to even be homosexual). In America homosexuals can find a minister somewhere who will "marry" them and they can make contracts with each other sharing their property, their health care powers, and their children.
    So if homosexuals are already free to enter into their own version of marriage, why do they push to change marriage laws on a state and national level? Because they want social acceptance from the American people to mollify their consciences. And they want to re-educate our children by pushing their radical agenda in the public schools. Once SSM is legalized in a state, homosexual radicals have legal protection to begin brainwashing children. This has been happening in Massachussetts since 2003 - the state that has had SSM the longest. Please take a moment and read about the disturbing trends in the "public re-education" of students in Mass:
    http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

    You see, same-sex marriage doesn't come alongside traditional marriage - it takes it over and it labels people who disagree as hateful discriminators. The truth is that SSM will continue to morph into new perversions: group sex and group "marriage"; incestuous sex and "marriage;" open "marriage" with partners who agree to be unfaithful. And this is what radical homosexual advocates want: legalized sexual anarchy. Our civilization will decline as children are born into chaos.
    Can we please call out the radical homosexual groups for what they are? Bigots who hate people who disagree with them - especially people of religious faith. It's time that the church stands up against this religious discrimination. The constitution declares that people have freedom of religion and we have a right to our belief in traditional marriage without being smeared and labeled. In contrast, homosexual groups cannot claim religious protection since their beliefs originate in anarchy and rebellion to Nature's God. There is no religious or scientific defense for their moral assertion that their behavior is "equal."
    Marriage does discriminate. But just because we disagree with you doesn't mean we hate you, homosexuals. To the contrary we care deeply about our children and our society and the effects of sexual and relational anarchy. And we care deeply about you if you have been deceived into believing the lies of the radical homosexual agenda.