Dear Marriage Supporter,
I'm in Raleigh today, still celebrating last night's amazing victory! What a privilege to be here with the Vote for Marriage NC Team last night as the election returns came in, and it became clear that the Marriage Protection Amendment was on track for a commanding victory.
Congratulations to Tami Fitzgerald, whose leadership made last night's victory possible, to my good friend and campaign manager Frank Schubert of Mission: Public Affairs, and to the dedicated volunteers (including many of you receiving this email!) whose tireless efforts made victory a reality.
It has truly been an honor to serve on the Executive Committee and be a part of this campaign.
61% to 39%!
Just days ago, gay marriage advocates were predicting victory, and the mainstream media was only too happy to play along with their campaign of deception and misinformation. But once again—thanks to your help!—we were able to prove the pundits wrong as voters approved the Marriage Protection Amendment in a 22-point blowout.
Even while we celebrate, I'm sobered by the enormous task that remains before us. Four more states will vote on marriage this November. In Maryland and Washington, we are just days away from critical signature gathering deadlines. And our opponents always have seemingly limitless resources to pour into these state battles.
Over the past several months, NOM was able to contribute $425,000 to the North Carolina campaign. But the simple reality is that we can't match that level of financial support in four states this November.
And the stakes just got even higher with President Obama's announcement today that he publicly supports same-sex marriage.
That's why we're launching Stand for Marriage America.
Through Stand for Marriage America, you can make a single contribution, and know that it will go directly to the four state campaigns in Minnesota, Maine, Maryland, and Washington State. With just a few clicks of the mouse, 25% of your gift (or any portion you allocate) will go to each of the state campaigns fighting to protect marriage this November. All you need to do is to enter the total amount you are able to contribute, and Stand for Marriage will send a check to each of the four campaigns!
Please help us launch this initiative and come out of the gate strong by making a generous donation toady! This November, Minnesota, Maine, Maryland and Washington State each have the opportunity to share in North Carolina's success, defending marriage and sending a powerful statement to politicians and judges across the country: the American people know what marriage is—the union of one man and one woman.
Each of these state campaigns is in dire need of financial support, relying primarily on grassroots volunteer efforts while gay marriage activists pour millions of dollars into the states to fund massive phone, email, online and TV ad campaigns. In the next few days, we will need to assess our status in Maryland and Washington to be sure we have more than enough signatures to put the marriage referenda on the ballot.
That's why I'm challenging you today to make a generous gift to Stand for Marriage America. Over the next 3 days, NOM will match every dollar you contribute, up to $100,000! With your help, together we can give each of the four state campaigns an immediate, and much-needed infusion of $50,000.
Two weeks ago, we saw the North Carolina polls begin to slip as opponents launched their massive advertising campaign. For the first time I was worried that the amendment might not pass. But despite being outspent nearly 2-1, thanks to your help, the North Carolina campaign was able to skillfully refute the opposition's deception with well-documented truth in the campaign's final days.
A special thanks to each of you who stepped up to help make this victory possible. We are counting on you, and tens of thousands of your fellow Americans, to step up and make victory in November across the nation—Northeast, Midwest, Atlantic Coast and West Coast—a reality, too.
The bar is set high...32 out of 32 states have now voted to protect marriage, and defeat in any one of these four states will be loudly and repeatedly trumpeted in the media as evidence that the American people are changing their views on marriage.
We simply can't afford to let any one of these campaigns fail for lack of resources. And that's why I'm so excited about this latest new opportunity.
Stand for Marriage America gives YOU the power to help ensure victory in all four states this November.
If you care about marriage, I urge you to join Stand for Marriage America with a generous gift today. In the next 12-18 months, the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments on the constitutionality of DOMA and California's Proposition 8.
Our opponents know how hesitant the Supreme Court will be to overturn the unanimous verdict of 35 consecutive state votes on marriage...but if we lose in any of the four states this November, it will put the marriage laws of 44 states in jeopardy.
Thank you for making last night's dramatic victory possible, and I hope you'll visit Stand for Marriage America to make a generous gift today! Remember, NOM will match every dollar raised over the next 3 days up to $100,000!
Contributions or gifts to Minnesota for Marriage, Protect Marriage Maine, Maryland Marriage Alliance - No on 6, and Preserve Marriage Washington are not tax deductible.
MN - PAID ADVERTISEMENT: Prepared and paid for by the Minnesota for Marriage committee, 2355 Fairview Ave N, Box 301, Roseville, MN 55113, in support of the marriage protection amendment.
WA - Paid for by Preserve Marriage Washington, 16212 Bothell-Everett Highway, Ste. F, #276, Mill Creek, Washington 98012.
MD - Maryland Marriage Alliance - No on 6, Brian Duggan, Treasurer.
51 Comments
It's not really much of a victory, since the vote was held on the Republican primary, with Republican voters. I know NOM is hurting for something positive, after its disaster in New Hampshire, but seriously.....
Glad to hear you're happy about your loss in NC, Jim.
I expect you shall be positively ecstatic after Minnesota......
I'm more interested in getting this to the Supreme Court, so all 50 states can enjoy equal marriage rights. Evidently, opponents of same-sex marriage want the same as I do, judging by their efforts to get same-sex marriage decided in federal courts!
Oh and Rick? The Minnesota vote is on general election day, not the GOP primary day. You'll get the full range of voters, not just the older GOP voters. I bet that makes for a difference, don't you?
We will win in MN,MD, and WA.
Rick, better get your checkbook out.
Minn, probably. Maryland, maybe. Maine, doubt it. WA, no way.
Do they even have the required signatures in WA? Less than a month left.
Stefan:
First thing in the morning.
Sigh.
MN: In the bag.
MD: Ditto
MN: What, are you kidding? We already won it and nobody appreciates having this jammed down their throat again.
WA: Your best shot. Frank Shubert, are you on the case here?
"Sour grapes."
Marriage Corruption Advocates
I like it how the liberals on this site are so confident(really arrogance). I'd say I admire it but their arrogance is what led to their downfall in 2010 and will only be amplified this year.
I should remind everyone that the U.S. Supreme Court typically does not get too far ahead of either public opinion or the law in the majority of states. For example, few states still had laws requiring racial segregation or outlawing interracial marriage by the time the Court struck those laws down. Most states had already struck down or repealed their own laws against same-sex intimacy when the Supreme Court finally invalidated Texas’s law in Lawrence. Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of the most liberal members of the court, has indicated that it is counterproductive for the Court to go "too far too fast." Although she tirelessly defends abortion rights, she has still said that "[t]he court bit off more than it could chew" when it decided Roe v. Wade.
It is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will overrule 31 state constitutional amendments defining marriage as being between one man and one woman and 32 out of 32 referendums and force gay marriage on everyone. Any lawyers bringing such a case before the Court will need favorable votes from five of the nine justices. Yet as Constitutional law scholar Andrew Koppelman put it, "When I try to count the votes in favor of same-sex marriage on the Supreme Court, I have trouble getting to one."
I predict losses in Maine and Washington but victories in Maryland and Minnesota. Doesnt matter though, Mitt will win the election and we can have a federal marriage amendment which can do away with this abomination once and for all! (Then all we need to worry about is civil unions/domestic partnerships like in Illinois and California) I kinda feel sorry for gay activists though, must be so humiliating to loose 32 times in a row! Maybe they will have more luck in other countries like Britain, Australia and Denmark where the subject is also being currently debated
"I should remind everyone that the U.S. Supreme Court typically does not get too far ahead of either public opinion or the law in the majority of states."
The SCOTUS was unanimous on Loving v VA even with its 78% disapproval rate. SSM is now at a 50% approval rate with a trend line that shows an upward swing. The SCOTUS would have to ignore the fact that you did so poorly in the lower courts because you have no evidence to back your claims.
As with Loving, you have no compelling argument against SSM, you give a whole lot of quirky stuff that will never come up in court.
Obama declares war on marriage after losing a major battle in NC. A little short, and a little late... yawn. We have already won!
A sitting president has nothing to do with a federal amendment. And I'm surprised that everyone's treating NC as such a victory. I personally didn't think marriage equality ever had a chance since it was already illegal to begin with. NH a few months ago was a much bigger win.
I really like the idea of having a coffer set up solely for the state fights, where any gift will be siphoned off to the four marriage campaigns. Excellent idea.
61% to 39%... during a Republican primary. Gee, why couldn't it wait until a general election? Because they knew they'd lose. A majority of Americans support marriage equality but a majority of Republicans do not. On the outside chance it's not struck down before '16, it should go on the ballot for what will surely be a successful repeal.
M.Jones, The hyperbole is really growing tiresome. The President saying that he believes same-sex couples should be able to marry is not a "war on marriage". It's quite the opposite actually. But the fact that you have to resort to such ridiculous straw men is emblematic of your side's lack of a solid, rational, based-in-reality defense of your agenda. Hyperbole doesn't get you anywhere is court.
Poster #14. We won in Maine two years ago I do not see any reason why we cannot win again. I see no reason why we cannot win in WA.
How does anyone not see the absurdity of all this? Really. To use what you want the defintion of a word is to keep another human being from something you have. There is only one logical explanation. Hate.
"There's one way that we straight people are better than you gay and lesbian people. We can get married, one, two, three, four, any number of times, and you can't get married at all."
As I write this, the people of North Carolina have voted to strip their gay and lesbian citizens of civil rights.
Like California's Proposition 8, North Carolina's Amendment One was a measure hatched and propagated by conservative Christians.
So to those Christians who championed and voted for this Amendment, or others like it, I'd like to propose the following exercise:
Imagine if instead of gays and lesbians, it were your rights that were put to a vote in the ballot box.
Why not? It's not like you were born Christian. Religion -- unlike sexual orientation, for example -- is actually always just a choice.
And there is an irony that doesn't get pointed out often enough: that while railing against gays and lesbians for wanting "special rights" (also known as equal treatment under the law), America's conservative Christians have enjoyed more special rights than just about anyone else.
If you are a Christian -- or a person of any faith, for that matter -- your chosen religious lifestyle is protected by every conceivable anti-discrimination law in every state. You even get exemptions from some secular laws. And you can give tax-deductible donations to a church or religious charity engaging in political action, even the elimination of the rights of others.
Of course, the Constitution of the United States protects religious freedom. But what if we somehow had a winning popular vote that Christianity was no longer considered a religion? Just like that -- no more legal protections under the Constitution.
Still would like some rights as a Christian person of faith? Just choose a different religion to believe in. Isn't that what you're always telling gay people ... just "choose" to be straight, and presto -- no more problems. Maybe you'd like to try that now.
Or maybe you'd like to argue that your faith is much more than just a choice. It's who you are as a person. It defines you, gives your life meaning and purpose ... sorry. Still not a religion.
Of course, you're free to still call yourself Christian, and believe and worship however you choose. It just won't be recognized under the law.
You can now be fired for being Christian.
You'll pay discriminatory taxes.
And marriages from your alternative lifestyle "churches" most certainly will not be recognized. What would we tell the children?
Isn't this, my dear conservative Christians, what you've been doing to gay and lesbian Americans for decades, putting their civil rights to a popular vote over and over again?
If you ever did have to choose another faith, I bet you wouldn't even miss being a Christian. Let's face it -- you didn't really believe half the stuff anyway. The Ten Commandments? Psssh. You've been routinely breaking the 9th (bearing false witness) every time you've spoken out about gay people and their rights. And you certainly don't believe a word about what Jesus said about loving your neighbor, or following the golden rule.
Need proof? Look no further than North Carolina.
Mikko Alanne
B73:
So sue us.
@Eliasasm
It wasn't hatred and nothing was stripped in North Carolina. The amendment doesn't prohibit couples from entering into private legal contracts which afford them the legal benefits that they desire.
You probably think it's hatred because you want people to without question agree with a lifestyle that isn't normal. What's the point of having diversity if you want everyone to think the same? What's the point of having individual states if they are not allowed to self govern? You know the United States was originally set up as a federation and not a single country?
But I guess it's true...ignorance is bliss.
Zack,
"You probably think it's hatred because you want people to without question agree with a lifestyle that isn't normal"
Joking, right?
What's preventing you all from not seeing how ridulous you look? Seriously.
Rick, Your true motivations are showing. Oops. The desire by gay people to live honest, fullfilling lives and commit to the person they love while protecting their families = a demonic hatred for Christ.
We will sue. And with lunacy like that, you will lose!
B73:
There exists no law against "(t)he desire by gay people to live honest, fullfilling lives and commit to the person they love while protecting their families."
Instead, you wish to destroy humanity's most basic and vital institution.
Why?
See above.
The mask is slipping.
Sue you?
You bet we will, you will be paying the court costs and lawyer fees. An expensive lesson in how to get along with other taxpaying citizens.
Rick, you can plead insanity, we have the knowledge to back that up. Galileo, Galileo Figaro magnifico.
B73,
According to the election results I saw there were nearly two dozen Democrat races taking place in North Carolina at the time of the Defense of Marriage vote.
Your war on language only proves that you yourself know their is no defense for your proclivity:
If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what must be done remains undone; if this remains undone, morals and art will deteriorate; if justice goes astray, the people will stand about in helpless confusion. Hence there must be no arbitrariness in what is said. This matters above everything.
—Confucius
Rick,
Have you looked at humanity's most basic and vital institution lately and acknowledged what the heteros have done to it?
Seriously.
It is very true that no fault divorce was the virus that weakened marriage and opened up the door to the subsequent, limitlessly lunatic, notions of the marriage corruption movement.
The good news is, the act of defeating marriage corruption, has the additional benefit of restoring sanity across other aspects of the question.
Like when Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Idaho, and Oklahoma were required to insert such discrimination into their constitutions to be admitted as states?
As a matter of fact, no-fault divorce was adopted on a massive scale around the same time the first salvo of the SSM campaign was fired.
" you wish to destroy humanity's most basic and vital institution"
Sure, just like women wanted to destroy democracy by gaining the right to vote.
Keep going, Rick. This little back and forth is an excellent demonstration of how and why we continue to win hearts and minds of people like the President, two former Presidents, the Vice President, the former Vice President, just to name of few.
B73:
Hmmmm.
Wonder why you can't win any elections?
Maybe it's because the media brainwashing campaign called same sex "marriage" doesn't play so well when billions of dollars in political payoffs aren't attached?
See you in November, B73.
B73:
Hmmmm.
Wonder why you can't win any elections?
Michael, The desire to have multiple wives in order to adhere to the doctrine of a religious cult that one voluntarily joins is not the same as a person's sexual orientation. Gays and lesbians deserve the right to marry ONE ADULT HUMAN, just like you have.
Jim,
there was a hotly contested Democratic gubernatorial primary on the ballot,along with all state legislative races and Congressional as well...the anticlimactic Republican presidential race was not the main draw to the polls.
Eliasasm,
if anything's "demonic",it's the practice of same-sex sexual relationships and the lie that standards of conduct discouraging it are motivated by hatred for would-be violators.
Here's an interesting comment:
"Though outside groups helped forces to defeat Amendment One take the lead in the money race, “the pro side could have not spent a single dollar, and they would have still won by double digits,” Tom Jensen of Public Policy Polling in Raleigh told the Charlotte Observer."
So, I checked this link,
http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/north_carolina/
and the good news is that the state of NC doesn't require anyone to divulge their sexual orientation, their political affiliation, or divulge their sexual past. So, there's nothing legally prohibiting a "gay" person, or a person with SSA, or a person who's dabbled in homosexual intimacy, from acquiring a marriage license in NC.
Turns out being "gay" is a not a problem. Naturally, if you've been married before, you have to show proof of divorce.
And now, the bad news: 1st Cousins can marry, but DOUBLE 1st cousins may not marry.
Hey, isn't that discrimination? Must be the dreaded and bigoted "cousin phobia." Wow. Must be a religionist kind of thing. Some folks are on the wrong side of history! I demand equality for cousins! Where's the tolerance?! Isn't all about love? What about romance?! Don't they deserve to marry the person of their choice?!
Waiting for Pres. Obama to support double cousin marriage...
Oh, and it gets worse. According to the web site I listed, double cousins are very rare. That means they are a minority.
Dang it all--the folks in NC are discriminating against a minority!!! That means if you are a double cousin, you can't get married! Where is democracy?! Are we going to let the majority determine the rights of a minority??? This is so un-American. There is no precedent for this kind of unfair treatment!
Double cousins can't help who they are. They didn't choose to be born a double cousin. They are human beings like every one else. Why should they be treated any differently? Heck, they were born that way (cues Lady Gaga). Their love is as good as anyone else's love. They could really use the benefits of marriage. It's not fair to tax them differently! No, there couldn't possibly be any logical reasons for discriminating against double cousins, but religion and hatred. And bigotry. And phobia. Nope, no good reason at all.
With full knowledge of the Loving case, SCOTUS ruled against ssm in Baker v. Nelson.
Furthermore, the majority of high courts to consider the issue since 2003 have rejected a right to same-sex marriage.
Son of Adam
Pete #15 Has already said what I had wanted to. Society is already shifting to approval of same sex marriage so the SCOUTS would not be way out in front. As for the 31 state constitutional amendments, these were all done over the last 8 years out of animus. PLEASE read something OTHER than this blog. The younger generation OVERWHELMINGLY supports marriage equality. It truly is ONLY a matter of time.
eliasasm,
Your remarks are bigoted.
Anyway, expressing your progay bigotry is how you choose to exercise the freedom to say what you want.
Meanwhile, freedom of conscience is not a choice. It is the birthright of each human being. That also entails obligations and duties. Religious liberty is part and parcel of the very basis for a form of government that depends on voting, one way or another.
Your fony-baloney thought exercise demonstrated that you are hooked on the supremacy of identity politics and you just happen to be seeing this issue of marriage by peering through the filter of gay identity politics.
That you do so is how you have chosen to exercise your freedom of thought -- also something that stems from freedom of conscience which is a birthright and not something gifted by Government.
MarkOH, please state your criteria for animus.
Not specifically on these particular topics regarding SSM, but animus in general.
State the criteria knowing that your own remarks here in the comment sections will be assessed accordingly.
Usually, SSMers end-up with being accused by their own words. Maybe you will surprise but I doubt that.
CHairm, eliasasm is not the bigoted one.
"Bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression." --Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:318
And since the minority to which you prefer is legally permitted to enter marriage, there is no justifiable claim of oppression. There is a glaring appeal, however, to special interest gay identity politics.
MarkOH,
Given your recent comments in this thread alone, you now owe the discussion your criteria for bigotry and your criteria for animus.
And to add to Daughter of Eve's valid point:
Society may discriminate between marriage and nonmarriage. It would be unreasonable to press the supremacy of gay identity politics into the law -- or into constitutional jurisprudence.
It would be unjust. It would be an example of a minority imposing its supremacy over things far more significant, societally, and far more reasonable, morally and lawfully.
MarkOH has no reasonable criteria for the term, bigotry, nor for the term, animus, as used by himself. These are words his comments render meaningless as empty-headed namecalling.