NOM BLOG

SSM Will Cost Obama Re-election Bid

 

Email Header Image

Dear Marriage Supporter,

The media is abuzz with the news that President Obama has publicly endorsed same-sex marriage.

Many see political calculation. The Washington Post suggests a financial connection, noting that 1 in 6 of Obama's top fundraisers are gay or lesbian.

Others are calling the announcement a profile in courage—a claim more convincing had it not been preceded by two years of suggestive "evolution" and three days of awkward damage control over Vice President Biden's remarks this past weekend.

President Obama's announcement just raised the stakes in the state marriage battles this November. For the next two days, NOM will match every dollar donated to the state marriage campaigns in Minnesota, Maine, Maryland and Washington, up to $100,000! Please make your gift to Stand for Marriage America right now!

After months of trying to have it both ways, the charade is over. President Obama has opposed every state marriage amendment, despite claiming to support the right of states to decide the issue. He opposes a federal constitutional amendment that would protect states' right to define marriage. And his administration is trying to dismantle state marriage laws by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

The strategy is clear: The Obama campaign is beholden to gay marriage financiers and is counting on an energized base to carry him to victory this November. But it's an approach that is likely to backfire, alienating large parts of the constituency that carried him to victory in 2008.

  • No state in this country has ever voted for same-sex marriage, a string of 32 consecutive defeats for same-sex marriage activists.
  • Two days ago, swing state voters in North Carolina rejected same-sex marriage by a 22-point margin, with support from nearly half the state's Democratic voters.
  • The African American church has become a powerful force in the fight to protect marriage, with Black voters opposing same-sex marriage by 2-1 margins.
  • President Obama's announcement is likely to spark a divisive battle over same-sex marriage in the Democratic Party platform this summer.
  • Same-sex marriage will be a defining issue in swing states, especially states like Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, Florida and Nevada where state marriage amendments are threatened by President Obama's position.

Yesterday's announcement further highlights the contrast between President Obama and Governor Romney, and we commend Governor Romney for his bold and outspoken commitment to marriage.

With high stakes come great opportunity. North Carolina voters just sent a strong message that Americans want to defend marriage. Now is our opportunity to build on that momentum.

We intend to win the marriage debate this November. I hope you'll stand with us.

In order to win marriage in November, the state campaigns in Minnesota, Maryland, Maine and Washington need your prayers and support today.

Please click here to make a generous contribution to Stand for Marriage America today! Every dollar donated will go directly to the state campaigns, and will be divided equally among them. And for the next 36 hours, NOM will match every dollar raised, doubling the impact of your gift, up to our goal of $100,000.

We have a short window to raise funds that are desperately needed by the state campaigns.

In Washington and Maryland we have just a few weeks left to collect the tens of thousands of signatures needed to ensure that voters have the chance to decide this issue. The need is urgent. I hope you will make a generous gift to Stand for Marriage America today!

Paid for by National Organization for Marriage, 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC, Brian Brown, President. Not authorized by any candidate, candidate's committee, or ballot issue committee.

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.

16 Comments

  1. Posted May 11, 2012 at 2:25 am | Permalink

    PS:

    This election has its Watergate.

    Joe Salmonese sits on Obama's reelection campaign.

    A confidential IRS document has been leaked.

    This investigation, combined with a steady, courageous outreach by Mitt to black voters in swing states, will result in the defeat of barack Obama in the 2012 campaign.

    There is nothing more important than securing that defeat.

  2. Posted May 11, 2012 at 3:04 am | Permalink

    Watching this marriage debate play out is like reading the Book of Jude (New Testament). Stunning how accurate a description of our day Jude is.

  3. Posted May 11, 2012 at 3:07 am | Permalink

    If anyone's interested in reading this one-chapter book, here's a link:

    http://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/jude/1?lang=eng

    Worth a ponder.

  4. Johan de Vries
    Posted May 11, 2012 at 3:29 am | Permalink

    You all do realize that Romney may be against marriage equality, but that contrary to what many of you may personally belief he is actually fine with gay couples adopting and raising kids? As quoted by him: "I also know many gay couples are able to adopt children. That's fine." He has also mentioned that some rights should be extended to gay couples as well.

    As some of you have rightfully said, marriage be be a point in the election but I think that mostly the economy will be the deciding factor in the elections. I think NOM (and HRC for that matter) tend to make this issue bigger than it actually is. That said, if Obama loses, I'm sure the NOM will be more than happy to claim that marriage played a key role. If Obama wins, well... I'm sure they'll find a way to blame it on him as well.

    I read a comment somewhere that sums it up pretty nicely, and it was something along these lines: Obama gave his personal opinion on marriage equality, but affirmed that he believes states should retain the rights as they do now. Romney on the other would support a nation wide constitutional amendment that bans marriage equality. The question therefore is, who is forcing his views upon others?

  5. eliasasm
    Posted May 11, 2012 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    DoE,

    I have a comment for you on the other thread.

  6. Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:35 am | Permalink

    Johan asks:

    Who is forcing his views upon others?

    Answer:

    Barack Obama, who has refused to uphold the law and has disrespected the overwhelmingly clear decision of the American people to reject the fascist media brainwashing campaign called same sex "marriage".

    Now Mitt Romney is wrong about a (very) great many things, alas.

    But he is right to uphold the clearly expressed will of the American people to reject the social engineering assault on humanity's oldest and most important institution.

    Therefore, not only must marriage advocates support him.......

    Every American disgusted with the cynical disregard of the sovereign People must support him.

  7. Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Johan asks:

    Who is forcing his views upon others?

    Answer:

    Barack Obama, who has refused to uphold the law and has disrespected the overwhelmingly clear decision of the American people to reject the fascist media brainwashing campaign called same sex "marriage".

  8. Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    Now Mitt Romney is wrong about a (very) great many things, alas.

    But he is right to uphold the clearly expressed will of the American people to reject the social engineering assault on humanity's oldest and most important institution.

    Therefore, not only must marriage advocates support him.......

    Every American disgusted with the cynical disregard of the sovereign People must support him.

  9. Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:37 am | Permalink

    Now Mitt Romney is wrong about a (very) great many things, alas.

    But he is right to uphold the clearly expressed will of the American people to reject the assault on humanity's oldest and most important institution.

    Therefore, not only must marriage advocates support him.......

    Every American disgusted with the cynical disregard of the sovereign People must support him.

  10. Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:41 am | Permalink

    BACKLASH!

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

    Cool.

    Even Mitt will get the message now.

  11. Posted May 11, 2012 at 7:04 pm | Permalink

    "widowed mother, well past child bearing age, is NOT allowed to re-marry?"

    Of course she is. And if she did, she and her husband would be able to offer a child a married mother and father, however likely it may be that she be asked/required to do so.

  12. Posted May 11, 2012 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

    "Marriage is a fundamental human right per SCOTUS and as such will eventually be legal nationwide and until such time I will be fully ashamed of this backwards hick country and its trashy inhabitants."

    In all your righteous outrage, you did stop to notice that there is no legal prohibition against "gay' people getting married, right?

  13. Posted May 11, 2012 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

    "Marriage is a fundamental human right per SCOTUS and as such will eventually be legal nationwide "

    And, not to overstate the obvious, but marriage IS legal nationwide. 😉

  14. Chairm
    Posted May 11, 2012 at 10:03 pm | Permalink

    eliasasm,

    Fitz said something far more meaningful than you would represent in your over-heated reaction.

    But you made a stab at denouncing the decisive weight of the majority.

    You said:

    "How dare you say that the majority says so and be so misguided to not see that that is the point. The majority does not have the right to say on this issue."

    You are against majorities? So if a court favored SSM, you'd denounce the vote of that majority, too?

    Howzabout a majority of legislators? That goes in the trash, too?

    I expect that you favor majorities that you favor, no more and no less.

    On the other hand, defenders of marriage favor the core meaning of this social institution while the SSM campaign is stuck on asserting the supremacy of gay identity politics over all other considerations -- including the principles of good governance and even the principles of judicial review.

    Against majorities but in favor of the rule of a tyranical minority, I suppose. Please elaborate.

  15. Pat
    Posted May 13, 2012 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

    He CAN'T defend DOMA. Oath of Office, y'know? Plus the whole "Would have to commit perjury" thing, which is kinda important.

    And you're still saying to "stand up for" what you're opposing. Might wanna fix that.
    Soliciting donations while lying about what you want to do with the money--and doing the literal opposite of what you said--sounds illegal as well as grossly unethical. And as supposedly-religious people, I'd think the unethical part would be important to you, too.

  16. Pat
    Posted May 13, 2012 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

    "Who is forcing his views upon others?

    "Answer:

    "Barack Obama..."

    The fact that he didn't actually *DO* anything aside, he's supporting freedom. Y'all are restricting it.
    "Let *everybody* do X if they want to" can not, AT ALL, be called "forcing" anything on anybody. The other way 'round? Hell yeah.

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.