Immediate Action Needed to Block SSM in Minnesota!


National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Just over a month ago, same-sex marriage activists were falling all over themselves to promise voters that a vote against the marriage amendment would NOT bring same-sex marriage to the state. . . .

And now, just a few weeks later, those very same activists are pushing for same-sex marriage when the Minnesota Legislature reconvenes on January 8th. State Senator John Marty, now part of a new DFL majority in St. Paul, is planning to introduce a bill during the first week of the new session and is already predicting quick passage out of committee in both the House and Senate.

Please click here to send a message to your state lawmakers today. Let them know the people of Minnesota are watching, and will hold them accountable for their vote on marriage.

Send your Lawmakers a Message!

In November, Minnesotans voted to maintain the status quo on marriage, as Minnesota statutes already recognize marriage as the union of a husband and wife. Now gay marriage activists are trying to force a whole new battle on the state.

But the people of Minnesota know as well as you and I do what negative consequences would follow in the wake of same-sex marriage becoming law.

Activists know the American people—even those who support same-sex marriage—don't want to force religious groups to go against their beliefs. And yet everywhere same-sex marriage becomes law, it is people of faith who become the law's first targets.

Across the country, Catholic Charities is being forced to drop their adoption and foster care services wherever same-sex marriage is enacted. Reception halls, inns, and bed and breakfasts are being sued if they decline to host same-sex wedding ceremonies or receptions. And schools across the country are facing increasing pressures to teach elementary students about "Prince & Prince," or "Heather's Two Mommies."

Send your lawmakers a message: Don't Mess with Marriage!

Please use this link to email your state senator and representative today, urging them to reject same-sex marriage in the upcoming legislative session.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Success or failure may well hinge on the outpouring of opposition to this bill that politicians receive over the next couple of weeks. After you take action, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY FORWARD this email to all your friends and family in Minnesota, or use the social networking buttons below to post to Facebook or Twitter.

Facebook ThisTweet ThisEmail This

Thank you.

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. Barb Chamberlan
    Posted December 27, 2012 at 9:22 pm | Permalink

    Here's the post-election makeup of the MN legislature:

    House: 73 D, 61 R
    Senate: 39 D, 28 R

    I don't know much about most of the individual critters, like where they stand on redefining marriage, but the majorities are pretty strong. Hopefully those outside the Twin Cities area won't be too keen on the idea, especially with the state's massive fiscal problems.

    It's very important to contact these folks and let them know what we think about it.

  2. John B.
    Posted December 27, 2012 at 10:26 pm | Permalink

    I gotta give NOM credit for this headline, the National Organization "for" Marriage openly and honestly admitting that what they're really all about is PREVENTING people from getting married.

  3. Randy E King
    Posted December 27, 2012 at 10:32 pm | Permalink

    Nobody should be surprised when they catch these elitists lying to them; after all, these sociopaths spend their entire lives lying to themselves about their true nature.

  4. Zack
    Posted December 27, 2012 at 11:20 pm | Permalink

    Well one should hope that there are enough Democrats to side with the GOP in the legislature to block passage. But of course, they will have sudden "change of hearts" if the price is right.

  5. Zack
    Posted December 27, 2012 at 11:24 pm | Permalink

    Well one should hope that there are enough Democrats to side with the GOP in the legislature to block passage. Of course...some of them may end up having "change of hearts".

  6. Good News
    Posted December 28, 2012 at 7:01 am | Permalink

    @ John
    We had the name first; na na ne na na. Before 'you' came along like a thief in the night to steal it away.
    Marriage – the union between a man and a woman.
    But if we have to one day invent a new word because of the impoverishing of our language, we will calmly do so.
    For you must understand, when signaling out this unique union, our interest is not to celebrate tax advantages, visiting rights, a social statues nor the committed union of two people. What we are celebrating and honoring is the union of the opposite sexes. This is not prejudiced, hateful or illogical... It is reasonable.

  7. Good News
    Posted December 28, 2012 at 7:04 am | Permalink

    For these action alerts. We must do what we can from on the outside. But I think we understand that they have gotten on the inside after years of working to do so. And it is on the inside that we must be to right this wrong.

  8. M. jones
    Posted December 28, 2012 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    SCOTUS will uphold natures law, the end to the homosexual agenda is finally a few months away.

  9. Mikhail
    Posted December 28, 2012 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    Whats your plan for civil unions in Colorado?

  10. David Cox
    Posted December 28, 2012 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    Sorry but "being forced to drop" is not synonymous with "voluntarily slashing".

  11. Cercis621
    Posted December 29, 2012 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    @John B. - Just like the State Dept. of Motor Vehicles 'prevents' people from driving. Those who don't measure up to the criteria are turned away.

  12. Posted December 29, 2012 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

    John B.: Yes, it is about keeping people from getting married, because civil marriage is decided by legislatures, and also reversed by legislatures. Legislatures are also keeping brother & sister from getting married, and minors of certain age from getting married. It is all decided by legislatures, and the legislators are supported or replaced according to how they represent their constituents. Yes, it is about keeping people from getting married when the union is simply friendship and cannot classify (not qualify) as a marriage. by definition marriage is reasonably for opposite sex adults by consent. Other definitions have to pass the test of the legislatures (long-term), and consider the consequences in their own State. If all fails, we can always get the government out of the marriage business. Yes, it is about keeping people from marrying when they dismiss the reasonable basis for civil marriage. Of course, everyone can marry at some church that agrees with their definition of religious marriage. We don't have to give up logic to support civil marriage.

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.