NOM BLOG

Action Needed: Rhode Island House Votes On Marriage TOMORROW!

 

National Organization for Marriage RI

Dear Marriage Supporter,

We need your help right away!

Yesterday, the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee voted to send to the floor of the House of Representatives a bill redefining marriage.

With the Supreme Court hearing cases on same-sex marriage in just a few short weeks, the eyes of the nation will be on the Rhode Island legislature to see how they decide this issue.

Today, you and other pro-marriage Americans need to send a message loud and clear to the political powers in Providence: DON'T MESS WITH MARRIAGE!

Click here to contact the Rhode Island House Leadership and urge them to vote NO on House Bill 5015 or any other proposed legislation that would redefine marriage in The Ocean State.

Marriage is too important a matter to be left to the whims of heavily lobbied politicians and the special interest groups padding their pockets.

Rhode Island has bravely held out against the tide of radical politics that has swept across its neighboring states in New England, where same-sex marriage activists have succeeded in forcing their agenda through the legislatures.

Contact the leadership of the Rhode Island House today and urge them to continue to stand for marriage and not to foist a radical redefinition of marriage on the state without the consent of its citizens.

The vote on the floor of the House is scheduled for TOMORROW at 4:00 PM — that's right, this Thursday, January 24 — so time is of the essence!

If you have friends and family in Rhode Island, forward this email to them right away, and share it on Facebook and Twitter, urging all pro-marriage Rhode Islanders to show up at the State House tomorrow at 3:00 PM to be there early for the vote and crowd the galleries with support for marriage, family, the rights of voters, and the well-being of children.

We need to act, and act as one, to send this important message to Rhode Island in time to make an impact. Tell them that the eyes of the nation are watching, and that we will not stand idly by while the most basic institution in society — the marriage of one man and one woman — is threatened by a radical agenda.

Stand for marriage, America!

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.

10 Comments

  1. Randy E King
    Posted January 23, 2013 at 9:07 pm | Permalink

    Seems to me there must be a lot of wealthy perverts out there nearing the end of the road who desperately want to keep their fortunes out of the hands of their natural family; in addition to Government of the people.

    These sociopaths truly believe they get to take it with them.

  2. Teri Simpkins
    Posted January 23, 2013 at 11:59 pm | Permalink

    Seems to me there's an awful lot of people who talk a big deal about perverts and sociopaths and never realize how much they sound just like what they spout off about.

  3. Posted January 24, 2013 at 9:33 am | Permalink

    Seems to me. . . (then some ad hominem curse)

  4. Gary47290
    Posted January 24, 2013 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

    RI House Approves the bill, and sends it to the Senate. Marriage equality is the ultimate conservative position because it promotes domestic stability and commitment. It's also critical for the well being of children in homes headed by Same-Sex couples.

    NOM's position is valid only from a religious perspective, which cannot be the basis for public policy. Don't like Gay Marriage? Then don't have one in your church.

  5. Son of Adam
    Posted January 24, 2013 at 8:14 pm | Permalink

    LOL Gary. Calling SS"M" A conservative position is like Joe Biden declaring that wanting to pay more taxes is patriotic.

    Redefining marriage for a particular sexual preference places the wants and desires of adults above the needs of children. It becomes a hedonistic institution revolving around adult sexual desires. As a consequence, the number of marriages plummet and illigitimacy rises as well. Just look at Scandinavia and the Netherlands who have had SS"M" the longest for a peek at our future if we continue down this road.

  6. Rob
    Posted January 24, 2013 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

    Gays are raising children all over the country, and quite well. So denying them marraige only denies the children the stability and economic benefits of marraige. Or is this really all about humans presuming they are God and trying to punish a certain group of people who they don't like? Or is this about sodomy, which is 99% heterosexual? Please NOM, I mean Catholic church, get your creepy eyes and hands out of the bedroom and stop diddling little boys while you are at it.

  7. Publius
    Posted January 25, 2013 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    “For certainly no legislation can be supposed more wholesome and necessary in the founding of a free, self-governing commonwealth, fit to take rank as one of the coordinate states of the Union, than that which seeks to establish it on the basis of the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from the union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization; the best guarantee of that reverent morality which is the source of all beneficent progress in social and political improvement. ”
    --The U.S. Supreme Court in Murphy v. Ramsey

    To place children with a gay couple necessarily separates them from one of their biological parents. Unless they carry the hypothesized gay gene, it places them in a situation contrary to what we are told is their deepest identify.

  8. Ash
    Posted January 25, 2013 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

    @Gary47290

    "It's also critical for the well being of children in homes headed by Same-Sex couples."

    @Rob

    "Gays are raising children all over the country, and quite well. So denying them marraige only denies the children the stability and economic benefits of marraige."

    I have a niece that is being raised by her mother, aunt and grandmother. Why do SSMers believe that children need married guardians only if they live in households led by two, romantically-affiliated, people? Are you trying to do what's best for all children, or are you using children as pawns to achieve a social agenda?

    Indeed, lots of households are raising children. If marriage becomes about stabilizing households with children, marriage would have no limits. But if marriage is about preventing the illicit procreation of children out of wedlock, and thus ensuring that as many children as possible are connected to and raised by their natural parents, then it would make sense to limit marriage to two opposite-sexed people.

  9. Jimmy Jones
    Posted January 26, 2013 at 10:10 pm | Permalink

    @Ash

    > "I have a niece that is being raised by her mother, aunt and grandmother. Why do SSMers believe that children need married guardians only if they live in households led by two, romantically-affiliated, people? "

    Well Ash, many studies of the benefits of marriage have been published (including by the Catholic Church the NOM itself!) which have elucidated the multitudinous benefits of marriage. These include better physical and mental health for spouses and their families, financial benefits and job propsects, longevity, stable relationships and family environment, pro-social behaviour including less chance of deliquency, crime and drug-use, better education, less violence and vulnerability to emotional issues, depression and suicide. And the list goes on. Why not start with a list provided by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops here: http://foryourmarriage.org/what-are-the-social-benefits-of-marriage/

    You can also Google "benefits of marriage" for more information on how marriage benefits children.

    And frankly, I'm surprised to find a NOM supporter providing an example of a well-adjusted child (your niece) being raised solely by women! Usually the mantra of your lot is that kids need to be raised by a man and a woman, and anything less than that is tantamount to child abuse.

    Go figure!

    > "Are you trying to do what's best for all children, or are you using children as pawns to achieve a social agenda?"

    The only "agenda" I know if is the advancement of equality and a more humane, enlightened and fair society. Presumably, as you use "social agenda" as a dirty word, I must assume you're against the promotion of equality and the rest. I find that a pitiable attitude, I'm sorry to say.

    Furthermore, NOM, by disingenuously arguing that marriage is only about procreation and raising children, are really the ones who are "using" kids as pawns to promote their agenda of non-acceptance of same-sex attracted people in society in general.

    Cheerio,
    J.

  10. Ash
    Posted January 28, 2013 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

    “Well Ash, many studies of the benefits of marriage have been published…”

    Thank you, J. I’m very familiar with the research on the benefits of marriage to spouses and children. What you have no evidence of is the proposition that those benefits will translate to children raised by married same-sex couples. We have every reason to doubt that those benefits will apply, especially since children who live in married step-parent families don’t enjoy them.
    “And frankly, I'm surprised to find a NOM supporter providing an example of a well-adjusted child (your niece) being raised solely by women! Usually the mantra of your lot is that kids need to be raised by a man and a woman, and anything less than that is tantamount to child abuse.”

    Thank you for complimenting my niece, but you may be jumping the gun. First, though I believe the optimal household for children is the married, biological family, I would not say that to be raised in another family form is child abuse. Maybe some NOMers feel that it’s child abuse to purposefully create children with the intent of raising them apart from their mother or father, using a dizzying array of reproductive procedures to pretend that a child resulted from a relationship that he or she could not have resulted from, and shrouding the child’s lineage in anonymity. Though legal, I could see this as a form of child abuse at worst, or selfishness at best. Second, though I believe the optimal household for children is the married, biological family, I never pretend that it’s impossible for well-adjusted children to come from other homes. Of course there are successful children raised by single and divorced parents, as well as by same-sex couples and in institutions. Nevertheless, the best for children is the married, biological family.

    Since my niece is a small child, we won’t know a lot about how well-adjusted she is until later in life. Remember the benefits of marriage you listed for children? Delinquency, crime and drug-use, education, violence, depression and suicide…Most of these wouldn’t even surface for measurement until adolescence and adulthood. But my ultimate point was this: why is marriage only important for children being raised by adults in romantic relationships? If we were to take the position that a household with children needs marriage, then marriage would be limitless.

    Do you believe my niece will be benefited by marriage if her mother, aunt and grandmother were allowed to marry?