Dear Marriage Supporter,
NOM's brilliant Chairman, Dr. John Eastman, delivered a stirring and powerful defense of marriage in a debate last week at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. The debate was hosted by the group Intelligence Squared before an uber-liberal audience and was structured in such a way as to ensure that the "results" were pre-ordained: the position in support of same-sex 'marriage' would be declared the winner. Still, the exercise was quite illuminating as it replicated in many ways the debate that has occurred throughout the courts and before the US Supreme Court. Our side presented cogent arguments based on the constitution while those seeking to redefine marriage relied primarily on emotional appeals.
Dr. Eastman was joined by marriage scholar Sherif Girgis, co-author (with NOM's founding co-chair Professor Robert George) of the book, "What is Marriage? Man and Woman, A Defense" in a debate with two supporters of same-sex marriage.
It was a spirited discussion, but Dr. Eastman and Mr. Girgis clearly dominated, presenting cogent and persuasive arguments that the constitution of our nation does not prohibit traditional marriage laws. Their opponents made emotional and political arguments, waxing poetic about why, in their view, gay 'marriage' is the right position for Americans to embrace.
The issue that was debated was this statement: "The Equal Protection Clause Does Not Require States To License Same-sex Marriages." I encourage you to watch the entire debate. Dr. Eastman's remarks begin at approximately the 30 minute, 30 second mark of the broadcast.
Our opponents' position relies virtually entirely on emotion and political correctness. Evan Wolfson, head of the activist group Freedom to Marry made an entirely emotional argument throughout his remarks. He began his presentation with the claim (a false one) that over 60% of the American people support the "freedom to marry" for gay couples. Yet what does a political poll (even one falsely presented) have to do with what the constitution requires when it comes to defining marriage? No matter! This misperception of what the polling shows formed the basis of Wolfson's closing argument as well. In between he talked about his own same-sex 'marriage' as well as attending the gay 'wedding' of his sister. His argument was joined by one from Professor Kenji Yoshino of NYU School of Law who talked about his own marriage to a man, with whom he is raising two children. Professor Yoshino even pressed Dr. Eastman on several occasions to say whether he felt that gay sex was morally inferior to married heterosexual sex — as if that had anything to do with the constitutional issues involved in the marriage question. It was a classic attempt of the liberal left to paint supporters of traditional marriage as appearing to be unkind or, worse, 'hateful bigots' motivated by animus. Such an ad hominem line of attack is what debaters pursue when they have lost the argument on principle, as Wolfson and Yoshino did.
Even though the outcome of the audience vote was predetermined from the outset, it is still worth 90 minutes of your time to see how vacuous the arguments are from those who would abandon the institution of marriage which has existed since the very creation of humanity simply because they can produce some bogus polling data that suggests that they've fooled a majority of Americans into supporting the concept. Contrast this against the principled, reasoned arguments presented by Dr. Eastman and Mr. Girgis and you can see, in a nutshell, the issue presented to the US Supreme Court.
NOM Honors COGIC Leaders
Recently I had the great honor of presenting two distinguished awards to leaders of the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) at their 65th annual Women's International Convention/Crusade in Minneapolis. Over 10,000 people were in attendance as I presented Bishop Charles Blake the "Outstanding Leadership Award" for his principled stand for faith, family and God's definition of marriage. Bishop Blake is the Presiding Bishop and Chief Apostle of COGIC. I also presented the "Mother for Marriage and Family" award to Mother Willie Mae Rivers, General Supervisor of the COGIC Department of Women. This award recognizes her great commitment to God's truth of marriage, her twelve children and women of faith around the world.
NOM Names Dr. Jacqueline C. Rivers to Board of Directors
It is with great honor that I share the exciting news that Dr. Jacqueline C. Rivers has joined NOM's Board of Directors. Dr. Rivers is the distinguished Director of the Seymour Institute for Black Church Studies at Harvard University. She is a highly-sought after speaker and lecturer and a strong defender of God's truth of marriage.
In a recent presentation at the Humanum Colloquium on the Complementarity of Man and Woman sponsored by the Vatican, Dr. Rivers told the gathered leaders of many of the world's religions, "Across the United States and Europe, sexual partnerships between persons of the same sex [and] of the same gender are being legally recognized as marriage, thus abolishing in law the principle of marriage as a conjugal union and reducing it to nothing other than sexual or romantic partnerships or domestic companionship. The unavoidable message is a profoundly false and damaging one — that children do not need a mother and a father in a permanent and complementary bond... In the United States, those who promote what they call marriage equality have unjustly appropriated the language and mantle of the black struggle in the United States — the Civil Rights Movement. But there can be no equivalence between blacks' experience of slavery and oppression and the circumstances of homosexuals."
NOM was prominently represented at the Humanum Colloquium and hosted a dinner for friends and supporters. We look forward to working with Dr. Rivers to advance the cause of marriage and to deepen our relationship with people of faith of all colors.
Is the game rigged?
One of the foundational principles of the American judicial system is that those who judge a fellow citizen do so solely by impartially applying the facts of a given case to the law. It should not matter whether the participants are black or white, young or old, male or female — or support or oppose gay 'marriage.' Justice should be blind to such external factors. In fact, the very symbol representing our judicial system is a blindfolded Lady Justice holding a scale to balance the evidence.
But increasingly it appears that the judicial system is not unbiased when it comes to issues involving same-sex 'marriage.' In fact, there are deeply troubling signs of bias and possible corruption that cast grave doubt on whether the system has been rigged against supporters of true marriage.
The latest exposition of this, thanks to a great piece of investigative journalism by The Daily Signal news site, involves revelations that the government of Oregon's actions taken to punish a Christian couple who declined to bake a cake celebrating a gay 'wedding' may have been the improper result of extensive communication and collaboration between the pro-gay 'marriage' group Basic Rights Oregon and the government agency that charged Melissa and Aaron Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa, with discrimination. The actions targeting this Christian couple effectively forced them out of business and a judge for the agency (the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industry) has recommended that they be fined $135,000 for exercising their first amendment right to decline to participate in something they do not support.
The Daily Signal expose uncovered internal documents revealing an extensive series of meetings between the gay 'marriage' group and the government agency that raise serious questions about whether the agency was using the case against the Klein's to promote the agenda of Basic Rights Oregon. At the time, the gay 'marriage' group was attempting to qualify a measure to the ballot to repeal Oregon's Marriage Amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman, and also was supporting a federal court challenge seeking to overturn the amendment. The Commissioner in charge of the case, including deciding whether to accept the $135,000 fine recommendation, held meetings with the advocacy organization and issued statements critical of the Klein's. Moreover, he himself has donated money to attend various functions sponsored by Basic Rights Oregon.
Attorneys for the Klein's have filed motions asking for this matter to be investigated.
It's Up To Us To Share The Truth
Our mission at NOM to preserve marriage and the faith traditions that sustain it will not cease when the US Supreme Court issues their ruling later this month no matter what they decide. If anything our work will become more important in the wake of this ruling.
If you would like to become a better-informed individual about the issues surrounding preserving marriage, please check our blog daily. We post a great deal of content that will educate and inform you.
And if you are able, please make a financial donation to help us continue our work fighting for the truth of marriage. Our work continues day in and day out, in good times and in bad, no matter the obstacles or challenges. With your support and prayers, we will continue to fight the good fight — and we will prevail!