Dear Friends of Marriage,
I don't often do this. But let me brag about Maggie. No--let me quote Austin Ruse bragging about Maggie.
Some of you may know Austin Ruse, who is himself a great Christian hero, a tireless and effective defender of the culture of life at the United Nations (talk about a flinty soil!) and other international organizations. Austin heads up the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a research institute focusing exclusively on international social policy.
This week on The Catholic Thing, Austin devoted his whole column to our own Maggie Gallagher, president of NOM. As I'm reading this tribute my first thought is, "Whoa"--this is really extravagant.
Austin writes, "Maggie Gallagher has almost single handedly changed the pro-marriage movement and in the process has given it perhaps its best and only chance of saving marriage from being permanently remade in America--and therefore the world."
He gives Maggie a great deal of credit for pointing out what the benign-sounding phrase "marriage equality" really means: It means you and I are just like racists and should be treated as such. "What happens to people who still hold racist views? They are shunned, driven from the public square. They lose licenses to work. In short, they are pariahs not welcome in polite society," Austin continues.
"Maggie points out that those who oppose homosexuality will come to appear no better than racists. They will be discriminated against. They will lose jobs and in some cases be hounded in public. This is happening already. Look at the treatment of those who were publicly exposed as financial supporters of California's Proposition 8. This will happen to you, your mother, your grandmother," Austin says.
He goes on to say, "Maggie herself is constantly vilified on homosexual websites. ...They hate her profoundly because she has at least slowed the juggernaut that is the homosexual movement, one that has billions of dollars behind it along with the power centers of our culture."
Some of that hate is spilling over to NOM for our crucial role in fighting for marriage in Maine, California, and elsewhere.
You will see headlines about the Maine Ethics Commission's decision to permit an investigation of NOM. We are saddened at this transparently politicized attempt to distract attention from the real issue in Maine: Do voters want the consequences of gay marriage for themselves and their children?
Or I should say, Maggie is saddened. Me, I'm fighting mad!
Here's what I told the press yesterday in response to a closely-divided Maine Ethics Commission decision to reject their own staff's recommendation of "no investigation" and instead voted to open an investigation of the National Organization for Marriage:
NOM is in full compliance with Maine law. The complaint is frivolous; it was filed for political reasons by a group whose sole purpose is to harass decent Americans who exercise their civil rights to peacefully and democratically act to protect marriage as the union of husband and wife.
The independent professional staff of the Commission examined the facts and concluded that an investigation was not warranted.
This is a side issue in the campaign; the future of marriage is what is important. ...Gay marriage advocates have not been able to persuade the people of Maine that gay marriage is either true or good; they cannot rebut the truth that gay marriage will profoundly change the culture of marriage for everyone in Maine, including parents in public schools. This is why they want to change the subject by filing frivolous election complaints.
NOM will vigorously pursue all our legal rights and the legal rights of the more than 100,000 people who've come together with NOM to protect marriage. We will not be intimidated or deterred from peacefully and democratically organizing within the law to protect marriage as one man and one woman. Not only have we fully complied with Maine law, we believe the underlying statute in Maine is unconstitutionally vague, and the vagueness is what allowed a politically motivated anti-marriage hate group to misuse the law to attempt to divert a campaign from the important moral issues at stake.
Fred Karger should understand: The politically motivated misuse of election laws will backfire and only help us grow more rapidly. The people of Maine and the American people will recognize a cheap shot when they see one. They understand that anyone who stands for marriage will now be ruthlessly attacked. And frankly, the American people don't like this kind of hate directed at supporters of marriage.
Let me emphasize one other thing Austin says that is crucially important: "Maggie is not the only one toiling in this unforgiving vineyard. There are many others and they should all get credit for telling the truth in a hostile environment that sometimes even includes death threats."
I am so grateful for each and every one of you that has taken a stand for marriage. Thank you. And I am profoundly grateful for the many sister organizations fighting to protect God's truth about this most sacred union around this country. As believers we know in a deep and profound way: We are never alone. But it is only by coming together in truth and love that we will prevail over lies and hate.
A final thought, though: Austin, I am also totally on board with your last thought: "Should we finally win, much of the praise should go to Maggie Gallagher and she should win all the awards, starting now."
If you would like to honor Maggie, and fight back against the Fred Kargers of the world--do not today give money to me and Maggie or NOM. Give it to StandforMarriageMaine.com. Maine is the frontline of the battle for marriage and we all need to come together to win. Can you give $10 today for StandforMarriageMaine.com?
Together we will fight. Together we will win.
May God's graces be upon you and your family for your courage and your decency.
Until next week,
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
PS: This week, Maine is where your help is most needed. You can defend marriage by giving to StandforMarriageMaine.com!
NOM Featured Article
The Catholic Thing
September 25, 2009
A few years ago a highly visible and influential member of the Christian Right appeared on one of the cable news shows talking about homosexual marriage. He said that homosexuality was harmful to society and to the individuals who practiced it. A week later this same man appeared again on the same topic only this time he said opposition to homosexual marriage was not about condemning homosexuals but about protecting children who need moms and dads, something homosexual couples can never provide. Sometime between his first appearance and his second, he was visited by one of the wisest social analysts in the country, Maggie Gallagher of the National [Organization] for Marriage.
Statement By Marc Mutty, Chair, Stand For Marriage Maine, Concerning Hearing of Maine Ethics Commission
"Stand for Marriage Maine is in complete compliance with Maine campaign disclosure laws. The decision today by the Maine Ethics Commission to open an inquiry based on frivolous allegations concerning the fundraising procedures of one of our allies, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), is an unfortunate abuse of power. It is yet another example of the harassment that follows supporters of traditional marriage. The split 3-2 vote overruled the independent professional recommendation of the Commission staff that an investigation was not warranted. Instead, a bare majority of Commissioners agreed with a California-based hate group that exists for the sole purpose of harassing marriage supporters that they should examine whether NOM has raised funds designated for the Question 1 campaign without disclosing the source of the funds.
"The complaint by Californians Against Hate--which is itself a hate group--is frivolous. The Commission's independent professional staff has reviewed the facts and concluded that there was insufficient evidence to launch an investigation. We are certain that the investigation will come to the same conclusion. However, the purpose of the complaint is not to lead to the truth, but to create an artificial and unwarranted political controversy in the final month of the Question 1 election. The Commission has even deferred until its meeting in November a decision of what alleged violations should even be investigated. By that time, the political damage that our opponents seek to inflict on supporters of traditional marriage will have already occurred. It is an abuse of power for the Commission to have allowed itself to be used as an instrument of politics in this fashion."
NOM in the News
"Maine Ethics Commission Approves Probe of Anti-Gay Marriage Fundraising"
October 1, 2009
AUGUSTA, MAINE -- Maine's campaign oversight board overruled a staff recommendation Thursday and authorized an investigation into fundraising by groups supporting the campaign to repeal the state's gay marriage law in a Nov. 3 referendum.
"Question 1 Fueling a Fundraising Fight"
Bangor Daily News
October 1, 2009
Campaign spokesman Scott Fish said Stand for Marriage Maine is reaching out to supporters "in several different ways" but declined to go into specifics. Asked about the opposing campaign's online fundraising, Fish replied: "We are aware of it, but we are pressing on. We are appealing to our supporters in a number of ways." The National Organization for Marriage, a New Jersey group that helps lead campaigns to prohibit gay marriage, contributed $160,000 of Stand for Marriage Maine's $346,000 during the last period.
"President Obama Must Speak Out on Maine Now"
September 29, 2009
The time for President Obama to make clear that he opposes the ballot measure in that state is now. If he waits any longer, the Maggie Gallagher brigade against human rights will use his opposition to marriage to prove that he supports the proposition.
"Creep of the Week: Carrie Prejean"
September 18, 2009
Creatures like Maggie Gallagher were more than happy to wipe the mascara off Prejean's cheeks and protect her from the big, bad homos.
"Gay Rights Measures on the Ballot in Three States"
September 26, 2009
The constitutional argument is similar to that made by the National Organization for Marriage and other groups that sponsored Prop. 8.