Dear Friends of Marriage,
Last night the impossible happened. George Stephanopoulos called it the "Upset of the Century."
Just three weeks ago, Scott Brown trailed Martha Coakley in the race for U.S. Senate by more than 20 percentage points. Yet last night Massachusetts voters sent a powerful message to Washington, giving Scott Brown a dramatic 52%-48% victory.
And the news you won't hear anywhere else?
Thanks to your efforts, last night marks the fourth consecutive major upset victory for marriage in the Northeast!
While in the Massachusetts legislature, Scott Brown was one of the courageous few to stand for marriage, voting yes on the Massachusetts Marriage Amendment in 2007. Now in Washington, he will bring a strong new voice to protect and uphold DOMA against the attacks by President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and the pro-gay marriage lobby in Congress.
The contrast in the race couldn't be more striking. As Massachusetts Attorney General, Martha Coakley has been a radical activist for same-sex marriage, even suing the federal government in an attempt to have DOMA declared unconstitutional.
Last night's victory will make even Nancy Pelosi think twice about trying to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. And with Senator-elect Brown as the 41st Republican vote in the Senate, any effort to repeal DOMA this year should be dead on arrival in the Senate.
And marriage supporters were key to the Brown victory. In the closing days of the race, NOM spent $50,000, calling 800,000 Massachusetts households in an effort to identify and mobilize marriage voters, getting every vote possible to the polls for Scott Brown.
After Maine, New Jersey, and New York, Scott Brown represents the fourth straight upset victory for marriage deep in blue America! If marriage can win here, we will win all across the nation!
Our message is a winning message. Voters believe in marriage. And with your help, we are energizing, organizing and mobilizing marriage voters all across the country.
Will you consider an additional donation today to help prepare for the next battle? Today we celebrate, but tomorrow we get back to work. Your gift of $25, $50, or even $100 or more today would make sure we have the resources to take the fight for marriage wherever the need arises.
And don't forget to send your friends to TwoMillionforMarriage.com to join our online army of marriage supporters in every state, county and congressional district in America.
Faithfully,Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
11 Comments
This past week at Opine Editorials, I blogged about the MA Senate Race. readers might find this series of blogposts provides some intersting context:
"Coakley and Brown: Clarifying Disagreement on Marriage Issue in Close Senate Race."
http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2010/01/coakley-and-brown-clarifying.html
I followed the race really close at the end. I didn't see the gay marriage card played in the race I do understand she is behind the MA lawsuit against DOMA. It would be interesting to be able to make a connection between being the candidate and the lawsuit. Was that one of the things that got her funding in the first place? Certainly the gay community was watching.
INDIANAPOLIS — The nation's ongoing debate about same-sex marriage took the stage Wednesday at the Statehouse, as an Elkhart County lawmaker introduced a measure that would allow Indiana voters to decide if the state's constitution should specifically bar marriages and civil unions between gay and lesbian couples.
Passed 6-4
The children of same-sex parents are doing "just fine" and are "statistically indistinguishable" from kids with opposite-sex parents, according to an academic study. "No research supports the widely held conviction that the gender of parents matters for child well-being," the study from researchers at New York University and the University of Southern California finds. (btw - USC isn't exactly "liberal")
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-21-parentgender21_ST_N.htm?csp=usat.me
Not that raising children has anything to do with same-sex marriage rights, legally...but how many more studies do you need??
Jacob, did you read the article? There are some serious flaws with the methodology that are not conveyed in the newspaper's snatchy headline.
"Three researchers critiqued the effort; their comments appear in the same issue of the journal. Lisa Strohschein of the University of Alberta in Canada takes issue with the review's attempts to "tease out the effects of the parent's gender" from an array of variables.
She notes that many of the studies cited place differences in family type "in context with other factors that influence child outcomes," including number and gender of parents in the household, sexual identity, marital status and biogenetic relationship to children. The review, she says, "provided no such context."
Kyle Pruett, a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Yale University Child Study Center and co-author of the 2009 book Partnership Parenting,has not seen the research review. But he says "you can't take gender out of the world."
He says that as adults, "we are struggling to be politically correct about gender" when we should be thinking more about the children. "It's not about the supremacy of one gender over another or about the necessity of one gender over another," he says."
October 22, 2007 - The Fatherhood Foundation in New South Wales (NSW) has recently published 21 Reasons Why Gender Matters.
The study is based upon four foundational principles: 1. Gender differences exist; 2. Acknowledging gender differences is the only intellectually honest response to this reality; 3. Gender differences are complementary; 4. Gender disorientation exists in a small minority of individuals. It is not normative and should not drive social policies.
The 21 reasons are summarized below:
1. Gender uniqueness and complementarity means that each gender has a unique contribution that can't be filled by the other.
2. Acknowledging gender differences helps children learn more effectively.
3. Men and women are happier when they recognize these gender differences.
4. The masculine gender is an essential ingredient for fatherhood.
5. The feminine gender is an essential ingredient for motherhood.
6. Marriage is the best way for men and women to enjoy complementarity.
7. Gender complementarity in a life-long marriage is essential for the continuation of humanity.
8. Gender complementarity in marriage is needed for a healthy, stable society.
9. Gender complementarity in marriage between a man and woman is good for the economy.
10. Marriage between a man and woman is the foundation of a successful family and best way to protect children.
11. Gender complementarity in marriage is the best way to teach children about the value of gender.
12. Gender is important in understanding the significance of manhood.
13. Gender is important in understanding the significance of womanhood.
14. In healthy societies, gender complementarity is celebrated; societies rejecting this face harmful consequences.
15. Healthy gender development prevents individuals from developing compulsive obsessive disorders leading to sexual addiction and other pathologies.
16. Gender disorientation pathology is a symptom of family dysfunction, personality disorder, father absence, health malfunction or sexual abuse.
17. Gender disorientation pathology will lead to increased levels of drug abuse and partner violence.
18. Gender disorientation pathology will increase the risk of communicable disease and bad health.
19. Gender disorientation pathology will decrease life expectancy.
20. Gender disorientation pathology is preventable and treatable.
21. Gender disorientation pathology encourages the sexual and psychological exploitation of children.
The study concludes with a list of 20 public policy responses to gender disorientation pathology.
The authors note: "Given the importance of the two genders, it is imperative to promote heterosexual marriage and the biological two-parent family. The evidence makes it clear that these two institutions provide the best environment for individuals, for societies, and for children."
21 Reasons Why Gender Matters can be ordered from the Fatherhood Foundation, P.O. Box 542, Unanderra, NSW 2520; http://www.fatherhood.org.au. For ordering information, contact the Fatherhood Foundation: info@fatherhood.org.au.
James R, please email me. My profile is available at Opine Editorials, see link in my prevous blogpost.
Cheerio,
Chairm
Enjoy your celebration while it lasts. This is a tiny set-back agaist a huge change in public opinion. This is why you are screaming at the tide NOM, you are in a state of panic, spewing your hate-filled ads out left-right-and centre. You are fighting a battle which you can't possibly win. You can't fight agaist progression. You can try, but you will fail.
But it's very very funny for us progressives to watch.
I'd give it 20 years, till you see same-sex marriage across the board. Till then enjoy your homophobic ramblings.
ElusiveCake
Prosecutors finish up their side. Final witness said being gay not a choice.
Here is a good link for a review of Friday.
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_14246816?source=most_viewed
That's funny Adam. "Final Witness says being gay not a choice."
Yet if you read this account from his testimony, apparently it IS a choice for at least 32% of lesbians and 12% of gay men, at least in Dr. Herek's obviously unscientific poll.
And nevermind that one of the lesbian plaintiffs was married to a man for 12 years, and was not attracted to women at the time.
So much for "Born that way, can't change." Dr. Herek is a joke.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100122/ap_on_re_us/us_gay_marriage_trial
Adam, MSNBC used the gay card -- and the SSM card -- in the various commentaries of the hosts of its political talk shows. Olberman most prominently.
But, more importantly, the gay activists had overestimated their importance in past votes and their importance in a close vote in this Senate race. The Coakley campaign sought to use this as a wedge issue -- and to marshall the efforts of the influential gay identity groups. That proved impotent.
That's part of the bigger picture and means something in the state that the SSMers have lauded as "the birthplace of SSM" -- in their own endorsements of Coakley.