Dear Friends of Marriage,
It's on.
The Governor of New Hampshire is losing it over our "Lynch Lied" ad and has launched a fluffy rebuttal ad, heavy on the slick, light on the substance. It's called "Lynch Leads" and you can view it here.
After viewing the ad, you might wonder why Governor Lynch didn't respond to the facts laid out in our ad "Lynch Lied" (which you can view here). We all know why: as the Union Leader wrote, "Unfortunately for Gov. Lynch, the criticisms are valid and he knows it."
Maybe that's also why Lynch doesn't want to hear back from his constituents -- he's even disabled comments on the YouTube version of his ad.
The other glaring omission from Lynch's rebuttal ad is any defense of same-sex marriage. We also know why. Lynch knows that the voters of New Hampshire don't want same-sex marriage and expect a governor who said he opposed redefining marriage to actually follow through and veto the bill. Pure and simple, Governor Lynch betrayed the trust of the voters when he put his pen to the same-sex marriage bill. He's not willing to highlight this betrayal in an ad. The people might get...the TRUTH!
But if Lynch does not want to talk about same-sex marriage to the voters of New Hampshire, he definitely does want to talk about it to the far-left funding base of his campaign. In a Lynch campaign fundraising e-mail to supporters, his finance chair lays his cards on the table.
"On its website, NOM has made clear its real agenda: repealing New Hampshire's marriage equality law and punishing Gov. Lynch for signing it.
The National Organization for Marriage spent $200,000 in ONE week running their ad. We spent $250,000 on advertising for the whole last campaign.
This out-of-state group has spent millions in other states to push its agenda of hate and discrimination."
My friends, supporting traditional marriage is now "hate" and "discrimination" according to the Lynch campaign. So whether you're one of the majority of voters who passed a constitutional amendment in 30 states or one of the majority of voters who vetoed same-sex marriage in neighboring Maine, or one of the majority of voters in New Hampshire who opposes same-sex marriage, the Governor of New Hampshire is effectively declaring your views hateful.
Governor Lynch has one thing right. We're going to shout about his betrayal of New Hampshire voters from the mountaintops, from the airwaves, from the streets (with our "Lynch Lied" bumper stickers available here), from the internet, and wherever else we can. And it's not just him. A new day has dawned. No longer can politicians vote against protecting marriage and then hide it from the voters. And you bet we'll work to repeal New Hampshire's gay marriage law. Our "Lynch Lied" spot is only the beginning of our public education efforts in New Hampshire and throughout the country.
But with just this single ad, we have already defined the agenda for the rest of the year in New Hampshire. For the rest of his campaign, Governor Lynch will have to defend his stances on the issues we've raised, and his opponents can be expected to constantly press the case as well. This is going to be a race unlike any other the Governor has experienced. He won't be able to run ads making him look "warm and fuzzy" and appear to be "a nice guy." He's going to have to defend his positions on the issues we've raised. And we've only begun to fight back in New Hampshire!
But we need your help. As you can see, we've got a Battle Royale on our hands at the highest levels of power. But we know that when a sitting Governor attacks us he's also attacking you. And you're not going to take that without standing up and being counted.
You see, we don't have uber-millionaires like Tim Gill that the pro-gay marriage crowd has supporting them. We have you. And you have been key to our victories in California, Maine, New York and New Jersey. And with over one hundred thousand online NOM supporters there are a lot of us. But we can't think that someone else is going to step up to the plate for us. It is up to you. Will you dig deep at this critical time and give your most generous contribution so that we can fight effectively for your values?
I'm also asking you to forward this message to everyone that you know in your contacts folder that supports protecting marriage. Post it on Facebook. Retweet it on Twitter. We've got a momentous task before us and we'll need everyone to be a part of this fight. Don't wait. Please get the word out now.
P.S. You may ask, well I'm not in New Hampshire, why does this matter to me? Well, we're not just fighting in New Hampshire; we're active in states across the country. But New Hampshire is of national significance because same-sex marriage can be repealed there--given the right legislature and governor. Unlike Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa, New Hampshire simply passed same-sex marriage by a vote of the legislature. Next year's legislature can repeal it. Can you imagine the powerful message that would send to other states considering redefining marriage?
Faithfully,
Brian S. BrownPresident
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org
Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization with QNC status, 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.
18 Comments
There is one thing I can never understand. I hear the word "marriage equality" thrown around...why is it that only homosexuals are the ones under that flag? it would seem to me that true marriage equality would include everyone (relatives being married, polygamists, etc) rather than just homosexuals. Just another example of their hypocrisy.
Joe,
There are many stories like today's ChristianPost.com article
about an Episcopal priest who will marry his partner of 20 years. Marriage equality is about those stories because that is what it is about. I know that I'm making a tautological argument, but
that's what it is. The marriage equality movement is a political movement because it represents millions of personal stories like the priest's. A better question would be, "why are anti-marriage activists incapable of empathizing with these stories?"
Just sent in my donation. Brian, this is the kind of actual, on-the-ground, battle-changing work that I have come to expect from NOM.
Steady as she goes.
Hey Rick! Good to see you on here again. It's been a while.
What does empathy have to do with anything? Everyone lives their imperfect lives, everyone deals with struggles and challenges. What does that have to do with whether or not SSM is a good idea? What I find intriguing is why SSM activists only worry about their own sob story in a life full of choices, what about empathy for the kids who don't get to choose? What about the ones who will be denied a mom and a dad simply to suit someone's personal bias? Is that really equality?
L. Marie, what criteria did you use that enabled you to choose your parents? Sob, sob.. I did not get to choose mine.
If only more Christians were to follow the path of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Church Council, who recently decided to grant full recognition and equality to all its lesbian and gay and bisexual and transgendered followers.
Every child comes with a mom and a dad. If you don't like it, take it up with mother nature.
Every child deserves a mom and a dad. If you want to, for your own reasons, deny a child a mom or a dad, that is your choice, and unfortunately our laws in some places allow it, but don't talk about equality while you're doing it. It's not equal for the child.
And until you ban divorce, single motherhood, etc. and forcibly take children away from every heterosexual couple who mistreats them in any way, don't get all high-handed about same-sex couples providing supportive, loving homes for them. It's just hypocritical, not to mention detrimental to the children. And we can't have that!
I don't know what kind of world you're proposing Emma, but it doesn't sound like one where freedom reigns. Why force when encourage is enough? You admit that two dads can never be a mom to a child, but we're supposed to just accept that it's good enough? How is that equality?
If two moms or two dads can't do the job a loving, stable mom and dad can, then why force people to hold up ssm as anything but another broken family?
People have the right to do as they please, but you can't force society to hold up something as equal when it's not. Are single moms equal to a married couple? Are single dads? or is it the number that matters? What's magical about two, how about three?
The best situation for kids is to be raised by a mom and a dad, married and dedicated to them and their family for life. Anything less than that is just that. Less.
L.Marie, is a married straight couple without kids another broken family? What about an elderly couple who marries late in life? Are they to be discarded too? The over 1,200 benefits that come with the word "marriage" surely can't be confined to straight, fertile couples....but that's what you're saying.
"The over 1,200 benefits that come with the word "marriage" surely can't be confined to straight, fertile couples....but that's what you're saying."
Hardly. What I'm saying is that rather than outlaw all behavior that is less than optimal and FORCE everyone to conform, society simply encourages the best situation for kids. No one is excluded.
Emma: "...until you ban divorce, single motherhood, etc. and forcibly take children away from every heterosexual couple who mistreats them in any way, don't get all high-handed about same-sex couples providing supportive, loving homes for them."
I have nothing against same-sex couples, divorced families, or single mothers providing supportive, loving homes for children. But neither do I pretend they are married when they clearly are not.
I don't know about you, Marty, but (just for example) the great state of Arizona saw fit to forbid same-sex couples (and all unmarried couples) from fostering or adopting children. So in fact the state of Arizona does have something against divorced families, same-sex couples, and single parents / grandparents / aunts / uncles / whoever from providing supportive, loving homes for children. Which seems ignorant at best, prejudiced at worst, and all around potentially bad for children.
Emma, Arizona (and Florida) citizens seem to think that a married husband/wife mother/father is the idea environment for children to be raised. This is uncontroversial, and in no way does does it prevent divorced families, same-sex couples, and single parents / grandparents / aunts / uncles / whoever from providing supportive, loving homes for children.
Nobody is taking kids away from these "supportive, loving homes". Neither are they pretending that they are just as good as the real thing.
(Nobody is stopping any of these folks from marrying either. They simply choose not to, for a variety of personal reasons)
I for one, refuse to believe that separate is equal. Where exactly is the "diversity" in a family with two moms and no dad?
Bigots.
Emma, when a Christian church abandons marriage, as the ELCA has done, it abandons Christianity. Remember, the Church is the bride of Christ, the focus of our baptism is original sin, given to us by our first parents. Christian theology, and the biblical narrative, is incomprehensible without male and female complementarity. Luke and Matthew begin their gospels with genealogies.
The ELCA has ceased to be Christian, though it is certainly Lutheran.