Category Archives: Children

Science Proves Family Structure Matters

Throughout history it's been obvious to any observer that children in intact families with a married mother and father do much better than children from broken homes or those living in alternative family structures. In recent years, there's been an attempt to deny that reality and convince people that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are somehow exempted from the realities of family life, claiming there are "no differences" in outcomes for these kids or even sometimes suggesting they do better than children raised by a married mother and father in the home. Increasingly, social scientists have been examining this "no differences" claim and, as you might suspect, find it without merit. A distinguished social scientist from the University of Virginia, W. Bradford Wilcox, writes a detailed piece this week for National Review reviewing three recent developments that make it harder for the "family structure denialists" to continue to make the "no differences" claim. He says:

"It’s been a rough two weeks for the family-structure denialists, those progressive academics (Philip Cohen, “How to Live in a World Where Marriage Is in Decline”), journalists (Katie Roiphe, “New York Times, Stop Moralizing About Single Mothers”), and pundits (Matthew Yglesias, “The ‘Decline’ of Marriage Isn’t a Problem”) who seek to minimize or deny the importance of marriage and family structure. That’s because three new pieces of scholarship — a journal, a report, and a study — were released this month that solidify the growing scientific consensus that marriage and family structure matter for children, families, and the nation as a whole."

The studies and reports mention by Wilcox confirm many of the outcome problems that children who lack a married mother and father in the home experience, especially boys lacking the presence of their father at home. Wilcox says these children "are floundering in school and society" and details findings including problems in the areas of truancy and educational attainment, increased behavioral problems, higher cognitive disability, perform worse on standardized school tests and are less likely to graduate from high school. And the article details important new findings that states with higher levels of married parenthood enjoy higher levels of growth, economic mobility for children growing up poor, higher median family income and markedly lower levels of child poverty. Says Wilcox,

"[W]ith study after study showing that children, families, and now even states benefit from strong and stable married families, the job of those who would seek to deny that marriage and family structure also play an important role — the family-structure denialists — is getting harder and harder. That’s because the facts just aren’t with those who seek to deny the scientific evidence that family change is having a major impact on our social environment and — in particular — our boys.

The complete article is available at National Review.

Pope Francis Reasserts that Traditional Marriage is Under Attack

On the eve of Pope Francis’ visit to the United States, he has issued a strong and unequivocal statement in support of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and notes that traditional marriage is under attack “by powerful contrary projects supported by ideological colonization.” The Pope said that married couples are “in the best position” to introduce Jesus Christ to others. He said the unique joy that the Lord enables families and couples to experience in the intimacy of domestic life, both in moments of joy and suffering, "must be witnessed to, announced and communicated externally, so that others, in turn, take the same path."

Catholic Online expounds on this:

ThinkstockPhotos-101054028Pope Francis told couples to defend God's design for the family as the union of a man and woman for the procreation of children, and urged them to be merciful to those whose marriages have failed.

Today "the family - as God wants it, composed of a man and a woman for the good of the spouses and also the generation and education of children - is deformed by powerful contrary projects supported by ideological colonization," the Pope said Sept. 10.

A family which is filled with the presence of God, he said, "speaks for itself of God's love for all men."

. . .

The unique joy that the Lord enables families and couples to experience in the intimacy of domestic life, both in moments of joy and suffering, "must be witnessed to, announced and communicated externally, so that others, in turn, take the same path," he said.

The Pope encouraged couples to live the movement's spirituality and commitments in a deep way, saying these allow couples to live their married life confidently, following the path of the Gospel.

. . .

ThinkstockPhotos-75677464He also encouraged the couples to draw close to the increasing number of wounded families who suffer due to either a lack of work, concern for a child, the distance, or an absence of a family member or a violent environment.

"We must have the courage to enter into contact with these families," he said, adding that it must be done "in a discreet but generous way, materially, humanly or spiritually, in those circumstances where they are vulnerable."

Pope Francis closed by encouraging couples to instruments of Christ's mercy toward those whose marriages have failed, and stressed that married fidelity is a gift from God.

Mercy has been shown to "every one of us," Francis said. He added that couples who are united and happy could better understand the pain and the suffering caused by betrayal, abandonment and a lack of love.

"It is necessary, therefore, that you bring your witness and your experience to help Christian communities to discern the real situations in which these people find themselves, to welcome them with their wounds, and to help them to journey in faith and in truth," he said.

"Nor must you forget the unspeakable suffering of the children who experience these painful family situations: you can give a lot to them."

Pope Francis asked those present to pray for the upcoming Synod on the Family, and for all their reflections on the "vital cell of our societies" within the difficult current cultural context.

Declining Marriage Rates Hurt the Poor Hardest

As the marriage success gap widens in America, social analysts from both the right and the left debate what could be the cause. Why is it that the wealthy and educated have successful marriages while the poor and working classess by and large do not? The Right argues that the rise of abortificant ability and laws protecting a mother's choice over childbearing have marked the decline, while those on the Left generally argue that the lowered standard of living among the poor has hurt marriage.

Rachel Sheffield, writing for Public Discourse, examines the theories of leftist Andrew Cherlin, and points out why the loss of American manufacturing jobs is not the ultimate cause of marriage's decline:

ThinkstockPhotos-146006568[R]esearchers have directly examined the thesis that reduced manufacturing employment reduces marriage rates. Sociologists at New York University recently studied how increased importing from China in the 2000s affected marriage in communities that produced competing products. The new competition had negative economic effects—but this did not impact marriage rates. This research is preliminary but casts serious doubt on the primacy of economic factors in the decline in marriage rates. If centuries of subsistence-level poverty did not destroy the two-parent family, it is hard to see why a late twentieth century slowdown in the rate of compensation growth would.

On the other hand, Cherlin is correct that working class men are indeed less likely to be employed today than in the past. Part of the reason appears to be directly connected to the decline in marriage rates—but as an effect, not a cause. In other words, because marriage rates are down, men are less likely to engage in the labor force.

In a 2014 report published by the American Enterprise Institute, researchers Brad Wilcox of the University of Virginia and Robert Lerman of American University report that over half (51 percent) of the decrease in male employment between 1980 and 2008 (and 37 percent of the decline between 1980 and 2013) is connected to the decline in marriage. The authors note:

When young men and women replace formal commitment with informal relationships or none at all, work becomes less urgent, especially for men, who have historically taken all kinds of jobs to support their families. With no wife or children to support, men become less focused on the job market.

Wilcox and Lerman’s research shows that the greatest decline in male employment since 1979 has been among unmarried men. This trend holds true across all levels of education. The authors also point out that median family income would be 44 percent higher today if the United States had the same rate of married-parent families as in 1979.

The true cause of marriage's decline lies in the spread of "casual sex." Sheffield explains:

The spread of birth control and the legalization of abortion attempted to disconnect sex from childbearing. It ended up disconnecting childbearing from marriage, weakening men’s responsibility as fathers. As Brookings Institution scholars George Akerlof and Janet L. Yellen put it, “By making the birth of the child the physical choice of the mother, the sexual revolution has made marriage and child support a social choice of the father.”

Marriage binds a man and a woman together for life so that they can make children to love and raise. Without the openness to children, marriage loses its meaning and, as we have seen, falls by the wayside.

Catholic Archbishop Says It's Not About Equality or Rights — It's About Destroying the Family

In a letter published in the Pacific Daily News, the Catholic Archbishop of Agana (Guam), Anthony Sablan Apuron, exhorts all “sisters and brothers” to stand firm in defense of marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Mid adult couple looking at their babyIn the face of recent events undertaken by the U.S. District Court of Guam, the U.S. Supreme Court and the 33rd Guam Legislature in redefining marriage, the Church stands firm on her teaching that marriage is between one man, and one woman.

Disagreement is not discrimination. These recent laws force the people of Guam, and of the United States, to either agree with a particular political position or face ridicule and sanction for discrimination. These types of laws not only undermine the precepts of the United States Constitution to freedom of speech, but also undermine and attempt to eradicate the constitutional right to Freedom of Religion.

These times compel the Church to expose the intentions of those who have deceivingly disguised same-sex unions as an issue of equality and anti-discrimination. It is important to understand that the political pressure to push the agenda for same-sex “marriage” has never been about gay rights; the true intention behind this agenda has always been about the destruction of the family and the imposition of the totalitarian system. The approval of same-sex “marriage” has now thrown open the doors of Guam to implement in our community a very clever and systematic theory, which has as its aim the destruction of marriage and family through the annihilation of any sexual differences among persons. This theory is known as the “Theory of Gender.”

At the political level, in order to avoid “discrimination” among the genders, a principle of “radical equality” has been imposed upon society, demanding and forcing society to have a neutral response to gender. Any objection is considered not only discriminatory and intolerant, but bigotry.

The next step will be to implement this theory in the educational system of Guam. This means that our children, your children, will be forced to assimilate to this pattern of non-gender; that there is no such thing as “male” or “female” — they will be encouraged to explore their sexuality earlier, and parents will have no voice in the education of their children. These ideas are already part of an international agenda promoted especially by the United Nations. The laws just passed on our beautiful island, which were disguised to fight against discrimination, will now work to subvert our human sexuality from the most tender age with the goal to abolish the natural family and create new “models” of a family.

. . .

In my view, these recent laws are not a sign of human progress, but are dangerous steps toward annihilation of our fundamental religious beliefs. As shepherd of the local Church of Guam, I urge every person to be mindful that each of us is answerable to the supreme judge for what we do and do not do.

Not Just Same-sex Marriage: Other Unions Will Be Imposed Upon the American People

Now that the definition of marriage as the union between one man and one woman has been arrogantly dismissed by the Supreme Court, other groups are looking to have their unions included in the “marriage” category. One such example is polygamists, led by the reality stars from the series ‘Sister Wives.’ The Blaze reports that these ‘Sister Wives’ stars are invoking same-sex marriage legalization in an attempt to overturn Utah’s polygamy ban.

ThinkstockPhotos-147042664Kody Brown and his wives, Robyn, Christine, Janelle and Meri — the stars of “Sister Wives” — are asking judges to reject an appeal by Utah of a judge’s 2013 decision to strike a portion of the state’s ban on polyamorous relationships, KSTU-TV reported.

U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups ruled that the law’s ban on cohabitation among individuals who are not married runs in contrast to the First and 14th Amendments, and essentially violates Brown’s religious freedom.

. . .

“From the rejection of morality legislation in Lawrence to the expansion of the protections of liberty interests in Obergefell, it is clear that states can no longer use criminal codes to coerce or punish those who choose to live in consensual but unpopular unions,” Jonathan Turley, an attorney for Brown, wrote to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court in Denver. ”This case is about criminalization of consensual relations and there are 21st century cases rather than 19th century cases that control.”

. . .

Brown has maintained that the legal battle is not about forcing acceptance of bigamy or challenging the rights of states to preclude individuals from holding multiple marriage licenses, but that it is, instead, about battling back against criminalization.

The state, though, maintains that polyamorous relationships are harmful to women and children.

“By only striking the cohabitation provision, the District Court left Utah with the same law maintained by most states in the Union prohibiting bigamy,” Turley wrote. “What was lost to the state is precisely what is denied to all states: the right to impose criminal morality codes on citizens, compelling them to live their lives in accordance with the religious or social values of the majority of citizens.”

When marriage is no longer protected as the union between one man and one woman, society opens itself up to harmful unions that not only further damage the institution, but also work to destroy the family. Given that the family is the building block of society, our government should be looking to protect marriage and the family — not redefine and destroy it.

Why Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Will Never Live Up To The Real Thing

Two authors have penned an article at The Federalist pointing out several key reasons “why marriage deserves special attention from government – and its redefinition does not”:

ThinkstockPhotos-783213991. The Species Only Survives Because Of Heterosexual Relationships
Marriage produces more taxpayers. By providing a social stamp of approval and public policies friendly to marriage, government is encouraging the survival of the human species and the creation of more tax dollars in the environment that—study after study has found—is best for children.

2. Children Benefit From Marriage—Not Same Sex Marriage
[C]ontrary to popular reports, people raised by same-sex couples are not as well developed as those raised by married parents. Comprehensive research published earlier this year by Catholic University of America researcher Dr. Paul Sullins found that ‘emotional problems were over twice as prevalent for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents.’

3. Marriage Is Physically Healthy; Same Sex Marriage Is Not
In 2011, a survey of 90 studies found that single men die eight to 17 years earlier than married males. Life spans for single women decrease by seven to 15 years compared with their married counterparts.

Conversely, a number of studies have found lower life expectancies for same-sex sexual couples. While the invention of anti-retroviral drugs has narrowed the gap, anal sex between men has led to this small segment of society making up at least two-thirds of all HIV/AIDS cases in America.

. . .

Taxpayers have a right to not be held financially accountable for poor life decisions with predictable consequences.

4. Society Is Empowered By Marriage And Weakened By Its Redefinition
[T]he families that come from marriage create communities that empower each other. Bonds are formed, friends are made. As has been seen in Europe, Canada, and a number of U.S. states, however, redefining marriage brings persecution, reduction in liberties of speech and religion, and threatens the very fabric of equal treatment under the law.

. . .

The burden of proof to expand the government’s definition to “earn social approval, tax benefits, etc.,” of marriage is on same-sex couples. Like anyone who wants to receive a degree or a certificate, same-sex couples must make the case that they add benefits equal to those of marriage.

Alas, based upon the available science, the many benefits of marriage are not transferrable to its redefinition for same-sex couples.

Many people who advocate redefining marriage act as if it is a political institution, something that can be changed to suit changing societal whims. But marriage has intrinsic meaning – it is the union of one man and one woman – and it witnesses eternal truths: that men and women are complimentary, naturally made for each other, that only the union of men and women can create new life, and that children thrive when they receive the love of both their mother and their father.

See The Federalist for more.

Heartbreak, Lessons, and Encouragement Emerge from Religious Liberty Rally

Last week, in Des Moines, Iowa, a group of people persecuted because of their beliefs about marriage gathered for a religious liberty rally organized by Sen. Ted Cruz. Of those present, many spoke publicly about the hardships they face, as well as their faith in God. The Daily Signal reports on the event:

Iowa couple Dick and Betty Odgaard, who are Mennonite, told  how they were forced to close their business, the Gortz Haus – a wedding venue located in an historic church.

The wedding venue also served as an art gallery, flower shop, and restaurant. After declining a gay couple’s request to use their venue for their wedding in 2013, the couple became the target for attacks.

Asked why they didn’t host the same-sex wedding, Betty said, “We could not celebrate a sin.”

The Odgaards were fined $5,000 last year. In July, the couple closed the doors on the business.

. . .

Those speaking on a panel at the event included former Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran, Oregon bakers Aaron and Melissa Klein, retired Air Force Senior Master Sgt. Phillip Monk, and Washington florist Barronelle Stutzman.


Iowa-based radio host Steve Deace moderated the discussion.

All of the panelists shared their stories of heartbreaks, lessons, and encouragement.

“I was never in a court,” said Aaron Klein, who has been fined $135K after not baking a wedding cake for a lesbian couple.

The Klein family owns Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

“Before all of this happened, I had a very large lack of trust in my God. I hate to admit that, but I did," Melissa Klein said. "And through this and through standing for him, I have learned to trust him so much.”

This week the Klein family baked 10 cakes to send to LGBTQ groups to show love for these individuals, even though the Kleins do not support gay marriage.

“I would just encourage you all,” Melissa continued, “stand for God and be strong because He can move in your life like you have never seen Him move before.”

The US Supreme Court has made a grave mistake in imposing same-sex ‘marriage’ on the nation. Until we are able to take the steps necessary to reverse this illegitimate decision, it is imperative that there be no more victims of persecution or punishment of people simply for standing up for the truth of marriage. We call on Congress and the states to pass the First Amendment Defense Act prohibiting government from discriminating against people who support marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

See The Daily Signal for more.

Marriage and Family: You Can't Have One Without the Other

Shortly after the Supreme Court legitimized “same-sex marriage,” the noted New York Times columnist, David Brooks, wrote a piece calling for what he termed “conservatives” to give up the fight for marriage and focus on what he viewed as a different culture war: the fight for the family.

Dr. Thomas Lickona, in an open letter to Brooks responds to Brooks' call for conservatives to end the fight for marriage:

200226088-001The two great Gospel values are truth and love.  They’re not only compatible; they’re inseparable.  If you wish to speak the truth, you must do so with love (as Christ did).  If you love someone, you must speak the truth to them.  John Paul II said we are “called to build the civilization of truth and love.”  When competing values have a claim on our conscience, It’s never either or, but always both and.

. . .

The family is the foundation of society and the first school of virtue.  The sexual revolution has been an unrelenting assault on that foundation.  Can we achieve the stable families you say we need without people who make an enduring, sacrificial commitment to each other and the children they bring into the world? Research findings suggest otherwise, with negative effects on children – as you note.

. . .

When our Center addresses educating for character in the sexual domain (not our main focus but an important part of our work), we often begin with things that are likely to create common ground.  For example, nearly all people feel that more should be taught to our young about the emotional dangers of premature sexual involvement—something that gets short shrift in most sex education.

Most people, liberals and conservatives alike, are also concerned about the sexualization of children. Stories that illustrate the sexual corruption of children by our hypersexualized culture move them to take stock of our sexual culture and the unanticipated fallout of the sexual revolution.

The best way to protect the family is to protect the institution of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The family is the safeguard of children, so the protection of marriage and the protection of the family are interrelated. We cannot have a stable one without the functioning other.

See Aleteia for more.

Why is the Family Suffering?

What happens when a child is mistreated? Someone usually calls the local Child Protective Services. What happens when so many children are mistreated that the average Child Protective Service agent has a fifty family caseload? The local Child Protective Services sues the government for assigning an inordinate case overload.

It may sound insane, but in Indiana, that is just what is happening. And it’s not just the Hoosier State—across the nation more families cannot function without government intervention. Why this recent rash of heavily dysfunctional families? Joseph Turner of The Federalist explores the root of the problem:

ThinkstockPhotos-468044452Let’s look at single parenthood. One-parent households receive nearly twice as many CPS reports as those of married families. About 80 percent of reports are related to neglect rather than abuse. It doesn’t take much imagination to consider how the emotional, logistical, and economic demands of children could place single parents in some compromising situations. This is true even for the most loving and well-intentioned parents. Lose your five-year-old in a crowded mall? Miss a payment on your light bill? It’ll probably be okay…but you might get a knock on your door. Children are relentless, and parents are flawed. Raising kids is not meant to be a one-person task.

. . .

Let’s look at cohabitation as a marriage alternative, and by now a norm. Here, the statistics are frightening. Children living with a mother and cohabiting partner are 11 times more likely to experience physical, sexual, or emotional abuse than who live with married parents. Even children living with their biological unmarried parents are at four times the risk. Most cohabiting relationships are doomed to end eventually, exposing any children involved to the trauma of separation from parents and caregivers. And kids in the all-too-common families with one mother but multiple fathers are likely to experience any combination of the above risk factors during childhood, perhaps several times over.

We need to reeducate the populace about the importance of marriage. Devaluing the institution has left children bereft of the proper care they require. Turner offers possible solutions:

ThinkstockPhotos-126479084To protect American kids from harm on a large scale, we need to be willing to recognize a basic truth: children are safer and better off living with their married biological parents. As a society, we shouldn’t be afraid to say so. From high school sex ed on, adolescents should be warned about the dangers of unwed childbearing. The ample empirical benefits of marriage ought to be emphasized, with future children in mind. There should be pamphlets, instructional videos, motivational speakers, the works. We’re already on a mission to provide “comprehensive” sex education at ever younger ages. We encourage kids to stay in school, and educate them about college and career paths. There’s no reason we can’t fit marriage and family into the curriculum.

. . .

Legislators should be willing to craft policies and fund programs that encourage marriage norms. Create tax incentives for people to get married and raise their own children. Start public education campaigns. Subsidize pre- and post-marital counseling for those who need it. There’s any number of ways we could strengthen marriage culture if that’s what we decided we wanted to do. Measures like these would go further to protect our children than all the CPS workers we can fit in the budget.

Marriage is a cornerstone of society. We must protect it, for our own good, and our children’s’ good. We need strong marriages between one man and one woman. Whenever possible, children need to be raised by their biological parents: their father and mother. Our nation is far from perfect, but we can attempt to give our children the best lives possible, by encouraging marriage to be upheld as the sacred and precious bond that it is: the bond that unites a man and woman is the bond that holds together the family.

See The Federalist for more.

Children Are Not Commodities

So far, five videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s atrocities have been released. The videos show a disgusting, utterly callous affront to human life: first Planned Parenthood employees talking about aborted children in terms of paychecks and sports cars, then actual depictions of trays full of frozen baby organs. These videos demonstrate horrifically the objectification of children all too common in society and among activists on the left. Such objectification will dramatically increase as a result of the US Supreme Court’s decision in the Obergefell marriage case, which treats children merely as tools for obtaining adult pleasure. As Robert Oscar Lopez writes at Public Discourse:

ThinkstockPhotos-527616603Obergefell brings Roe v. Wade to its climax because it completes the transformation of children into objects. For children will be forced to love gay adults who are not their parents. To Kennedy, gay adults have a right not to feel lonely, which includes the right to start families. In fact, he states that they have a right to “custody” and “birth certificates” (i.e., birth certificates falsified to include two same-sex parents and erase biological parents of the opposite sex). To satisfy the human right to dignity and to thwart the civil injustice of “loneliness,” children must be produced and provided to people who want them, whether or not those people conceived the child by making love.

Children not only can, but must be manufactured. The transfers of custody must generate orphans and abandoned children, paying gamete donors and surrogates to abandon and orphan their offspring, so that this new product—the loving and obedient human being—can be delivered to paying customers.

. . .

The wine-sipping doctor of Planned Parenthood didn’t come out of nowhere. This individual was dealing with people who claimed to be doing research with the fetal tissues. She was educated by a system that framed her brutal trade as not only acceptable, but just and fruitful.

Dr. Nucatola is the inevitable offspring of a society that has no way to discuss humanity, no real lens into the history of past atrocities, no true connection to all the arts and letters left by millennia of writers about what makes us human and why humanity is precious. She is the indispensable sentinel of the society and the educational system that gave us the twin disasters of abortion and gay marriage.

ThinkstockPhotos-119998604We must protect our children and educate them so that future atrocities like the Planned Parenthood scandal will not occur. Our children deserve to know how precious every life is, how every child has a mother and a father, and how every human life is unique and irreplaceable. #AnotherBoy suffered a cruel death because our society has turned its back on its foundation: the family.

To protect our children, we must protect the family. To protect the family, society needs to protect marriage. Without marriage as the union between one man and one woman, our children will be considered “commodities.” Our society can be educated; our children can be protected. When marriage is upheld as only between one man and one woman, children are viewed as they truly are: precious humans, who are the hope for the future.

For the full article, please visit Public Discourse.

White House Witness: Protect Every Child's Right to a Mom and Dad

Join the National Organization for Marriage as we gather in front of the White House to pray the Rosary on August 15th from 10am-12pm. The purpose of this event is to give witness to the nation the glory of God's plan for marriage through prayer, fasting & sacrifice.

Our goal is to have at least 500 men (and women) gathered in front of the White House to show our support for the belief that every child has the right to a mother and a father.

Please see White House Witness for more details. We hope you can make it!

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke

Redefining Marriage Puts All Children at Risk

Our culture has become one focused on satisfying adult desires, no matter the cost. The recent Planned Parenthood scandal reinforces this fact, but its existence is not the cause. Of course, selling baby body parts is disgusting and an egregious offense against humanity, but it can only exist if people want it to exist. And we, as a culture, do.

ThinkstockPhotos-79072286American culture has left chastity by the wayside, thus endangering the lives of the unborn. This first surfaced in the divorce culture, then in the acceptance of abortion, and now in the legalization of same-sex marriage. Ryan T. Anderson explains this progression:

Adults must have what they want, including children. If those children cannot be conceived through a natural act of love, they must be manufactured. Far more children will be destroyed than will be born, of course, but we have decided that adult desires come first.

Giving people the right to get what they want, even a baby, sounds like an expansion of freedom. But it’s not. Activities that were once prohibited are now acceptable, protected, and even privileged. The Supreme Court ensured the legalization of contraception and abortion, for example. And now the government mandates that other people promote them. Obamacare requires employers to provide free contraception and abortifacients, and the State of California and the District of Columbia are attempting to require insurance coverage of elective surgical abortion.

ThinkstockPhotos-100614973Children should be conceived within a relationship that will provide them with the love and care of the man and woman who gave them life. The unborn child has a right to life, yes, but also deserves a mother and father, and where possible the mother and father who brought the child into being. Because of human frailty, it isn’t always possible for a child to be raised in his natural family, but that should be the ideal to which our policy aspires. And we should never intentionally deprive a child of such an upbringing. And yet redefining marriage does precisely that. That’s another reason why Justice Kennedy got the case so wrong.

The only way to ensure the safety of our children is to give them a family--a mother and a father, to love and care for them.

To read Ryan Anderson’s full article, please visit Town Hall.

NOM President Brian Brown Speaks at The FAMiLY Leadership Summit

Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, recently joined Republican presidential candidates and conservative luminaries in addressing the 2,500 activists who attended the FAMiLY LEADER’s Family Leadership Summit, which NOM was proud to co-sponsor. In his interview, Brown discussed the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision, and counseled conservatives on what to do next.

Brian-Brown (1)Speaking out against the current judicial tyranny ruling America, Brown outlined four key points of action for conservatives in the wake of the Supreme Court’s unjust decision:

1. We must affirm that marriage is the lifelong bond between one man and one woman for the purposes of procreation.

2. We must reject the Supreme Court’s decision vehemently in the public square. Pastors must speak out against gay marriage, average people must discuss traditional marriage at the workplace, and lawmakers must fight to repeal the Court’s decision.

3. We must overturn this decision. This point is a particularly daunting task. In the upcoming election we need to elect a president who will champion the cause for the family, and work to overturn this decision within the next election cycle.

4. Until we overturn Obergefell, we must contain the effects of the decision. There are a number of ways to contain the effects of the ruling, including FADA, a bill that guarantees first amendment rights.

Brown ended on an optimistic note, saying never to give up hope; all things are possible with God. He then said that we should be glad that we are to be persecuted—for we have an extraordinary opportunity to stand up for truth.

Watch Brian Brown’s full video interview below:

FLS15-Brown from The Family Leadership Summit on Vimeo.

After Obergefell, Support for Same-sex "Marriage" Drops

As a recent AP-GFK polls shows, 41% of Americans now disapprove of the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage, while only 39% support the decision. As Brietbart reports, when it comes to same-sex marriage conflicting with religious liberty, the numbers are of an even greater difference:

The AP poll reveals that 42% of Americans favor legal gay marriage, while a similar poll carried out last April showed 48% in favor. Moreover, in conflicts between the interests of same-sex couples and those of religious liberty, a majority of Americans (56%) believe that government should rule in favor of religious freedom.

ThinkstockPhotos-521108245The issue of religious freedom seems to be the deciding factor in this turn in opinion. Americans do not like to see their fellow citizens mistreated and harassed by the government for committing no wrong save the crime of having moral convictions. In the past months, wedding related businesses and judges have suffered for holding to their belief in traditional marriage, causing outrage across the country. The AP’s report reflects this fact:

Specifically, more Americans believe that local officials with religious objections should be exempted from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, with 49% siding with the exemption and 47% saying they should be obliged to comply with the law. Moreover, an increasing number of U.S. citizens believe that wedding-related businesses with religious objections should be allowed to refuse service to gay and lesbian couples. Whereas in April 52% thought they should be accorded this option, the number was up to 59% in the recent poll.

“What the Supreme Court did is jeopardize our religious freedoms,” said Michael Boehm, 61, an industrial controls engineer from the Detroit area who describes himself as a conservative-leaning independent.

“You’re going to see a conflict between civil law and people who want to live their lives according to their faiths,” Boehm said.

The poll was conducted in the aftermath of the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision, in which the Supreme Court erasing state laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, effectively making same-sex marriage the law of the land.

Americans will not let the forces of injustice trample upon them. We must never compromise our core beliefs. We must always stand up for truth. The Obergefell decision attacks among other things, the institution of the family, marriage, and religious freedom; the Obergefell decision will not stand.

See Breitbart for more.

"SCOTUS is Not the Final Word on Marriage"

NOM President and co-founder Brian Brown discusses the future of marriage today in the Washington Examiner:

Words in FamilyThis not the first time that the Court has relied on its own conception of liberty to justify a decision. One of the best examples of this phenomenon was the Dred Scott v. Sandford case in which a majority of the Supreme Court ruled that restrictions on slavery were unconstitutional because of the implied right of slaveholders. African Americans were thus not people entitled to the rights of citizens, but instead property subject to the will of their masters.

In terms of its legal reasoning, the marriage case, Obergefell v. Hodges, is the Dred Scott decision of our time. It is illegitimate and completing lacking in constitutional authority. It is the product of unaccountable judges legislating from the bench, usurping the role of elected officials and voters and imposing a social policy on the nation because they think they know best.

And like Dred Scott, America need not accept it as the final word, the "law of the land" or even a decision worthy of respect.

...The decision last week is by no means the final word concerning the definition of marriage. NOM is committed to overturning this ruling and containing its effects.

This is only the beginning of the next phase in the struggle to protect marriage. Read on to learn about three major steps that NOM is taking to reverse this unjust ruling. We will not rest until the injustice of this decision is undone and marriage is restored to our nation's laws as it exists in reality — the union of one man and one woman.