NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Civility

LTE: Rhode Island’s Elected Officials Gave in to Bullying

Marla Parker writes to The Westerly Sun:

The SunThis is in response to the April 22 letter to The Sun by Chris Irwin in which she charges the National Organization for Marriage and the Rev. Raymond Suriani with “bullying.” I ask “who’s bullying whom?”

It is Ms. Irwin’s baseless complaint to the IRS against the Rev. Suriani that constitutes bullying.

She contacted the IRS alleging that the Rev. Suriani engaged in political lobbying when he reminded his parishioners of church teaching on homosexuality and marriage, and encouraged them to exercise their right as American citizens by contacting their senator, whose duty is to represent them and their views at the Statehouse.

This harassment leveled against the Rev. Suriani is a typical intimidation tactic designed to silence all those who disagree with the gay agenda, and it is just the tip of the iceberg. In Sweden and Canada, ministers were jailed for quoting from the Bible and preaching against homosexual behavior once marriage was redefined there.

The redefinition of marriage impacts personal lives well beyond same-sex couples. One’s choice of a partner does not concern me, but when they come to our legislatures and courts and force the rest of us to recognize and accept their relationship as identical to that of a man and a woman, it affects everyone.

SSM Advocates Brazenly Jeopardize Immigration Reform

POLITICO reports on a proposed amendment to the bi-partisan immigration reform bill so long in the making which could end up killing the bill altogether:

The most serious threat to bipartisan immigration reform doesn't involve border security or guest workers or even the path to citizenship.

It’s about gay rights.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an outspoken defender of traditional marriage, warned that " if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart."

Faith groups that have been involved in crafting the legislation are also worried about the negative impacts of this cavalier move which, if viewed unvarnished, is nothing but another attempt to surreptitiously undermine the Defense of Marriage Act:

"We strongly would oppose the provision and it could could force us to reconsider our support for the bill," said Kevin Appleby, director of the Catholic Bishops’ Office of Migration Policy and Public Affairs. "It immediately makes the bill a partisan bill and the bipartisan effort could begin to unravel."

And Alfonso Aguilar, executive director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles, issued a statement against the proposed amendment saying, in part: "We hope that President Obama and Democrats in Congress are not willing to sacrifice the legalization of millions of undocumented immigrants for the sake of appeasing the gay lobby."

“Femen” Activists Disrupt Event, Assault Archbishop

Here is the story from globalpost:

The four protesters leapt out of their seats at a debate on blasphemy and freedom of expression held at the Brussels' Free University (ULB) campus Tuesday evening, baring their breasts and squirting water at Archbishop Andre Leonard as they accused him of homophobia.

The story notes:

[T]he archbishop himself remained composed and apparently at prayer throughout.

The women used water bottles made for blessed holy water, shaped like Catholic statues of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The picture to the left shows Archbishop Leonard picking up and kissing one of the bottles following the disruption.

Gay Marriage: About the Children Whether We Like It or Not

Thomas Crown in RedState:

Two of the more interesting (where “interesting” is a euphemism for “horrifying”) aspects of the debate over gay “marriage” are inexorably intertwined: the decision by the movement’s backers to pretend that there is no strong connection between marriage and children (this is overwhelmingly done by those who do not have children) and a separate but related track to “get government out of marriage,” which is treated as some sort of tactical decision to, er, divorce government from its ability to decide who may marry and when.

The former is overwhelmingly done by libertarians who have taken the curious position that the failure by the state to expand a right is the same as the affirmative denial of that right, and by liberals who do not understand what rights actually are. The latter is a position taken by libertarians who believe the state’s role in marriage reaching back centuries is part of the nanny state, and conservatives who either legitimately want to preserve marriage from the barbarians or who like sounding good to their more left-wing friends.

Yet it is in the confluence of these two fantasies that the lie of both is exposed. I think it is helpful, as we embark on destroying yet another social institution and just assuming something else will pop up in its place, to understand what we are doing and what its likeliest consequences are.

These consequences, of course, somehow involve children.

School Cancels Santorum Speech Over Marriage Views

The new "tolerance" -- simply blocking pro-marriage figures from sharing their views on any topic:

A Michigan high school canceled a speech by former Sen. Rick Santorum after teachers became outraged over his opposition to gay marriage and threatened to stage protests and a possible work stoppage.

Santorum had been invited to deliver a upcoming speech on leadership by the Young Americans for Freedom chapter at Gross Pointe South High School. But the speech was canceled on Monday after the school district’s superintendent heard from angry teachers.

“It’s a sad day when liberal educators are allowed to influence young minds – extending free speech rights only to those who share their liberal views,” Santorum said in a statement posted on Patriot Voices. “This has nothing to do with the content of a speech, but rather the context of my convictions.” (FoxNews Nation)

CNN, MSNBC Refuse to Interview Gay Son After He Refuses to Bash Father

The Blaze reports on the media bias against those who hold traditional views of marriage -- as we know all too well:

During an interview Sunday, Rep. Matt Salmon's (R-Ariz.) gay sontold KPNX-TV that CNN and MSNBC cancelled interviews with him after he told them he would not bash his father for his stance againstgay marriage.

Matt R. Salmon told KPNX-TV that he is disappointed that his father has not changed his position on gay marriage, however, he still enjoys a good relationship with him and supports him. He also said his father is not a "bigot."

"People want controversy," Salmon said.

Accused of canceling the interviews are MSNBC's "The Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell" and CNN's "Piers Morgan Live."

The younger Salmon said MSNBC cancelled his scheduled interview because "they had intended to be critical of him and" he was unwilling to do so. Additionally, he claimed CNN was "very gung ho" about doing an interview but then became disinterested when he reiterated he wouldn't attack his dad.

Pastor on FoxNews: Gay Marriage Opponents Are The Oppressed Ones

This week Megyn Kelly interviewed a panel of pastors on FoxNews about their views on marriage and how the debate needs to change:

Rep. Matt Salmon: Gay Son Hasn’t Changed My Views on Gay Marriage

The Washington Post's Post Politics blog:

In an interview aired over the weekend, Rep. Matt J. Salmon (R-Ariz.) told a local news station that his son’s homosexuality has not led him to change his position on gay marriage.

“I don’t support the gay marriage,” the congressman said. But Salmon emphasized that he loved and respected his son and did not consider homosexuality a choice.

“My son is by far one of the most important people in my life. I love him more than I can say,” an emotional Salmon told 3TV. “It doesn’t mean that I don’t have respect, it doesn’t mean that I don’t sympathize with some of the issues. It just means I haven’t evolved to that stage.”

... “We respect each others’ opinions and we just know that on certain issues we have to agree to disagree,” the congressman’s son, Matt R. Salmon, told The Post. “I love my father and realize that he can have the opinions that he has, and they might differ from mine, but that doesn’t change the way I feel about him.”

... Salmon also expressed disappointment in those who have reacted to the interview by leaving “hate speech” on his father’s Facebook page. “If he’s going to change his mind it’s going to come from a place of love,” Salmon said. “All they’re doing is fighting intolerance with intolerance.”

Shame on Piers Morgan and Suze Orman -- I Stand With Ryan!

Earlier this week Piers Morgan and Suze Orman conduct one of the most rude, condescending "debates" I've ever seen. I've seen dozens of debates on marriage where rudeness and incivility were directed towards those with pro-marriage views but this takes the cake.

Ryan Anderson, a fellow at Heritage and co-author of "What is Marriage?" patiently gave lucid answers to their questions, even as Piers peppered him with questions without giving him time to respond.

It wasn't a conversation, it was a trial.

They didn't even allow Ryan to sit at the same table as them. Orman went so far as to call Anderson "uneducated" on the question of marriage and insultingly called him "sweetheart".

On the "uneducated" remark, consider what Denny Burk points out:

"Ryan Anderson graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude from Princeton University and he’s a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Notre Dame. He just co-authored a book that is probably the definitive case for traditional marriage. He’s a fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an all-around brilliant guy. "

At the 12 minute mark, Orman loses control and lashes out at Anderson, pointing her finger at him, etc.

Piers did nothing to intervene or stop her, even as he continually interrupted Anderson.

Then, as if that was not enough, she called on the audience to express their disapproval of Anderson personally by booing, etc.

This is a travesty and Piers Morgan and Orman owe Anderson and pro-marriage Americans an apology.

That's why I'm proudly proclaiming I STAND WITH RYAN on Twitter and Facebook.

Watch the video and see for yourself:

Video: Sen Rubio at CPAC: It's Not Bigotry for Me to Be Pro-Marriage

Sen. Marco Rubio, during his CPAC speech, calls out those who would label pro-marriage Americans like him "bigots" simply for supporting marriage:

ConservativeHQ: Buy A Comic Book To Stand For Marriage

A special shout-out to ConservativeHQ for coming to the defense of Orson Scott Card, author of Ender's Game, who has come under fire for his pro-marriage views:

Orson Scott Card, a talented science fiction writer, is part of a team of writers and artists assembled by DC Comics to create an “Adventures of Superman” comic series ahead of the release of the summer Superman film Man of Steel.* Card is also a believer in the Biblical definition of marriage who has the courage to say so.

Orson Scott Card’s views, such as “the left is at war with the family,” and opposition to same sex marriage are reflective of his Christian faith and hardly “out of the mainstream,” but they have now earned him and DC comics a call from homosexual activists for a boycott.

National Organization for Marriage President Brian Brown told Fox News he was simply stunned that homosexual activists are trying to destroy a man’s career.

“This is completely un-American and it needs to be stopped,” Brown said. “Simply because we stand up for traditional marriage, some people feel like it is okay to target us for intimidation and punishment.”

Brown called the attacks on Card frightening and said it’s another example of radical homosexual activists trying to punish those who believe marriage should be a union between a man and woman.

“Marriage is the union of a man and a woman,” Brown said. “That is not hateful. That is not bigoted.”

Rod Dreher Condemns Treating Orson Scott Card Like a "Thought-Criminal"

Rod Dreher writes at The American Conservative:

Orson Scott Card is one of the best-selling science fiction writers alive. He is also a devout Mormon who opposes same-sex marriage. A group of pro-gay comics fans is up in arms over the fact that DC has hired Card to write a new Superman series. The Guardian is making it sound like a huge deal:

... “Superman stands for truth, justice and the American way. Orson Scott Card does not stand for any idea of truth, justice or the American way that I can subscribe to,” said Jono Jarrett of Geeks Out, a gay fan group. “It’s a deeply disappointing and frankly weird choice.”

A film of Ender’s Game, co-produced by Card and starring Harrison Ford, is set to be released in November. Jarrett speculated DC was hoping pre-publicity for the movie would drive sales for the comic.

Fortunately, a gay comic writer quoted in the piece understands that blacklisting Card is offensive:

Dale Lazarov, a gay comic writer, said it was counterproductive to attack Card’s appointment: “I’ve known Orson Scott Card is a raging homophobe since the early 90s. I refuse to buy or read his work. But asking that he be denied work because he is a raging homophobe is taking it too far. Asking for workplace discrimination for any reason is counterproductive for those who want to end discrimination on their own behalf.”

True enough. What does Card’s view on homosexuality have to do with Superman? This is about trying to punish Card for thoughtcrime.

ACTION: Tell SPLC to Take Down the "Hate Map" Used by FRC Shooter to Target Victims

Becket Adams of The Blaze:

The Family Research Council shooter, Floyd Lee Corkins II, on Wednesday pleaded guilty to charges that include assault with intent to kill and committing an act of terrorism.

Shockingly enough, Corkins told FBI agents that he chose FRC as a target based on the liberal Southern Poverty Law Center’s “hate map.”

In case you were unaware, the Southern Poverty Law Center has designated FRC a “hate group” because of the conservative organization’s position on gay marriage:

It is absolutely extraordinary to me that, as of this writing, almost a week after these revelations have been made public, SPLC has still not taken down their hate map.

This hate map includes at the top a photo of (presumably) neo-nazis in military style gear. If you look on the SPLC Hate Map it lists the Family Research Council (and Traditional Values Coalition) as "Anti-Gay". Click on that link and you see this image:

More faces of hate, more provocation.

But it doesn't end there. The SPLC includes a photo of FRC President Tony Perkins alongside images of graphic, anti-gay imagery that FRC and Tony Perkins has condemned repeatedly!

The SPLC Hate Map is not designed to bring hatred to light. It is designed to instigate hatred against the people it lists.

The SPLC still lists the Family Research Council, which so recently would have been the scene of a human massacre were it not for the heroic actions of the security guard who was shot in the process, on this Hate Map. Even after a killer admitted he used this map to find victims and unleash his own hatred at them with a gun.

SPLC, take down your Hate Map. Ending hatred starts with you.

PLEASE TAKE ACTION BY SIGNING THE PETITION FOR SPLC TO TAKE DOWN ITS HATE MAP HERE.

FOIA Request Reveals Cozy Relationship Between DoJ and SPLC

LifeSiteNews:

Documents uncovered from a Freedom of Information Act request show the Obama administration's Department of Justice enjoys a close relationship with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an organization that brands principled opposition to homosexuality “hate.”

The SPLC has built an elaborate fundraising empire by branding mainstream Christian ministries – including the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America – as “hate groups” for opposing homosexuality.

The legal watchdog Judicial Watch filed the request to see what effect SPLC's designation of “hate groups” had on the government. The two-dozen pages of e-mails it received reveal views of DOJ employees that border on adulation.

The department invited co-founder Morris Dees to appear as the featured speaker at a July 31, 2012, “Diversity Training Event.” The Assistant Attorney General's office “wants to take Morris out to lunch” before his simulcast remarks, entitled “With Justice for All,” one e-mail stated.

A “training blurb” stated that the event “qualifies for mandatory annual diversity training.”

“I will pick you [Morris Dees] up at the airport July 30,” DOJ employee Barry Kowalski wrote Dees in an e-mail. “Would you go out to dinner with my wife and me and our two teenage daughters that first night? The girls need some inspiration from a master of inspiration,” he gushed.

Chorus of Voices Decry Media Double-Standard on FRC Shooter, SPLC

Top conservative writers and bloggers are all pointing out the double standard the media is applying to the FRC shooter and SPLC, compared to the outcry the media expressed in the wake of the Rep. Gabby Giffords shooting as they attempted to pin the violence on right-wing politics.

Breitbart:

"...It's impossible not to notice that this is precisely what many on the left accused Sarah Palin of doing in January 2011 after Jared Loughner shot Rep. Giffords and several bystanders in a Tucson parking lot. At the time, the left claimed Palin's district map featuring crosshairs might have given Loughner ideas. No connection between the map and the shooting was ever found. Indeed, it turned out Loughner had been obsessed with Giffords before Palin's map even existed.

Now that anti-right, anti-hate SPLC is implicated in providing targets for a politically motivated mass shooter will the national media turn on the SPLC the way they did on Sarah Palin?"

Erick Erickson of RedState:

"...Floyd Lee Corkins, II, who shot a security guard at the Family Research Center as he attempted to shoot up the organization was directly inspired to take action by a list of supposed “hate groups” on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s website.

... I hope my friends in the media who spent much time talking about Sarah Palin’s political target map will now talk about the Southern Poverty Law Center’s routine and reckless use of the label “hate group” with which is smears conservatives.

By the way, Palin took down her target map after the controversy. The Southern Poverty Law Center? Crickets..."

HotAir:

"...Why yes, this is eerily similar to the left claiming after Gabby Giffords was shot that Palin’s “crosshairs” election map inspired Jared Loughner. With two differences. First, Loughner was not, in fact, inspired by Palin whereas this guy, per his own plea bargain, did consult the SPLC website in choosing people to kill. Second, you’ll see zero coverage of this inconvenient entry in the canon of political hate in wider media because it can’t be used as a blunt object with which to bludgeon the right.

... Funny thing, though: The SPLC itself was verrrrry quick to try to tie Jared Loughner to the “far right”, and kept at it long enough that they were posting speculative pieces about “political rhetoric” and its role in the Tucson shooting as late as 13 days after it occurred. Not only are they comfortable with a free-speech slippery slope when it’s right-wingers who are at risk, they’re willing and eager to add some grease."