NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Featured

Boys in the Girls' Room in Frederick County, MD?

 

The Board of Education of Frederick County, Maryland is considering a policy that endangers the privacy and safety of the county’s students by allowing "access to facilities, including rest rooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities, that correspond to their gender identity […] without question" [emphasis added].

Below are some important action items for you to consider, but first I'm including more information about this dangerous policy. You can read the policy in full here (PDF).

If you're already familiar with it, feel free to skip below to see how you can help today, or simply go online and sign our petition about this policy now:

Please take immediate action to defend students' privacy and safety in Frederick County today!


This ominous policy is far-reaching in its implications. If adopted, it would mandate that:

  • “All students [would] have access to facilities, including rest rooms, locker rooms, or changing facilities, that correspond to their gender identity. Access [would be] provided without question or additional complicating procedure. Students, including non-binary students, [would] determine which facilities are consistent with their gender identity."
  • “Under no circumstance [would] any student [be] required or directed to use a private use facility.”
    “Students [would be permitted to participate in sports and phys. ed. Classes] in a manner consistent with their gender identity” and “[t]he gender identity of student-athletes [would not be required] to be disclosed to coaches, teammates, opponent’s coaches, or anyone else….”
  • On “overnight field trips,” any student would have “the opportunity to room with others according to their gender identity,” and while efforts would be made to “accommodate any student who desires greater privacy… no student should be isolated.”
  • Students and all staff who work with students would be required to refer to students by their chosen name and pronouns, and be provided “a current and complete list of preferred names and pronouns for all students” to be used “in every interaction.” There would also be no dress code for events based on gender.
  • Finally, and most dangerously of all, the policy states: “Depending on privacy needs or a transgender student’s own personal transition, school staff are authorized to work with students (and their families, if students explicitly wish) to provide options that may support a student’s needs” [emphasis added] - which implies that schools might work independently of parents in implementing policies having to do directly with children’s health, safety, privacy, and general welfare!

This policy is not only absurd, it is dangerous. With this policy, the Board of Education adopts the view of LGBT activists that “gender nonconforming” or “non-binary” students are the only ones with “rights,” and ignores the basic rights of privacy and safety of all other students. It puts the agenda of gender redefinition, a political tool being used by radical activists throughout society, ahead of the privacy and safety of students in intimate spaces like locker rooms and bathrooms. To satisfy the whims of activists and powerful lobbyists from Hollywood and Washington, DC, the Frederick County Board of Education would - without regard to parents’ wishes - force students to use the restroom, to shower, and even to cohabitate overnight with members of the opposite sex! All this in the name of “creating [a] welcoming and affirming]” environment for students who suffer from gender confusion!

So now it is time for us to take action!


Here is how you can help:

We have launched an online petition to the Board of Education urging them to reject this dangerous policy. Please visit and sign this petition right away!

Sign Our Petition Today!

Secondly, if you are able, consider attending the next Board meeting, where this policy is scheduled to be discussed. The meeting will be on Wednesday, June 14th at 6:00 PM in the FCPS Board Room, 191 South East Street in Frederick.

Finally, please share this email with your friends and family in Maryland, especially in Frederick County, and alert as many people to this urgent matter as you can!

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

NOM, CitizenGO and IOF Wrap Up Successful, Enlightening #FreeSpeechBus Tour

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2017 at 12:00 PM (EDT)
Contact: Joseph Grabowski (202) 276-4404 | [email protected]


NOM, CitizenGO and IOF Wrap Up Successful, Enlightening #FreeSpeechBus Tour

Bus Tour Exposes Intolerance, Hate of LGBT Activists; Reveals Deep Coordination with Democrat Politicians, Anarchists

Washington, D.C.–The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), CitizenGO and the International Organization for the Family (IOF) today wrapped their #FreeSpeechBus tour intended to spark a national discussion about the biological truth of gender with a visit to the nation's capital in Washington, DC. The organizers said the tour revealed the ugly side of the LGBT movement, which engaged in violence and assault, and inflicted substantial property damage, in a failed effort to derail the bus tour. They also said that the response to the tour indicated deep coordination between the LGBT movement, Democratic politicians and anarchists who are committed to the destruction of civil society. Organizers said the tour was a success in that it highlighted the vicious intolerance shown to anyone in society who expresses dissent regarding the transgender agenda.

"We launched the #FreeSpeechBus tour as a way to spark a conversation about gender, that it is determined by biology rather than by emotions and feelings, and to call for all sides to respect the free speech rights of citizens to debate these issues without fear of being demeaned, harassed, or threatened with retaliation," said Brian S. Brown, president of NOM and IOF. "What we encountered was a sustained, violent, coordinated attack designed to shut us down and force us to just go away. They failed to stop the tour or silence us, and, ironically, in the process made our very point that they don't want to debate the issues and instead will use force and political power to silence Christians and all Americans who understand that biology determines gender."

On the first day of the bus tour, the #FreeSpeechBus was attacked by two LGBT activists while parked near the United Nations in New York City. They assaulted the African American bus driver and destroyed several of the bus's windows with a hammer, while also using graffiti to cover the bus with militant "trans liberation" messages. After repairs, the bus continued the tour to Boston, New Haven, Philadelphia and concluded in Washington, DC. Along the way, it was frequently met by an angry mob of LGBT extremists and anarchists. It was revealed that prominent Democratic politicians were involved in promoting the violence and hate, including coordinating with anarchist groups.

"In Philadelphia, Mayor Jim Kenney's office was deeply involved in organizing the violent demonstrations against us, including coordinating with anarchist groups that are closely watched by the FBI," said Ignacio Arsuaga, president of CitizenGo. "The mayor's Office of LGBT Affairs proudly referred to themselves as 'an accomplice' in organizing protests which turned violent, with attacks on the bus and on police officers by gay activists and anarchists. At least one of them was arrested and bus organizers were prevented from speaking, an act of intolerant bullying the Mayor's office takes pride in. Meanwhile, while we were being prevented from engaging in a discussion with the protestors, the mayors of both Philadelphia and Boston ordered LGBT/transgendered flags to be flown at City Hall."

Brown noted that the intolerance and violence shown to those who hold traditional, majoritarian beliefs about the biological nature of gender is a powerful argument why Congress should move forward immediately to pass the First Amendment Defense Act, legislation which would prevent the federal government from discriminating against people of faith based on their views of gender and similar matters. "No American should be subjected to discrimination or harassment by the government simply for standing by their deeply held beliefs about the nature of gender, marriage and similar subjects. Citizens on both sides of these debates should be able to express their viewpoints without the heavy hand of government harassing and discriminating against them."

# # #

To schedule an interview with a representative of any of  NOM, IOF, or CitizenGO, please contact:
Joseph Grabowski, [email protected], (202) 276-4404.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Watch and Share our Video on Religious Liberty

  Dear Marriage Supporter, NOM has produced a critically important video on religious liberty that I am asking you to watch and share widely with your friends, family and contacts. You can watch the video here. Please do so ASAP!

As you may know, President Trump is considering an urgently-needed Executive Order to protect people of faith from discrimination and retribution by the government because of their faith beliefs, including their beliefs about marriage. But powerful opponents are working to convince him to abandon the Order, which is why it's so important that you watch this video today and share it with everyone you can.

Former President Obama and his administration targeted people of faith and faith-based nonprofit groups with damaging policies that were designed to force them to abandon their faith and adopt an extreme leftist secular agenda on marriage, life, gender and many other matters. Those who held firm to the teachings of their faith were punished – some lost their jobs, others were sued and fined, business and charities were closed and reputations were ruined. All this simply because Christians and other people of faith did not want to violate their faith.

As the video says clearly, it's unconscionable and unconstitutional to force people to abandon their religious faith. The first and most immediate step needed to correct this outrage is for President Trump to sign the draft Executive Order protecting religious liberty. Then Congress must act to make it permanent by passing the First Amendment Defense Act.

The more people who see this critical video, the bigger the impact it will have. So I am asking you to do three things right now:
  1. Please watch the video.
  2. Please send the video link to all your friends, family and contacts and ask them to watch it and share it with others.
  3. If you use Twitter, please send out a tweet using #ATimeForChoosing #ChooseReligiousLiberty and include a link to the video. Ask your friends and contacts to do the same.
It is a blessing from God that we have this opportunity to encourage President Trump to sign the pending Executive Order on Religious Liberty. Had Hillary Clinton been elected last November, we would have had no hope that she would do the right thing. Now that Mr. Trump has assumed office, it's important that we get him to act in pursuit of his promise to do everything in his power to protect religious liberty in our nation.

Remember, watch the video, share it widely, and if you are on Twitter, send a tweet today. Faithfully, Brian S Brown   PS — This video is the first element of a major new initiative that NOM is undertaking called the First Freedom Initiative. Look for more info on this critical project soon. Donate today!

Fake News Drawn from a Flimsy Study

A recent study in the journal JAMA Pediatrics has caused a lot of buzz in the press. The study claims to trace the “Association Between State Same-Sex Marriage Policies and Adolescent Suicide Attempts” among LGBT youth and is being presented by the media as "proof" that gay marriage saves lives.

But like much of the fake news coverage this study has generated, the study itself leads people to a  fake conclusion: that somehow the enactment of same-sex marriage results in reduced teen suicide attempts, especially for  LGBT teens. In fact, the study proves nothing of the sort. Indeed, some data in the report suggest the opposite may be true in states that have had experience with same-sex marriage the longest.

The study begins with the presentation of its conclusions as if they were facts proven by the study. The report opens with a tidy summary and easy to swallow conclusion: Same-sex marriage enactment is associated with reduced teen-suicide attempts. The authors' biases don't become evident until the reader dives into the actual report, including the astonishing statement that, "Policies preventing same-sex marriage constitute a form of structural stigma because they label sexual minorities as different and deny them legal, financial, health and other benefits that are associated with marriage." This is a political statement, not a statement of established scientific fact. As we will discuss further down, it is also subject to question because the study authors don't look at things like civil union and domestic partnership laws that were in place in some states and for all intents and purposes treated same-sex unions exactly the same as opposite-sex ones. This is especially true in states like California.

Further, the authors' conclusions neatly presented on Page 1 and upon which all the fake media coverage is based give no hint of the inherent unreliability of the study that the authors themselves acknowledge, but notably only deep in the body of the report: "The analyses on the association between implementation of same-sex marriage policies and adolescent suicide attempts among those identifying as sexual minorities should be interpreted with caution."

This is like burying the lede: the fact is that the entire study should be viewed cautiously.

In a brief and insufficient acknowledgement, also rather buried within the text, the authors admit that while they have traced a correlation between redefining marriage and reduced teen suicides (in some states), they cannot affix a causal relationship between the two: "[O]ur analysis does not allow us to understand the mechanisms through which implementation of same-sex marriage policies reduced adolescent suicide attempts."

The reality is that the conclusions of the study are subject to numerous and significant warnings throughout the text itself that the results may not be reliable. For example, "it is unclear what drives greater rates of suicide attempts among adolescents who are sexual minorities"…"[we] emphasize that these estimates are subject to bias"…"complex survey design"…"The analyses on the association…should be interpreted with caution."

Furthermore, there is data in the study that actually undercuts and shows the opposite of the conclusions reported. For example, in Figure 2, data from some of the states that implemented same-sex "marriage" before 2013, suicide attempts appear to have risen after this implementation. The mean also appears to have risen in recent years, and may be the same or only exceedingly tiny percentage below where it started. In other words, there may be little to no difference, and in some states like New York there seem to be rising rates of teen suicide attempts, since same-sex 'marriage' was enacted.

It is also questionable, as we mentioned earlier ,whether the authors haven't mis-categorized certain states, like California, by putting them in the category of "Wave 2" (i.e., states that implemented same-sex 'marriage' in 2013/14). The authors say, "We defined the exposure as a state-level policy granting same-sex marriage rights as opposite sex couples." If, as the authors state, teen suicide attempts are attributable to "stigma" caused in part by denying them "legal, financial, health and other benefits that are associated with marriage," it would be instructive to look at state data for states like California which for many years have had expansive domestic partner or civil union legislation eradicating any legal distinction between couples. The study's authors say that California courts provided for same-sex 'marriage' in 2013, but fail to mention that California has been a domestic partner state since 2004, with policies benefiting gay couples that are "associated with marriage" that meant there was no legal difference as to how the state treated opposite-sex married couples compared with same-sex couples in a domestic partnership. The same is the case for states that had expansive civil union laws.

It would be interesting to look at the state-by-state data of actual teen attempted suicide numbers by year, so that we could compare states like California that for a long time have provided expansive benefits to gay couples vs those that do not. Unfortunately, the study does not provide that data to examine, leaving us to rely only on the authors' representations.

Most fundamentally, though, the key point is this: that even given all the cautionary notes, biases, etc., there is nothing in the report to show that same-same 'marriage' causes a reduction in suicide attempts among teens. The authors acknowledge this deep in the body of the report, but fail to note it in presenting their now highly-publicized conclusions. There is simply an alleged correlation between two things -- teen suicide attempts and same-sex marriage -- and not any proof that one is impacted by the other.

In the classic logical fallacy -- since "A" happened, followed by "B" happening, "B" was caused by A" -- readers are led to a conclusion that is not established by the evidence. Such is the case with the JAMA report.  What other correlations could be used to advance a similar conclusion, one wonders? Obamacare was passed in 2010. Are changes in attempted teen suicide rates associated with Obamacare? What about the enactment of DACA, which was created in 2012? What about Dodd Frank, which was enacted in 2010? Or the stimulus plan enacted in 2009?

We do not pretend to understand the authors' motivations for presenting their study in the way they did, and we don't intend to impugn them personally or professionally. But the simple truth is that the authors have presented a study that leads people to a fake conclusion that is not established by the facts. There is no evidence whatsoever in this report that passage of same-sex 'marriage' reduces teen suicide attempts. The authors admit this in the report. The fact that the mainstream media has run with this study as "proof" just shows their own bias.

New Executive Order Will Keep Key Campaign Promises, and Protect Religion on Many Fronts

Writing at The Daily Signal, our good friend Ryan Anderson comments on a leaked draft of a forthcoming executive order from President Trump's administration that protects religious liberty on several fronts. The leak itself, and the ensuing coverage in the media, may exert pressure on the administration not to issue the order, but Ryan explains why we should all hope that that doesn't happen. This order is "good policy and entirely lawful."

Ryan summarizes the chief tenets of the order as follows:

  • It tells the entire federal government to respect federal statutes and Supreme Court decisions that make clear the free exercise of religion applies to all people, of all faiths, in all places, and at all times—that it is not merely the freedom to worship.
  • It notes that religious organizations include all organizations operated by religious principles, not just houses of worship or charities. And it follows the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in saying that religious exercise “includes all aspects of religious observance and practice,” not just those absolutely required by a faith.
  • It instructs all agencies of the federal government, “to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law,” to reasonably accommodate the religion of federal employees, as required by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
  • It instructs the secretaries of health and human services, labor, and treasury to finally grant relief to the Little Sisters of the Poor and others who weren’t exempted from the Obamacare abortifacient and contraception mandate.
  • It instructs the secretary of health and human services to ensure that all citizens have the ability to purchase health care plans through Obamacare that do not cover abortion or subsidize plans that do.
  • It instructs the secretary of health and human services to ensure that the federal government does not discriminate against child welfare providers, such as foster care and adoption services, based on the organization’s religious beliefs.
  • It adopts the Russell Amendment and instructs all agencies of the federal government to provide protections and exemptions consistent with the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities Act to all religious organizations that contract with the federal government or receive grants.
  • It instructs the secretary of the treasury to ensure that it does not revoke nonprofit tax status because a religious organization’s ordinary religious speech deals with politics, or because it speaks or acts on the belief that marriage is the union of husband and wife, that a person’s sex is based on immutable biology, or that life begins at conception.
  • It instructs all agencies of the federal government to refuse to recognize any decision by a federally recognized accrediting body that revokes or denies accreditation to an organization because of such beliefs.
  • It instructs all agencies that they may not take adverse action against federal employees, contractors, or grantees because of their speech about marriage outside of their employment, contract, or grant, and that agencies shall reasonably accommodate such beliefs inside of employment, contract, or grant.

Read the whole summary and commentary over at The Daily Signal.

NOM Brief in Gloucester County School Board v. G.G.

CLICK HERE TO READ AT SCRIBD

NOM Endorses Dr. John Fleming for US Senate in Louisiana

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 14, 2016
Contact: Joseph Grabowski (202) 457-8060 x-110 | [email protected]


"John Fleming has been a champion for marriage, religious liberty, life and family values his entire career in Congress. He's a proven leader, a true champion, and an honorable man." - Brian Brown, NOM President

nom_logoWashington, D.C. – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced it has endorsed Dr. John Fleming for US Senate in Louisiana, calling him a "true champion" in support of marriage, life, religious liberty and parental rights.

In an endorsement video released today, NOM's president Brian Brown said, "John Fleming has been a champion for marriage, religious liberty, life and family values his entire career in Congress. He’s fought for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage, and for the sanctity of human life; stood for religious freedom and parental rights; worked to promote fatherhood and encourage fathers to take responsibility for their children; and championed a national day of prayer. He's a proven leader, a true champion, and an honorable man."

 

NOM's endorsement video pointed out that the next Senator from Louisiana could cast the deciding vote on the confirmation of US Supreme Court justices and potentially decide the future direction of the Supreme Court, making it one of the most consequential votes in history.

Brown said, "We can count on Dr. John Fleming to make sure that only conservative justices like Antonin Scalia are confirmed to the Court, people who are committed to upholding the constitution. We cannot allow the policies of Barack Obama to live on for decades through an activist Supreme Court controlled by liberals."

NOM said it would distribute its endorsement video to supporters across the country and encourage them to contribute to support Fleming’s election. Dr. Fleming is seeking the seat of retiring Senator David Vitter. The top two candidates in November will advance to a run-off in December.

# # #

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, please contact:
Joseph Grabowski, [email protected], (202) 457-8060 x-110.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Judge Halts Obama Administration's Transgender Agenda

Breaking news today via Reuters:

A U.S. judge blocked Obama administration guidance that transgender public school students must be allowed to use bathrooms of their choice, granting a nationwide injunction sought by a group of 13 states led by Texas.

Reed O'Connor, a judge for the Northern District of Texas, said in a decision late on Sunday that the Obama administration did not follow proper procedures for notice and comment in issuing the guidelines. He said the guidelines contradict with existing legislative and regulatory texts.

[...]

At a hearing on the injunction in Fort Worth on Aug. 12, lawyers for Texas said the guidelines usurp the authority of school districts nationwide. They said they were at risk of losing billions of dollars in federal funding for education if they did not comply.

U.S. Department of Justice lawyers sought to dismiss the injunction, saying the federal guidelines issued in May were non-binding with no legal consequences.

The guidance issued by the Justice Department and Education Department said public schools must allow transgender students to use bathrooms, locker rooms and other intimate facilities that correspond with their gender identity, as opposed to their birth gender, or face the loss of federal funds.

Under the injunction, the Obama administration is prohibited from enforcing the guidelines on "against plaintiffs and their respective schools, school boards, and other public, educationally based institutions," O'Connor wrote.

Read the whole article here.

Target feeling the pressure, but the fight isn't over

NO!Following Target's decision earlier this year to institute a policy whereby biological men could on a whim gain access to bathrooms and changing rooms normally reserved for girls and women, NOM and other conservative groups launched a boycott of the store to let them know that this kind of ideological move was not only dangerous for its customers but also insulting and bad for business.

In the months since, with stories cropping up regularly of how the policy was backfiring, Target has definitely felt the pressure, and this week comes news that the store is at least beginning to see the errors of its ways. From the Chicago Tribune:

Target said Wednesday that it is preparing to spend $20 million in coming months to add single-stall bathrooms along with men's and women's restrooms in its stores, a move meant to accommodate shoppers concerned about the retailers' policy of allowing customers and employees to use the bathroom that corresponds to the gender they identify with.

The story goes on to note some of the staggering statistics of Target's reported sales and projections which show that the boycotts have had a serious impact on the store, as much as the corporate execs and the media would like to downplay this.

However, this move by Target is only a beginning of righting the wrong of enforcing a dangerous gender ideology that puts women and girls at least in a very uncomfortable and unseemly - if not dangerous - situation of needing to undress in front of members of the opposite sex. (You'll note that this new "accommodation" of single-occupancy facilities is ironically for those who feel uncomfortable being in such a situation with members of the opposite sex, rather than the small minority of those who don't identify with their own biological sex!)

So, we need to keep up the pressure!

If you still haven't pledge to "Say No To Target," we encourage you to do so today. It's working!

Frank Schubert: "Republican Voters Are Not 'Moving On' From Marriage"

From NOM's political director, Frank Schubert, comes this piece in Public Discourse:

It’s rarely covered by the media, but the political landscape is littered with the wrecked careers of Republicans who abandoned the party’s commitment to marriage as it has always existed, which is a foundational institution of virtually every faith tradition on the planet.

[...]

It should be acknowledged that these races often involve more than the marriage issue. There is usually a range of issues at play in any contested race, whether for the state legislature or Congress. But unquestionably, marriage was a critical issue in all of these contests. Marriage was the issue that drove conservatives to oppose and ultimately defeat incumbents like Anne Zerr in Missouri.

Finally, it is also important to note the importance that support for marriage played most recently in the GOP when grassroots Republican activists made their views clear in crafting the national Republican Party platform last month in Cleveland. Despite an organized and well-funded campaign by Wall Street billionaires and corporate lobbyists to “modernize” the party’s official position on marriage, convention delegates utterly rejected the notion. The 2016 GOP platform is the most pro-traditional marriage platform ever adopted. It specifically calls for reversing the Obergefell ruling redefining marriage. It explicitly condemns as the product of activist judges the rulings on marriage in both Obergefell and the Windsor case that overturned the federal Defense of Marriage Act, and it calls for the appointment of Supreme Court justices who will reject their reasoning. It endorses the First Amendment Defense Act to protect supporters of marriage from governmental persecution. And it calls for a constitutional amendment to return to the states their right to define marriage solely as the union of one man and one woman.

Never fans of social issues to begin with, it’s a safe bet that the consulting class, corporate lobbyists, and wealthy donors will ignore the mountain of evidence all around them that rank and file Republican activists and voters revere marriage and will act to defend it. But Republican candidates should come to understand that succumbing to the pleadings of the elite echo chamber can come at a very high price: their very political careers.

Read the whole thing here.

Evan McMullin: Not a Viable Conservative Alternative

Recently, an independent Presidential candidate touting "conservative" credentials has come onto the political scene posing as an alternative to Donald Trump for those who have not decided to support the Republican nominee.

Recently, though, McMullin gave an interview to Bloomberg Politics where his answers to some questions on same-sex marriage raise concerns about his claims to conservative credibility [emphases added]:

McMullin

INTERVIEWER: Same-sex marriage.

MCMULLIN: Sure.

INTERVIEWER: It's happened very quickly. It's now legal. Are you comfortable with the way it's happened and the current state of the law of the land on same-sex marriage?

MCMULLIN: Well, my position on that is, uh, that as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint, I believe in traditional marriage, between a man and a woman, but I respect the decision of the Court and I think it's time to move on.

INTERVIEWER: Along those lines, you said you want to push a lot for the Federal level down to the State level.

MCMULLIN: Yeah.

INTERVIEWER: Is that something you think should be handled by the States and not the Federal government?

MCMULLIN: Ideally, yes, but it's been handled by the Supreme Court, and that's where it is.

INTERVIEWER: But are you saying your personal preference is that marriage should be only legal between a man and a woman, but not just you accept the Court but that you're fine with the change?

MCMULLIN: This, this is a decision of faith for me, it's something of faith for me, but my faith isn't everybody else's faith and I make my decisions for me on those kinds of things--and...

INTERVIEWER: So--so, you're personally opposed to it, but you're--you're comfortable with the law of the land? In other words, you wouldn't--for instance--try to appoint Justices, nominate Justices, who would overturn--the decision?

MCMULLIN: I--I wouldn't on that.

You can view the entire interview here.

"I was terminated because of my religion"

Another sad story of the "tolerance" of the LGBT movement comes to us today from Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, writing at CNSNews.com:

In May, Javier Chavez, senior store detective at the Macy's store in Flushing, New York, received a phone call stating that a male had entered the ladies room with a female companion. A female customer, and her daughter, were afraid to enter because of the male's presence. A security employee who reports to Chavez advised the man to leave and use the men's room. He left claiming to be a female. He then complained to store officials that he was asked to leave.

Chavez was subsequently told by an Assistant Store Manager that certain males can use the ladies restroom. This was news to him. A few days later, an assistant security manager told him that transgender persons can use the bathroom of their choice.

He said he had just become aware of this policy, stating that it was contrary to his religion and the Bible. But he hastened to say that he would nonetheless enforce Macy's policy.

That's where one would think the story would end: but it doesn't:

Macy's would not leave this alone, and this is where it crossed the line.

Chavez was then summoned to meet with the Human Resources Manager, who suspended him. He was later terminated.

"After my employer learned that I was a practicing Catholic, with religious concerns about this policy," Chavez says in his formal complaint, "I was terminated because of my religion, in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law."

Read the rest of Donohue's commentary here.

This is just another example of why we need so urgently Congress and state legislatures to enact protections for people of faith who simply want to conduct their lives - at home and at work - in accord with their beliefs about marriage and God's design for men and women. Now would be a good time, if you haven't already done so, to join us in this effort and sign our petition to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform urging them to pass the First Amendment Defense Act!

Without FADA, stories like this will unfortunately only become more and more commonplace.

NOM Launches Campaign To Defeat Missouri Representative Anne Zerr Who Betrayed Missourians, Denying Them The Right To Vote On Critical Religious Liberty Protections

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: July 22, 2016
Contact: Joseph Grabowski (202) 457-8060 x-110 | [email protected]


"It's the height of hypocrisy that this politician who denied voters their own chance to decide this issue now demands they vote for her." - Brian Brown, NOM President

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. – Washington, DC – Following through on a promise made to citizens last April when the Missouri House of Representatives refused to pass SJR 39, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced they have launched, through their NOM in Missouri PAC, a campaign to defeat Rep. Anne Zerr in the 23rd Senate District Republican primary. NOM in Missouri is funding mailings and phone calls urging voters to defeat Zerr in the August 2nd primary and elect her principal opponent, Bill Eigel.

"Anne Zerr betrayed the people of Missouri and the Republican Party when she refused to allow voters to consider critical legal protections preventing government from discriminating against people who believe in marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "It's the height of hypocrisy that this politician who denied voters their own chance to decide this issue now demands they vote for her. We are committed to her defeat."

As a member of the House, Zerr joined with fellow Republicans Rep. Jim Hansen and Rep. Caleb Rowden to defeat SJR 39 which would have allowed Missouri voters to protect the right of Christians and people of faith from being punished by government because they object to participating in a same-sex 'wedding.' NOM is the nation's largest and most active organization in support of traditional marriage and the religious liberty rights of marriage supporters and will target Hansen and Rowden in the future.

"Anne Zerr has subjected supporters of marriage, Christians and people of faith to punishment and persecution for standing true to their beliefs. She has sided with LGBT extremists who want to punish people of faith for supporting marriage and use the full power of government to persecute them," Brown said. "Zerr has subjected churches, pastors, religious charities and schools, individuals and small businesses to lawsuits, fines, the loss of their livelihoods and the ruin of their reputations. We urge voters to defeat her."

# # #

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, please contact:
Joseph Grabowski, [email protected], (202) 457-8060 x-110.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

US Bishops Committee Chairs Urge Support for FADA

Via the USCCB, the statement by Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone of San Francisco, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage and Archbishop William E. Lori of Baltimore, chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty, reads in part:

The definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, universally held for centuries, has nothing to do with disrespect for others, nor does it depend on religious belief. Rather, it is based on truths about the human person that are understandable by reason. Faithful to its commitment to serve the best interests of society, the Catholic Church will continue to promote and protect the truth of marriage as foundational to the common good. The Church will also continue to stand for the ability of all to exercise their religious beliefs and moral convictions in public life without fear, and to witness to the truth.

We are pleased to support the First Amendment Defense Act, and we urge Congress to pass this important legislation.

Bravo to these faith leaders for standing up in support of this critical bill! Read their full statement here.

2016 March for Marriage Set for June 25 in Washington, DC

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 8, 2016
Contact: Joseph Grabowski (202) 457-8060 x-110 | [email protected]


March Will Protest Supreme Court Gay ‘Marriage’ Decision and Obama Transgender Decrees; Call on Congress to Enact Legal Protections

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced that the 2016 March for Marriage has been scheduled for Saturday, June 25th in Washington, DC. Marchers will walk from the US Capitol building to the US Supreme Court. Tens of thousands of people have attended previous marches in support of traditional marriage.

“The Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling redefining marriage will go down as one of the most infamous, illegitimate rulings in the Court’s history, along the lines of their decision in Dred Scott to sanction slavery,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “The narrow 5-4 majority ignored precedent and invented a constitutional ‘right’ to gay ‘marriage’ so that these activist judges could impose their own values on the nation. In the process, they stripped over 50 million voters and countless legislators in states across America of their sovereign right to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.”

Supporters of marriage are urged to attend the March from all across the country. More information including a route map and schedule is available at www.marriagemarch.org.

Brown noted that it didn’t take long following the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage for LGBT activists and their chief ally President Obama to push the next element of their agenda – transgender bathroom rules. “The LGBT extremists and the Obama administration are attempting to defy human nature itself and declare that gender can be self-directed and chosen based on ‘identity,’” Brown said. “Obama is fighting to ensure that when someone chooses to declare an identity different from reality, such as a man claiming to be a woman, all of society will be expected to bow in compliance and succumb to every demand, including allowing men into private facilities like restrooms and showers reserved for girls and women. It’s outrageous and it must be stopped.”

NOM is also a strong supporter of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) to provide legal protections for supporters of marriage, protecting them against governmental discrimination. The proposal (HR 2802/S.1598) has 170 sponsors and co-sponsors in the House and 38 in the Senate, but has not been scheduled for a hearing. Encouraging support for this measure is another goal of the March for Marriage this year.

“It’s time that Congress pass the First Amendment Defense Act so that people of faith do not have to worry about choosing between protecting their livelihood and upholding their beliefs about marriage,” Brown concluded.

# # #

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, please contact:
Joseph Grabowski, [email protected], (202) 457-8060 x-110.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.