NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Free Speech

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.

Italian Bishop Confined to Home by Gay Marriage Demonstration

CWN:

An Italian archbishop has revealed that he was confined to his home, forced to remain inside his “besieged” residence, when homosexual activists staged a protest there earlier this month, and warned that gay-rights campaigners aim to prosecute all who oppose their agenda.

... Archbishop Crepaldi said that the protest was organized against him because of “the false and very grave accusation of being intolerant and racist.” He said that gay-rights activists are determined to gain approval for same-sex marriage, and toward that end will accuse all opponents of “homophobia.”

The archbishop warned that the goal of the demonstrators was to define “homophobia” as a crime, in order for “those who say publicly--as the Catholic Church has always done--that the real family is only that founded on marriage between a man and a woman, to be declared homophobic, intolerant, racist, and therefore, subject to criminal prosecution.”

French Government Warns Catholic Schools to Stay ‘Neutral’ on SSM

LifeSiteNews:

As French Catholics prepare to mobilize on January 13 for a national march against the creation of homosexual “marriage,” the country’s education minister is warning Catholic schools against participating, claiming that it could cause “homophobia” against homosexual students.

National Education Minister Vincent Peillon has written a letter to all of the country’s 8,300 Catholic school principals, claiming that they have the responsibility to maintain “neutrality” regarding the debate over homosexual “marriage” in their institutions, according to reports by Le Monde and the French Press Agency.

“It is your responsibility in effect to ensure that the debates that are occurring in French society not be expressed, in the schools and establishments, by the phenomena of rejection and homophobic stigmatization,” wrote Peillon.

... Peillon also asks principles to inform him “as quickly as possible regarding eventual incidents and regarding any initiative contrary to these principles, within the public institutions as well as the private institutions under contract.”

Court Upholds Firing of College Official Over Op-Ed Against Gay Rights

The Chronicle of Higher Education:

A federal appeals court has upheld the University of Toledo's decision to fire a high-level human-resources administrator who wrote a newspaper opinion column challenging the idea that gay people deserve the same civil-rights protections as members of racial minority groups.

In a ruling handed down on Monday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that the administrator's column "contradicted the very policies she was charged with creating, promoting, and enforcing," and cannot be excused as merely a statement of her own views as a private citizen. The panel affirmed a lower court's decision to dismiss the administrator's lawsuit accusing the public university of violating her constitutional rights by firing her.

At the center of the case was an opinion essay that Crystal Dixon, who had been the university's interim associate vice president for human resources, published in the Toledo Free Press in April 2008.

... In upholding the dismissal of Ms. Dixon's lawsuit, the federal appeals court said she differed from other employees cited in her equal-protection claim in that her speech, and not theirs, contradicted university policies. The appeals panel said her essay "spoke on policy issues related directly to her position at the university," and the government's interests as an employer outweighed her free-speech interests in the dispute.

Commission Opposes T-Shirt Company’s Refusal To Print Gay Pride Message

CitizenLink:

A Kentucky commission has announced its support of a gay and lesbian group suing a T-shirt company owned by a Christian man who declined to print the group’s shirts because the message, he said, violates his faith.

Blaine Adamson, who owns Hands On Originals (HOO) in Lexington, Ky., refused to print T-shirts for the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization (GLSO) in early March, because he disagreed with the “gay pride” message the group wanted printed on the shirts.

“I want the truth to come out — it’s not that we have a sign on the front door that says, ‘No Gays Allowed,’” Adamson said in a video posted on ADF’s website. “We’ll work with anybody. But if there’s a specific message that conflicts with my convictions, then I can’t promote that.”

The text on the shirts would have read: “Lexington Gay Pride,” and would include a list of sponsors of the event on the back of the shirt.

Adamson offered to direct GLSO to another business that could produce the shirts for the same price.

Instead, GLSO filed a complaint on March 28 against HOO with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Human Rights Commission claiming that HOO violated a local ordinance based on sexual orientation.

Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys filed a response to GLSO’s complaint in April stating its claim of discrimination is unfounded, and that the complaint should be dismissed.

Snell on the Marriage Debate: "Freedom is ... at Risk"

Russell Snell, associate professor of philosophy and director of the philosophy program at Eastern University reviews the new book "What is Marriage? One Man One Woman: A Defense" and also focuses on the threat posed to freedom by those who would redefine marriage:

"...Freedom is also at risk. If the law withdrew its support of conjugal marriage, the state would “imply that the conjugal view makes arbitrary distinctions,” and supporters of conjugal marriage could not be viewed as anything other than unreasonable “champions of invidious discrimination,” with encroachment on conscience quite likely. Already defenders of the conjugal view are likened to racist supporters of antimiscegenation laws, and examples grow of their lost employment, eroding freedoms, and social stigmatization. Nor does the allegedly “conservative” claim that the revisionist view imposes marital norms on more relationships address that view’s arbitrariness or provide any reason why traditional marriage norms are binding once divorced from the conjugal view. The reality that they are not binding is supported with ample evidence of the high value placed on “openness” and “flexibility” among proponents of same-sex marriage."

Victory For Christian Demoted Over Gay Marriage Comments

The UK Christian Institute:

A judge has today ruled that bosses at a housing trust were wrong to demote a manager who said gay weddings in churches would be “an equality too far”.

Adrian Smith, a Christian, made the remark on his personal Facebook page, which was not visible to the general public, outside work time.

But bosses at Trafford Housing Trust, near Manchester, took action against Mr Smith saying the comments amounted to ‘gross misconduct’ and could bring the Trust into disrepute.

Mr Smith went to court with the financial backing of The Christian Institute’s Legal Defence Fund, which exists to protect the civil liberty of Christians.

It emerged in evidence that the Trust was worried it could lose a gay rights charter award unless it took action against Mr Smith.

But today the judge, Mr Justice Briggs, said the Trust had no right to demote Mr Smith over his Facebook comments, and ruled that the Trust had breached the terms of his contract.

Mr Smith says he is delighted to have won the case, but he is worried others may be in the firing line if the Government pushes ahead with its plans to redefine marriage.

He said: “I have won today. But what will tomorrow bring? I am fearful that, if marriage is redefined, there will be more cases like mine – and if the law of marriage changes people like me may not win in court.

“Does the Prime Minister want to create a society where people like me, people who believe in traditional marriage, are treated as outcasts? That may not be his intention, but that’s what will happen.

Maine Blogger: Treworgy Farm is the New Chick-Fil-A

Aaron Prill lives in and blogs about current events and politics in Maine:

This past weekend Treworgy Family Orchards became the “Chick-Fil-A of Maine” in that they exercised their freedom of speech to show support for traditional marriage, and as a result received backlash from the homosexual community and those that support their agenda. The simple act of placing a “NO on Question 1″ campaign sign in front of their family-owned business was labeled bigotry and hate-speech. Much of this backlash was expressed on their business Facebook page, but the Bangor Daily News reportsthat they were finally strong-armed into removing the sign by people stopping into the business to express their displeasure with it being there.

This incident is further proof that the crowd who continually cries for tolerance is only “tolerant” if you support their agenda. I expressed this sentiment directly on the Treworgy’s Facebook page, and was immediately bombarded with the usual, predictable responses.

... to witness fellow Christians such as the Treworgy’s being persecuted for their heart-felt beliefs has prodded me to speak out. And while I’m just another voice in the wilderness, and by no means think I speak for anyone but myself, I’ve concluded the platform this blog allows must no longer be silent on the same-sex marriage issue. -- CounterCulture

Maine Family Farm Becomes Flashpoint for Gay Marriage/Free Speech Debate

The Bangor Daily News reports on a story we've seen all too often -- good, decent, pro-marriage citizens express their first amendment rights on behalf of marriage (by simply putting up a "No on Question 1" sign) and are met with boycotts and harassment.

It's extremely encouraging, however, in this instance to see how many people are already standing with the Treworgy family! The family posted a detailed explanation for their pro-marriage views on their Facebook page which has already been liked over 1,600 times (at the time of this writing).

A poll hosted by the Bangor Daily News found readers supporting the Treworgy family's choice to put up their sign 71%-28% (at the time of this writing).

Stories like that of the Treworgy family puts yet another face to the reality that redefining marriage has consequences for everyone, and that far too often the free speech of pro-marriage citizens is marginalized and stigmatized -- that is, unless we band together to stand up for our right to be for marriage!

The Bangor Daily News:

When the owner of a local family farm operation exercised his right to free speech by putting up a small political sign near a private driveway, some customers with an opposing view exercised their consumer rights to boycott the business.

That, in turn, prompted others to publicly come out in support of the farm family in a battle that is being waged primarily on the farm’s Facebook page.

At issue is a small lawn size “No on 1” sign that Gary Treworgy, patriarch of the family farm, put up in front of his house. The property is also the location of a business that employs several family members.

“Don’t redefine marriage. Vote NO on Question One. Marriage=One Man + One Woman,” read the sign, sponsored by the Protect Marriage Maine campaign.

A citizen initiative on the Nov. 6 statewide ballot, Question 1seeks to overturn Maine’s ban on same-sex marriage. The issue has proven a contentious one — pitting neighbors, family members and friends against one another from one end of the state to the other.

The first post critical of Treworgy’s sign appeared Sunday, family spokesman Jon Kenerson said Monday afternoon. Within less than 24 hours, more than 15,000 people had visited the page, with many of them weighing in with comments, he said.

... The controversy playing out on the Treworgy Family Orchards Facebook page prompted the family to post a lengthy statement Sunday night in which the family apologized for any hurt the sign might have caused — but at the same time stood by its position on same-sex marriage.

“This is obviously a very divisive issue and we value the freedom for every citizen to exercise their rights to express their opinion,” the statement read. “It’s a shame that so many assume that we are hateful and discriminatory simply because we are convinced that marriage is defined by a higher power than civil government.”

Baptist Press: TV Ads Warn of Gay Marriage Consequences

The Baptist Press:

Legalizing gay marriage will negatively impact free speech and religious liberty, leading to threats, lawsuits and even the firing of people who support the traditional definition of marriage, new TV ads warn in the four states where the issue is on the ballot.

Voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington will decide Nov. 6 whether to legalize gay marriage, the same day that voters in Minnesota will consider a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman.

Gay marriage supporters are outspending the other side by wide margins -- estimated at 4-to-1 in Washington state -- but traditional groups say that if they can get their message out, they can win, as they have in all 32 states where the issue has been on the ballot.

Why Three Sisters Are Voting No on Same-Sex Marriage in Maine

The Bangor Daily News:

Amber Waterman | Sun Journal

Their deep belief in God and Christian teachings is being boiled down to sound bites by the “mainstream media,” and they say the ongoing debate over same-sex marriage in Maine is being dominated by those who support the idea.

That’s how Carol Daigle and her sisters, Valerie Litalien and Cindy Terrill, feel about Question 1 on the Nov. 6 ballot.

Deeply devoted to their religions — Litalien is Catholic; Terrill and Daigle are Baptist — the sisters sat together in the front pew of Daigle’s church Friday and spoke passionately about their beliefs and fears.

... The sisters said that as much as they hear that gays and lesbians are discriminated against, it feels now that those who oppose same-sex marriage are the ones being treated with bias. Terrill said she lost a job over her views, and Litalien worries about saying where she lives for fear of retaliation.

“We are now the ones being forced into the shadows,” Daigle said. She said Maine voters decided the issue once when a citizen referendum overturned state legislation legalizing same-sex marriage.

... Many simply don’t dare to speak up for fear of being labeled hateful, Daigle said.

“Do you know how much courage it takes to go out in front of people and put up signs not to redefine marriage?” she asked. “How much courage it takes to put it on the back of your car? You could have your windows broken.”

They know some in the Christian Civic League who have applied for and been granted concealed weapon permits because they faced death threats and other types of harassment.

Heritage's Ed Meese: A Summer of Liberal Intolerance

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese of the Heritage Foundation ties events surrounding Chick-fil-A, the Regnerus study and the FRC shooting together and describes it as a "summer of liberal intolerance":

"As summer faded to fall, a Chicago alderman’s fury toward Chick-fil-A finally seemed to be cooling. But fall is fickle in the windy city, and Proco Joe Moreno once again is threatening to stall the chicken chain from opening in his ward.Moreno, Mayor Rahm (“Chicago Values”) Emanuel and other big-city officials piled on Chick-fil-A after Dan Cathy, the company’s president and COO, publicly supported the biblical definition of marriage. As they were soon reminded, though, for a public official to deny a business license because of the businessman’s marriage views would amount to unlawful discrimination against his viewpoints.

Sadly, controversies such as the one that Moreno’s overblown comments helped create grow more frequent, and Chick-fil-A is only the most visible target. Advocates for “tolerance” increasingly push traditional ideas on marriage, family, life and faith out of public life.

In June, sociologist Mark Regnerus at the University of Texas-Austin, became the target of a blogosphere blaze of character assassination.

... Groups across the political spectrum condemned the [FRC shooting]. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank suggested more, though. He argued that the leftist Southern Poverty Law Center, among others, had been “reckless” in labeling the conservative council a “hate group”—and so implying the research and education organization is outside the pale of legitimate debate.

This summer, long lines of Chick-fil-A patrons similarly rebuked the intolerance of Chicago’s Moreno and Emanuel. The freedom to uphold “Chick-fil-A values” continues to draw wide support. The City of Broad Shoulders – indeed, every town in America – ought to have room for those values. They represent the very principles on which this nation was built. Surely even those who don’t celebrate them can tolerate them. --- LifeSiteNews

Gay Couple Files Human Rights Complaint Against New York Christian Farm Owners

A writer for the Albany Times Union relates what is happening to a couple who own a farm in upstate New York:

I was listening to FLY this morning and heard Brian and Chrissy talking about a listener who wanted to get married out at Liberty Ridge Farm in Rensselaer County. The venue has taken a pass on marrying the couple.

Why?

Because they’re gay. Or, at least, that is one of the reasons, according to the FMR.

I called Cynthia Gifford, who owns the farm with her husband, to ask her about the claim.

“I just felt uncomfortable. Maybe I made a mistake in my initial response to them,” she said when I reached her on her cell phone (I’ve done stories out there with them in the past). “I am willing to have a meeting. It is kind of against my religious views, but if they have an interest, they are more than welcome to come out and look at the property.”

She went on to say “When you are on a phone conversation, and you are taken back … I made a mistake.”

The couple has filed a human rights complaint and, once she addresses that, she said she’ll be happy to discuss this with me further.

I am guessing — and this is just an assumption — that the formal complaint may have had something to do with her backing off a bit. And, well, I can’t say I blame her. If the state was after me, I’d probably ease off, too."

Washington Examiner Editors: Marylanders Face "Very Real Threat of Political Retaliation" Unless Marriage is Protected

The editors of the Washington Examiner react to the story of Dr. McCaskill:

Gallaudet University's rash decision to place its chief diversity officer on paid administrative leave because she signed the petition that put Maryland's same-sex marriage law on the ballot next month is a dismaying example of political correctness run amok. But it also exposes the same kind of intimidation and coercion quietly lurking behind a facade of "fairness" and "toleration" that reared its ugly head in California four years ago over voter-approved Proposition 8.

Maggie Gallagher, a former president of the National Organization for Marriage, zeroed in on this anomaly last week, writing on National Review's blog: "Nobody that I know is losing his job for being for gay marriage." Indeed, the shabby treatment of Dr. Angela McCaskill is more proof that the Tolerance Lobby does not tolerate dissent -- even among its own card-carrying members.

... McCaskill, who lives in Maryland, says she signed the petition at the suggestion of her pastor because she believes in the democratic process. So her removal from her job at the federally-chartered D.C. university was clearly an act of retaliation for exercising her First Amendment rights.

Gay marriage proponents have tried very hard to reassure Marylanders that the new law will not force clerics to perform gay weddings or otherwise participate in ceremonies forbidden by their faith. But McCaskill's removal for merely signing a petition make these vague reassurances even less credible than before...

... McCaskill's pastor says her dismissal is "a warning of what is to come if same-sex marriage becomes law in Maryland." And MDPetitions.com founder Del. Neil Parrott, R-District 28, plans to reintroduce a bill to protect people like her -- and the 200,000 other Marylanders who signed the petition as individual voters. If Marylanders didn't face the very real threat of political retaliation, they wouldn't need such protection.