NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Media

Louisiana Governor Stands Strong Against Same-Sex Marriage

“Hollywood and the media elite are hostile to our values and they tip the scales to our liberal opponents at every opportunity,” wrote Jindal. “Liberals have decided that if they can’t win at the ballot box, they will win in the boardroom. It’s a deliberate strategy. And it’s time for corporate America to make a decision.” - Gov. Bobby Jindal

J000287As Americans across our nation prepare for the March for Marriage this Saturday, April 25th, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has bravely defended his stance on marriage in one of the most high-profile media publications out there: The New York Times’ Opinion Pages.

Politico covers Gov. Jindal’s piece:

The Republican 2016 hopeful penned an op-ed with the headline “I’m holding firm against gay marriage.” It accused “radical liberals” of teaming up with businesses to push same-sex marriage and other LGBT protections that he believes threaten religious liberty. As evidence, the Louisiana Republican pointed to the widespread public outcry that earlier this year pushed both Arkansas and Indiana to insert anti-discrimination protections into their religious freedom laws.

Jindal expressed support for a new bill in Louisiana called the “Marriage and Conscience Act” that would allow private businesses and institutions to refuse service based on their own definitions of marriage without the threat of government action. He called on conservatives to harness their traditional alliance with corporate interests to halt progressives’ momentum on pushing LGBT protections.

“This strategy requires populist social conservatives to ally with the business community on economic matters and corporate titans to side with social conservatives on cultural matters,” Jindal wrote, calling for a new “grand bargain.”

You can read Jindal’s original piece here. And in case there was any doubt, Jindal makes his intention transparently clear:

As the fight for religious liberty moves to Louisiana, I have a clear message for any corporation that contemplates bullying our state: Save your breath.

Well said, Gov. Jindal. We couldn't agree more.

Hollywood Is Pushing a Pro-SSM Agenda, But Where Will it Stop?

We have often seen same-sex marriage activists trying to force their pro-SSM agenda onto as many people as possible through business, education, the courts, and the media, but a recent GLAAD report shows some more unsettling results.

The report indicates that the number of films and TV shows featuring LGBT characters (and often, same-sex marriage) has risen to an all time high, over-representing true statistics by nearly 500%. But what is even more concerning is that GLAAD says this is still not enough: they want even more leading roles for LGBT characters, more racial diversity, and voiced discontent with the occasional “less-than-positive portrayals of the homosexual lifestyle by some filmmakers.”

The article also explains, in part, how GLAAD “measured” their data:

200274063-001To produce its 2015 “Studio Responsibility Index,” homosexual advocacy group GLAAD analyzed the film releases of seven major film studios and their affiliates and found that out of 161 movies released in 2014, 25 featured characters with non-traditional sexual preferences such as homosexuality or bisexuality – a total of 15.5 percent. The major film studios were more likely to feature gay characters – nearly 18 percent of their films did so, compared to just 11 percent of those released by their smaller, “indie”-style affiliates.

Considering a recent Gallup poll found that only 3.4 percent of the U.S. population identifies as homosexual, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, the number of films featuring homosexual characters would seem to be inordinately large.

GLAAD CEO Sarah Kate Ellis announced that studios should "continue increasing the number and profile of positive portrayals of homosexuals at American cinemas in order to change the 'hearts and minds'" of those who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife.

“Only when they make those changes and catch up to other, more consistently inclusive media portrayals will we be able to say that America’s film industry is a full partner in accelerating acceptance,” Ellis said.

“Studies have repeatedly shown that in absence of someone knowing an LGBT person in real life, programs and films with LGBT characters can help foster understanding and acceptance,” Ellis continued.

Understanding and acceptance are noble goals indeed, but is this really Ellis' goal? Advocacy groups like GLAAD have a history of utilizing mass outlets like Hollywood and the film industry for the sole purpose of forcing their beliefs on everyone, and then attacking those who don't conform.

No big screen film can ever change a fundamental truth: that family begins with marriage between one man and one woman, and children deserve both their mother and father.

Must Watch: Brian Brown's Lively Debate on Indiana Religious Liberty Restoration Act

News Channel 8 featured NOM's own Brian Brown today, debating Rev. Graylan Hagler of Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ, on the hot topic of Indiana’s religious freedom bill. You won't want to miss this one:

Mark Your Calendars for the 2015 March for Marriage!

"This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it." - G.K. Chesterton

2015 March for Marriage

When: Saturday, April 25, 2015, at Noon ET

Where: Union Square, South of Capitol Reflecting Pool, Washington, DC

 

Who: Marriage defenders, champions, and leaders from across the nation join together to defend marriage, family, and American liberties!

Why: To defend marriage as the unique union between 1 man and 1 woman; to protect the family as the building block of society; to ensure that our children will have a future where basic American rights and liberties are honored, preserved, and protected.

Stayed tuned for more information to come!

ICYMI: Making Marriage Meaningless (VIDEO)

Here's a terrific new video with a clear, concise message about the meaning of marriage and why it is best for both children and society to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

NOM in the News: Brian Brown Discusses Implications of Supreme Court Decision on C-SPAN

via C-SPAN:

Brian Brown and Evan Wolfson talked about legal and political developments in the debate over same-sex marriage, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to deny appeals from five states seeking to retain their bans on same-sex marriage, and a ruling overturning some bans in Western states. They also spoke about the politics and public opinions surrounding the issue. Evan Wolfson participated by video link from New York City.

ICYMI: Recent State Department Honoree an Open Advocate for the Abolition of Marriage

Last month, on the same day as the historic March for Marriage, the State Department hosted its now-annual Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies Pride Day.

GILFAA

One of the honorees was radical, far-left activist and LGBT journalist Masha Gessen, who has admitted that she does not think the institution of marriage should exist.  Gessen has also previously said that she doesn't see why children "shouldn't have five parents legally."

It is a sobering reminded of the present administration's aggressive radicalism with regard to marriage to recall how Secretary of State John Kerry introduced Gessen, gushing, "she is a wonderful person – a mother, a journalist, an extraordinary human rights defender – and we are honored by her presence here."

Photo Credit: SNOB Magazine

Of course, as Breitbart News noted, Kerry did not mention Gessen's previous calls for the destruction of marriage altogether--something she says is the true intention of many of the elites behind the push to redefine marriage.

Here's Gessen in her own words:

“I agree that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it is a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist... Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change, and again, I don’t think it should exist.” [SOURCE]

Gessen also opines, "I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality [of her children having "more or less" five parents] and I don't think that's compatible with the institution of marriage."

Well, at least on that much we can agree: having "more or less five parents" is not compatible with the institution of marriage. But whether it will finally be judged incompatible with the distorted and redefined version of marriage sweeping across civilization--marriage as a pact of convenience, a genderless institution, and one no longer inherently bound up with the bearing and rearing of children--remains to be seen.

Fox and Friends: Brian Brown, NOM, and the IRS

Did you catch NOM president Brian Brown on Fox and Friends this morning?

Here's his interview regarding NOM's successful suit against the IRS for their illegal release of our confidential tax return and donor information:

Please share with your friends!

Without the Media Filter: Marriage Marchers Speak Out

The liberal media and advocates of redefining marriage are desperate to paint supporters of marriage as "hateful" or "bigots."  The media barely makes an effort anymore to veil its support of redefining marriage.

When it comes to the definition of marriage that has been the foundation of civilizations throughout time, the media's strategy is typically:

a.) ignore support for marriage,

b.) promote the redefinition of marriage,

c.) lazily distort and misrepresent the debate surrounding the nature of marriage, or

d.) all of the above.

Media coverage of the March for Marriage was no exception.

But, in their own words, marriage marchers explained why they support marriage--and their reasons aren't ones that the liberal media typically shows.  They emphasized that they are for love and don't hate anyone, and that support for marriage does not mean hatred for certain people:

The marchers also challenged the media's bias against marriage and its supporters:

NOM on Point of View Radio

On May 29, Joe Grabowski, NOM's Director of Communications, was a guest on Point of View Radio discussing the March for Marriage.

Joe talked about lobby day and the opportunity to stand up for marriage in Washington, D.C.  He also told listeners about the virtual march, an opportunity for those who can't make it to the national march.

The March for Marriage segment begins at 28:18--click here to listen!

Point of View

NOM on EWTN's Ave Maria Radio

On-AirJoe Grabowski, NOM's Director of Communications, was on EWTN's Ave Maria Radio on May 29 to talk about the upcoming March for Marriage.

"There are still millions of Americans who believe in marriage as the union of a man and a woman and they want their voices to be respected and heard," Joe said.  The March for Marriage, he said, is the perfect opportunity to demonstrate support for marriage.

Click here and scroll down to "Catholic Connection – May 29, 2014 – Hour 2" to listen to Joe's interview.  The interview begins at the 16:30 mark.

EWTN Covers March for Marriage

In case you missed it, on May 28 NOM President Brian Brown was on EWTN Nightly News to talk about the upcoming March for Marriage.  He also discussed the motion NOM filed with Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy asking him to stay the imposition of same-sex marriage in Oregon.

Watch him here:

Repression: A Very, Very Dangerous Thing

Two national voices from opposite sides of the spectrum related the same opinion in the wake of the Sam Bradford draft photo uproar: “Shouldn’t you also be teaching people who are gay to be open and understanding of people?"

Newt Gingrich and Stephen A. Smith, a self-described liberal, both expressed that the wave of recriminations against people speaking out against the televised kiss demonstrates an incredible intolerance on the part of the gay community.

Newt GingrichAs was reported on TruthRevolt.org yesterday:

On CNN's Crossfire, co-host Newt Gingrich pushed back against recent recriminations against people speaking out against Michael Sam kissing his boyfriend on ESPN after he was drafted by the St. Louis Rams.

Gingrich debated co-host Van Jones and former NFL player Jamal Anderson over the NFL fining and suspending Miami Dolphins linebacker Don Jones for Tweeting out "Horrible" after the televised kiss.  Former NFL running back Derrick Ward received death threats after he went further in condemning the gay PDA he and his kids saw during the televised draft.

Gingrich:  “You guys talk about how you want to be inclusive, except of course, if somebody tweets this, then having a death threat or ‘let’s send them off to sensitivity training.’ It strikes me, that’s repression, that’s not inclusive.”

Anderson:  “Is it repression to try to teach them to be understanding and open to other people, especially when you talk about people they have not been exposed to?”

Gingrich:  “Shouldn’t you also be teaching people who are gay to be open and understanding of people?"

ESPN analyst Stephen A. Smith, a self-described liberal, echoed Gingrich's sentiments yesterday when he said, "People should have the freedom to not want to be associated with that or not want that in their face. Smith also said, 'I think it’s a very, very dangerous thing when people see something and they have a problem with what they’re seeing and they express themselves, and ultimately they’re fined.'"

NOM and CitizenLink's New Radio Ad in Indiana

The new radio ad is currently running in the Ft. Wayne and Muncie radio markets, but NOM and CitizenLink are both prepared to expand into other markets and cut new ads to cover other legislators who fail to support marriage in the present deliberations over Indiana's proposed marriage amendment, HJR3.

Take a listen to the new ad here:

 

Please share this with everyone you know in Indiana! All Hoosiers should be calling their legislators on HJR3 and demanding their right to vote on marriage this November. You can bet the legislators in Indianapolis are hearing from the noisy marriage redefinition lobby today - so let's make sure they hear from our side as well!

"We've had multiple hearings on it!"

Before the Super Bowl yesterday, President Obama sat down to an interview with Bill O'Reilly of Fox News. The interview covered a wide range of topics, moving through each rather speedily, but at the end when O'Reilly honed in on the alleged political corruption at the IRS, the President's response was remarkable [emphases added]:

Obama O'Reilly IRSThe president... refused to acknowledge that the IRS illegally targeted tea party groups in the run-up to the 2012 election. "Absolutely wrong," he said when O'Reilly broached the subject. "These kinds of things keep on surfacing, in part, because you and your TV station will promote them… We've had multiple hearings on it!"

"So you're saying there was no corruption there at all?" O'Reilly asked.

"Absolutely not," the president replied. "There were some bone-headed decisions out of a local office."

"But no mass corruption?" O'Reilly persisted.

"Not even mass corruption," a visibly-annoyed Obama replied. "Not even a smidgen of corruption."

The President's touting of "multiple hearings" that have been held on the subject is simply a tactic of evasion. What those hearings have concluded is, at best, debatable. And to say that the issue keeps surfacing because of Fox News keeps bringing it up is an even more brazen attempt to evade the real issue: it was brought up at least two times just last week by two members of Congress.  

The first was Senator Ted Cruz, who asked about the matter to Attorney General Eric Holder during a Senate hearing on the DOJ:

"In the 280 days since that inspector general report, nobody has been indicted," Cruz said. "Not a single person. In the 280 days since that inspector general report, it’s been publicly reported that no indictments are planned. Today in this hearing, you were unwilling to answer a question whether even a single victim of targeting has been interviewed."

And Holder's replies, stating that, "This is a matter that is presently being investigated, interviews are being done, analysis is being conducted," indicates that the President's determination that there was "not even a smidgen of corruption" are, if nothing else, at least premature!


The second instance was a floor speech by Senator Mitch McConnell, parts of which the Senator included in an op-ed piece for Brietbart published the same day. Referring to proposed new rules regulating the activity of 501(c)4 organizations - rules which many critics fear will stifle free speech and political participation - McConnell had this to say:

McConnell floor speechFor some, it may be hard to imagine that the Obama administration would even think of touching an issue this radioactive after last year’s scandal stunned the nation. They underestimate the extent to which this administration and its allies are willing to go to shut down — and shut up — their ideological opponents.

They also underestimate the extent to which these folks are willing to go to hold onto power, and they forget how speech is usually stifled. As Madison knew, most encroachments on free speech and other constitutionally-protected freedoms are backdoor efforts like this one.

Suffice to say, therefore, that not everyone is convinced that the President's finding of "not even a smidgen of corruption" at the IRS is going to hold up very much longer. We're grateful to these brave members of Congress and others who continue working to get to the bottom of these matters and to hold accountable those and the IRS and elsewhere who abused power for political purposes.