We posted this on our Facebook page but wanted to make sure our blog-only readers saw this as well!
We posted this on our Facebook page but wanted to make sure our blog-only readers saw this as well!
Thom Hartmann begins an interview with our co-founder Maggie Gallagher by going on the attack. But after Maggie answers all of his questions with conviction and compassion, Hartmann gives up his gotcha line of questioning and concludes by saying he "very much appreciates [her] coming by and having a rational conversation" and they end with shaking hands.
A possible turning point in the interview:
Hartmann: "The work that you [Gallagher] are doing is causing for many of those [gay] people considerable pain and misery in their lives. How do you reconcile that with your notion of yourself? You've talked about your experiences as a single mother. You seem like a compassionate person. It seems to me like a disconnect."
Gallagher: "I guess when people fundamentally disagree about what's good for the country -- I certainly have always tried to make my arguments in ways that are respectful of people who disagree, but if you come to me and say 'the fact that you think marriage matters because children need a mom and a dad is deeply painful to me' -- all I can say is I'm sorry..."
Hartman: "...Not about what you're thinking, about your activism."
Gallagher: "...I'm acting on that [belief that marriage is good]. Because I think it's really important. When people say that's causing me a lot of pain all I can say is I'm really sorry, that's not my intention, but I think America is a country where we have to go out and fight for what we think is right and good, and we have to do so in a way that demonstrates respect to others and that's certainly what I've tried to do during my eight years in the gay marriage fight."
Watch the whole interview:
Local WMUR TV covers the rally. You can hear a pro-SSM protestor trying to shout down one of the speakers at the podium (0:18-0:26).
State representative David Bates says the other side is claiming "The marriage debate is over. It's time to move on." Rep. Bates asks the crowd, "What do you think? Is this debate over?" They respond: "NO!" He asks, "Do you think it's time to move on?" The crowd roars: "NO!" He continues: "I think it's time to move back to the true meaning of marriage."
Our co-founder Maggie Gallagher hosted a panel discussion Saturday morning at CPAC which included, among others, our Chairman Prof. John Eastman.
Here is a video of John Eastman's speech for those of you who missed it -- the packed ballroom responded really enthusiastically to his contributions, even giving him a standing ovation -- see for yourself!
My Dear Friends,
The fight is on!
In California, two judges on a divided Ninth Circuit panel just decided to take away the right of 7 million California voters to determine their own state's constitution, correct an out-of-control state supreme court, and restore the public meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
What is the evidence these judges offer that Prop 8 violates our beloved federal Constitution?
In a decision that NOM co-founder Maggie Gallagher rightly called "ill-natured and illogical," the Ninth Circuit actually said that the evidence that the 7 million Californians who voted for marriage are irrational bigots who hate gay people is: Prop 8 didn't take away any practical benefits from same-sex couples.
That's right, because Californians decided to focus on protecting the idea and the ideal of marriage, without restricting gay people from doing things like seeing one another in the hospital—that is the proof that they were motivated by unreasoning hatred towards homosexuals.
Ill-natured, illogical, and, I, would add: totally illicit. These were two judges with no empathy for those who disagree with their own liberal values, with a predetermined agenda they wanted to enact, with no respect for the original text or meaning of the Constitution.
The 14th Amendment, put in place to correct the serious evil of slavery, is not a license to import into the federal Constitution any vision of "equality" invented by Harvard faculty and do an end run about basic principles of democracy.
As for the idea that marriage is and always has been a union of male and female for a reason—that these unions are different than any other kind because they make new life and connect children to their mother and father—what did the Ninth Circuit say about that?
These two biased judges rudely dismissed these core concerns by claiming no rational person could imagine that publicly redefining marriage could affect the public meaning of marriage, or the way the next generation thinks about marriage:
"Because under California statutory law, same-sex couples had all the rights of opposite-sex couples, regardless of their marital status, all parties agree that Proposition 8 had one effect only. It stripped same-sex couples of the ability they previously possessed to obtain from the State, or any other authorized party, an important right—the right to obtain and use the designation of 'marriage' to describe their relationships. Nothing more, nothing less.
"Proposition 8 therefore could not have been enacted to advance California's interests in childrearing or responsible procreation, for it had no effect on the rights of same sex couples to raise children or on the procreative practices of other couples. Nor did Proposition 8 have any effect on religious freedom or on parents' rights to control their children's education; it could not have been enacted to safeguard these liberties."
Courts threaten to take away the roadmap to marriage. Rewrite the institution's public meaning. Brand traditional ideas about marriage as uniting male and female in love so children can have mothers and fathers as irrational bigotry. The public schools will teach the government's newly redefined marriage ideas to your children and grandchildren.
Gee, how could any reasonable person committed to our marriage tradition believe such a radical redefinition of marriage could matter?
The Ninth Circuit's opinion striking down Prop 8 is government of the judges, by the judges, for the judges, and I promise you it will not stand.
Here I am debating one of the leading architects of the campaign to impose gay marriage by judicial tyranny, Evan Wolfson, on ABC 7 News:
Thanks to the hundreds of you who responded to our "money bomb" request to raise $100,000 for the defense of Prop 8. We helped get Prop 8 on the ballot. We helped form and fund the winning coalition that passed Prop 8. And we are going to see this fight through to the sweet victory at the end!
If you haven't yet had the chance, click here to help defend marriage, democracy and the rule of law!
Between now and the Supreme Court decision that will (or will not) impose gay marriage on all 50 states, there is an important election for president of the United States.
Three GOP candidates have not only responded to NOM's Marriage Pledge, they quickly spoke out against federal courts redefining marriage, and taking away the sovereignty of We the People:
Newt Gingrich said on Twitter, "Court of Appeals overturning CA's Prop 8 another example of an out of control judiciary. Let's end judicial supremacy."
Mitt Romney: "Today, unelected judges cast aside the will of the people of California who voted to protect traditional marriage. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman and, as president, I will protect traditional marriage and appoint judges who interpret the Constitution as it is written and not according to their own politics and prejudices."
And Rick Santorum on Facebook: "Today, activist judges in the 9th Circuit stripped away the rights of 7 million California voters by striking down Proposition 8. These judges inserted a right into our Constitution that isn't a right at all, but a privilege. The radical actions of the 9th Circuit underscore the need for a constitutional amendment which would define 'marriage' as between one man-one woman. Study after study shows that traditional marriage, as it has always been defined—one man and one woman—creates the best possible environment for our children. And strong families are a key part of a strong America.
"This issue is far too important to allow for 50 different definitions of marriage at the state level. And this issue should certainly not be decided by a few activist judges..."
(In our press release we also noted that Rick Santorum has been an early and staunch supporter of the National Organization for Marriage, signing fundraising letters for us, among other good deeds.)
We are very proud that the three leading candidates for the GOP nomination are all willing to speak up for marriage.
NOM is a cosponsor at CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference) this year, serving as a proud voice for marriage within the conservative movement as well as outside. Maggie is moderating a panel on the importance of uniting social and economic conservatives and NOM's new Chairman of the Board Prof. John Eastman will be speaking there too.
The battles continue: Washington state just passed a gay marriage law, weeks before they found the time to close a humongous budget gap. It will take a tough fight to get a referendum to the people. In New Jersey and Maryland, liberal legislators promise to impose gay marriage without a vote of the people.
In two states this year, the people will have a chance to pass state marriage amendments defining marriage as one man and one woman.
In New Hampshire, a vote to repeal same-sex marriage takes place soon.
The fight continues. The rewards for fighting the good fight are not supposed to be felt in this world.
But the chance to be your voice for your values is the benefit I most cherish in earthly terms—the chance to put my shoulder to the wheel, to work and to fight and to link arms with loving, decent, law-abiding Americans of every creed and color on behalf of something so important, and so good, as marriage. That's what no one can ever take away.
There's a profile of NOM's co-founder Maggie Gallagher in Salon by a New York Times columnist who favors same-sex marriage. He tries, but he can't make head or tail of Maggie's principled defense of marriage—or yours either!
At the end he reports being befuddled by Maggie Gallagher's strong and idealistic belief that gay marriage is not the future:
"I have no doubts who will win in the end," Gallagher says. "One hundred years from now the globe will not be full of societies that endorse same-sex unions as marriages. What happens between now and then is going to be less certain and full of struggle. In the long struggle, I'll bet on human nature to overwhelm ideology. The thing about same-sex marriage is it's based on a fundamental untruth: same-sex unions are not the same as opposite sex unions. They are not marriages."
Thank you for making this fight possible, with your prayers, with your words, with your financial sacrifices, with your friendship.
God bless you,
Brian S. Brown
National Organization for Marriage
P.S. Remember that we are fighting for the future of marriage! We will win, but we need your help to do it. Can you pledge $100 or $150 today for marriage? Or can you make a monthly donation of just $15? Every dollar makes a difference as we work to secure marriage for you, for your children, and for your children's children.
Married life can be full of distractions. "Life Coach" Jim Fannin explains how focusing on your family at certain times can help build strong relationships:
What began as a protest against the use of the Q-word, for which the Mayor of Troy, MI has apologized, has morphed into the public position: you are not entitled to oppose gay marriage.
Watch, it's telling:
"Free speech is one thing, hateful speech is another." e.g. you should be ashamed to say that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
Related on NOMblog: PPP Poll: Michigan Voters Oppose SSM 53%-33% (08/17/11)
Dear Marriage Supporter,
An anti-bullying curriculum in the Vancouver public schools points kids to a website featuring explicit videos of gay sex. When school board Trustee Ken Denike learned of it, he suggested periodic reviews of all online resources...and was roundly denounced by community leaders as a homophobe!
True story. See it here.
Our most recent Marriage ADA video features Vancouver School Trustee Ken Denike and mental health professional Sophia Woo, who have been trying to help concerned parents protect their children from an anti-bullying curriculum produced by Out in Schools pointing kids to online "resources" that amount to little more than gay pornography.
The request from Trustee Denike and Ms. Woo? That the school district implement a policy for periodic review of websites referenced in school curriculum, recognizing that website content can change quickly.
The school board refuses to do anything to protect kids from these explicit websites. Anti-bullying teacher Ryan Clayton, who has worked with the Out in Schools curriculum, chalks it up to a politically motivated attack. And for their efforts, Ken Denike and Sophia Woo are denounced as homophobes.
Imagine that—in our neighbor to the north, protecting 13 year old children from being exposed to pornography in public schools is now just a politically motivated attack.
Let's be clear—this is not about a student using a school computer to access pornography. This is about official curriculum recommending students visit a website containing gay pornography—and personal attacks directed at anyone who dares stand up for our kids.
The gay press understands the issue:
This is a moral question, I agree. Just as the black civil rights movement changed the rules of what is and isn't acceptable for racism, the gay rights movement is shifting norms in Canada. And with that comes a message to those who won't evolve: your outdated morals are no longer acceptable, and we will teach your kids the new norms.
"We will teach your kids the new norms." There it is—this is the whole story in eight simple words. No exemptions, no alternatives—just forcing kids to be exposed to government-sponsored porn, in an effort to shift cultural norms and reshape our kids' understanding of right and wrong.
This cannot go unanswered, but we need your help to continue this fight.
You've been a strong supporter of marriage and of NOM's efforts to protect marriage and religious liberty (thank you again), so you of all people understand how our opponents are viciously targeting people's safety, property, and livelihoods—and what we can do to fight back!
Marriage ADA will continue to release—one-at-a-time—a series of incredible new videos about other courageous pro-marriage citizens.
Our goal is to create a community of Americans who adhere to the core Gospel value: "Be not afraid!"
Thanks for acting fast,
Brian S. Brown
NOM Education Fund
P.S. Please forward this email to three friends right now so they can see the truth and get involved. Isolated and alone, we can be intimidated. Together we are too many to be treated as second-class citizens.
Simply visit MarriageADA.org, learn our stories, and make one urgent contribution. Thank you again, and God bless you!
P.P.S. Out in Schools has now voluntarily removed this website from new printed materials in response to concerns raised by Trustee Denike and Ms. Woo.
So their courageous stand has already had an effect!
Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York City reflects on the lessons learned from this summer's push to redefine marriage in New York, and outlines what he and other Catholic bishops are doing to continue fighting for victory:
A new documentary film released Monday explores how children conceived through anonymous sperm donations are left searching for their true identities, and questions whether the “anonymous father” industry of sperm donation should exist at all.
“Anonymous Father’s Day presents the untold stories of children of sperm donors. Featuring the heart-rendingreflections of now adult children fathered anonymously, these donor-conceived children share the pain, longing and uncertainties created by the secrecy of their conceptions,” stated a press release about the film on Monday.
The film was created by the The Center for Bioethics and Culture (CBC), producers of the award-winning documentary film Eggsploitation (2010) which focused on the egg donation industry. While the “world premiere” of Anonymous Father’s Day will be in New York City on January 29, 2012, the film is now available for DVD purchase, and can be viewed on the Internet.
Watch the trailer:
This week's video update by the UK Christian Institute tells more of Adrian Smith's story:
If we said it, we'd be homophobes.
We have no clue how representative Richard and Jeremy are, but gee, does FOX think they could be?
Watch and let us know what you think:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 12, 2011
Mary Beth Hutchins or Elizabeth Ray at 703-683-5004
National Organization for Marriage Partners With Rabbi for Robo-Call in NY-9
Washington – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced that Rabbi Zecharia Wallerstein has partnered with them to record a robo-call in New York’s 9th district, calling for voters to support Bob Turner in tomorrow’s congressional election.
Following robo-calls made in the district from New York State Sen. Ruben Diaz, Rabbi Wallerstein recorded a call in response to Democrat David Weprin, a self-proclaimed Orthodox Jew, voting for same-gender marriage in the New York legislature earlier this year. The call, which began on Monday and will reach 30,000 Jewish voters’ homes, is a plea to those of the Jewish faith to support Bob Turner.
“With the formation of the Let the People Vote coalition in the wake of passage of same-gender marriage, leaders from different faiths, backgrounds and political parties vowed to hold legislators accountable who betrayed them,” said Brian Brown, president of NOM. “David Weprin is learning the hard way that we are keeping our promise. The people of New York’s 9th district are sending a message loud and clear: Don’t Mess With Marriage.”
Audio of the call can be heard here:
Transcript of the call:
“Hello, I am Rabbi Wallerstein and I am calling to let you know that I am opposing David Weprin’s campaign for Congress in the 9th district. David Weprin defied Jewish law and betrayed our values by voting for same-gender marriage in New York. Now he wants to be our representative in Congress? I say No to David Weprin. David Weprin abandoned Jewish teaching in New York state; it’s time for us to abandon David Weprin. Please, join me in voting for Bob Turner for Congress on September 13th.”
To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Mary Beth Hutchins (x105), [email protected], or Elizabeth Ray (x130), [email protected], at 703-683-5004.
Paid for by the National Organization for Marriage, www.nationformarriage.org. Not authorized by any candidate or any candidate’s committee.
David Weprin is facing huge backlash in the Orthodox Jewish community for his vote to legalize same-sex marriage. He does his best to get out of his predicament when faced with tough questions about it:
Floridians showed up in droves to support the freedom of speech of Jerry Buell this Monday, as local FOX Orlando reports in the video below.
Mr. Buell was subsequently reinstated as we mentioned today.