Category Archives: States

NOM to Query Presidential Candidates Today

Dear Marriage Supporter,

I'm writing with big news. This evening I will be in Des Moines, Iowa for the last major pro-family forum of presidential candidates before the Iowa Caucuses. NOM is a co-sponsor of the Presidential Family Forum, and I will have the opportunity to ask the candidates to expound on their position in support of marriage and religious liberty, and to help Americans better understand how these candidates would govern when it comes to these issues.

NOM has co-sponsored two previous presidential forums in Iowa this year. This is an example of the leadership we exert, both publicly and behind the scenes, to restore marriage to its rightful place in the law and to protect supporters of marriage from harassment and discrimination. You see, electing a pro-marriage champion as president is the fastest way to reverse the illegitimate and anti-constitutional ruling of the US Supreme Court redefining marriage, and to ensuring that the government does not discriminate against supporters of traditional marriage.

Offer Your Support Now

Our work on your behalf and on behalf of all Americans who believe in marriage is dependent upon your financial support. We don't have billionaires contributing to our cause; we depend on grassroots support from you and others. Please consider making a contribution of $15, $25, $50, $100 or even $250 or more so that we can continue to exert critical leadership to restore marriage and protect the rights of all people who support God's design for marriage — the union of one man and one woman.

The forum tonight is the granddaddy of all the events we helped sponsor in Iowa. Not only will candidates have to answer direct questions about pro-family issues, but we will have the opportunity to better understand their worldview when it comes to our issues, and to lay bare how that viewpoint would influence their approach to governing. Here's how the website for the event describes tonight's forum: "It's the last call. It's the big one. And best of all, it's the one where politics take a backseat, worldviews get stripped bare, and hearts are revealed for all to see. It's the one where you get to see what really makes the candidates tick."

I am excited to be able to ask the candidates about marriage, and their responses will be very influential in any future actions NOM might take in the run-up to the presidential vote.

Will you please chip in a donation of $15 or more right now? Your contribution will be matched dollar for dollar by a generous donor. It's really important that we hear from you today.

I'll chip in $15 realizing that NOM will receive a matching gift, doubling my contribution.

I'll chip in $25 realizing that NOM will receive a matching gift, doubling my contribution.

I'll chip in $50 realizing that NOM will receive a matching gift, doubling my contribution.

I'll chip in $100 realizing that NOM will receive a matching gift, doubling my contribution.

I'll chip in $250 or more realizing that NOM will receive a matching gift, doubling my contribution.

NOM recognized early on that the election of the next president would be a pivotal moment in determining if reversing the Supreme Court's ruling takes several years or several decades. There's no doubt that eventually the lie of same-sex marriage will make itself clear to people as they witness the reality of children suffering under a viewpoint that strips marriage of gender-complementarity and denies children the love of one of their natural parents. But we have the opportunity in 2016 to take a major step to avoid a 40-year battle as we've had to wage on life in the wake of Roe v Wade, and take a decisive step toward remaking the US Supreme Court when several justices who voted to redefine marriage retire during the next presidential term, which they are expected to do. It could take as few as just one new Supreme Court justice to reverse the marriage decision!

This is why we have devoted considerable time and resources to examining the candidates and to really understanding their views. It's imperative that the next president appoint judges who will reverse the Obergefell ruling that redefined marriage, and who will take actions as president to protect the right of individuals and states to act in support of marriage. So we've issued our Presidential Pledge that has been signed by several leading candidates, and also encouraged grassroots Americans to sign The People's Marriage Pledge. We've worked behind the scenes to learn as much as possible about each candidate's true character when it comes to fighting for marriage, and we've helped support major public forums so that Americans can see for themselves how the candidates engage the marriage issue.

Our ability to influence the presidential election is entirely dependent on whether you give us the resources to do so. We don't have big labor unions or corporate billionaires, but if we can convince thousands of grassroots Americans to stand with us, then we can make a tremendous difference. Please be one of those with the determination to stand, and make your most generous donation to NOM. Your gift of $15, $25, $50, $75 or $100 or more will be put to immediate use, and will be matched by a generous donor.

For a long while we've seen politicians get away with paying lip service to the issues we care deeply about. Many claim to be "pro life" and "pro marriage" but few actually do anything about it. We can't settle for lip service any longer! We need a president who is truly committed to leading and taking concrete action to restore marriage:

  • A president who will advocate for a federal marriage amendment;
  • A president who is committed to overturning the illegitimate and anti-constitutional ruling of the Supreme Court redefining marriage;
  • A president who will sign the First Amendment Defense Act into law;
  • A president who will reverse improper actions by the Obama Administration advancing a redefinition of marriage;
  • A president who will champion the truth of marriage as a profoundly important institution for men and women, and especially any children born of their union.

As I get ready to engage the candidates tonight in Des Moines, please let me know that you are standing with me. Please make a generous contribution today to support NOM.


Brian S Brown

PS — Every dollar you are able to contribute to us will be doubled thanks to a generous donor. Your $25 contribution becomes $50, and your gift of $100 will result in NOM receiving $200. As we get ready to make a major push to elect a pro-marriage champion as president, please give generously.

Donate Today

Big Victories For Marriage!

Dear Marriage Supporter,

I have fantastic news to share — marriage won huge victories last night in critical election races in Houston and Kentucky! These electoral victories prove without a doubt that the American people do not accept the illegitimate and anti-constitutional ruling of the US Supreme Court redefining marriage, and they reject the attempt by the left to use that illegitimate ruling as a springboard to further advance the agenda of those who wish to destroy marriage.

Voters went to the polls and overwhelming rejected the LGBT agenda in Houston, where the city's lesbian mayor, backed by the money and muscle of the grossly misnamed Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and other national LGBT groups, attempted to force through an ordinance that prohibited discrimination based on "gender identity" and "sexual orientation." Nearly 62% of Houston voters said "NO" to the so-called Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, which was jammed through the City Council by Houston's mayor.

It's a tremendous victory for supporters of marriage and common sense, people who realize that biology trumps "feelings" and "identity" when it comes to men and women. It is not discrimination to treat a man as a man, even if that person wants to say that he "feels" he's a woman. And it is not discrimination to keep men out of intimate facilities reserved for women, like bathrooms, showers and locker rooms. Keeping sex-segregated facilities separate is common sense, a policy that protects people's privacy and safety.

It's also a tremendous victory for NOM in our battle against the HRC and groups that are bent on imposing same-sex 'marriage' like Marriage Equality USA and the American Unity Fund. These groups contributed nearly $700,000 through October 23rd, and likely hundreds of thousands more in recent days. They organized their supporters across the country to make calls.

And they lost — big time!

NOM was a major financial contributor to the Campaign for Houston, the grassroots group that spearheaded the referendum, and we worked hard to organize our supporters all over the country to contribute directly to the campaign, and to get out to vote against the ordinance.

The results give us a tremendous sense of pride and encouragement to redouble our efforts nationwide to fight for the truth of marriage, the complementarity of men and women, and the rights of children. We congratulate the leadership and supporters of the Campaign For Houston on their tremendous success, especially Jared Woodfill, the campaign manager.

But Houston was not our only victory for marriage last night!

In Kentucky, pro-marriage champion Matt Bevin soundly defeated the gay marriage movement's candidate, incumbent Attorney General Jack Conway. NOM endorsed Mr. Bevin several weeks ago and has worked to promote his candidacy. Bevin pledged to support marriage and protect marriage supporters like Kim Davis and others who will not violate their conscience to be personally complicit in the lie that is same-sex 'marriage.' In contrast, Conway refused to defend the state's marriage amendment as attorney general and was a major reason why it failed in court.

Now Conway's career lies on the trash heap of history, and a pro-marriage champion, Matt Bevin, is ascending to the governorship of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Once again, when given the opportunity to cast a free vote, the American people have voted for the truth of marriage and for candidates who stand with them. We congratulate Matt Bevin on his tremendous victory, and look forward to working with him to enact legislation that will protect all marriage supporters, including Kim Davis, from discrimination and retaliation for refusing to go along with the illegitimate and unjust ruling of the Supreme Court in attempting to impose a redefined version of marriage on the nation.

The results in Houston and Kentucky also serve as the latest abject lesson for our side: never believe polling claims that purport to show that the public is somehow embracing the redefinition of marriage or the expansion of the LGBT agenda. These polls are dead wrong. Supporters of the Houston ordinance constantly claimed that the polls showed they would win, yet they got trounced. And in Kentucky, the media was claiming that Jack Conway held a commanding 5 point lead over Matt Bevin days before the election and was the overwhelming favorite to win. Again, Conway got creamed, losing to Bevin by 9 points.

The truth is that when the American people are allowed to cast free and fair ballots in the privacy of the polling booth, they stand for marriage and the candidates who stand with them.

We thank you for all your work in Houston and in Kentucky to help secure these great victories, and for your faithful support of NOM. Once again, we've put everything we could into the fight and are in need of your financial support to replenish our coffers. Please make a celebratory donation to NOM today so that we can begin to focus on the critical opportunities before us, including electing a pro-marriage champion as our next president.


Brian S Brown

PS — Don't forget that a generous donor has agreed to match your contribution dollar for dollar through the end of the year. Please act today to help us rebuild our treasury after these two tremendous victories in Houston and Kentucky. Your donation of $25 will result in us receiving $50 and your gift of $100 will mean we receive $200. Thank you!

Will Houston Voters be Truly Heroic and Stand Against "HERO"?

Dear Marriage Supporter,

Today is Election Day in many parts of the country. NOM is particularly watching races in Houston, TX and in Kentucky.

In Houston, voters have the rare opportunity to overturn an act of their City Council thanks to a referendum that local citizens qualified to the ballot. The grossly-misnamed Houston Equal Rights Ordinance would give the LGBT community special legal rights including the ability for men to use restrooms and showers reserved for women simply by claiming a "gender identity" of the opposite sex. They call it the HERO ordinance, but there is nothing heroic about risking the privacy and safety of people to pursue a PC policy on behalf of a tiny group of people that is advanced by the city's lesbian mayor.

Just having the opportunity to vote on this dangerous ordinance has been a tremendous struggle. The mayor and city officials did everything they could to disregard the voter petitions, even notoriously threatening local pastors with demands to review all their sermons and correspondence about the measure in order to pressure them to drop their campaign. The Texas Supreme Court had to order the measure on the ballot.

Our friend Ryan Anderson from The Heritage Foundation has written a thoughtful piece about the problems with the Houston ordinance and others like it which I commend to your attention.

If you live in Houston, or have family or friends there, please do everything possible to get out and vote against the proposed ordinance. And if you can, please consider making a financial contribution, as NOM has, to the Campaign For Houston to defeat this proposal. National gay and lesbian groups who are determined to rewrite society have taken note of NOM's support of the campaign to overturn this ordinance, and are working overtime to get their allies involved to counter us. Please stand strong for common sense, biology and truth and support the Campaign For Houston in their work to overturn this terrible ordinance.

Meanwhile in Kentucky, two important statewide races are on the ballot. NOM has endorsed Matt Bevin in his race for Governor of Kentucky. Bevin is running for this open seat to replace Gov. Steve Beshear against the incumbent state Attorney General, Jack Conway. Conway is one of the people most responsible for marriage being redefined in Kentucky because he refused to mount a defense of Kentucky's state marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. He betrayed the 75% of Kentucky voters who approved marriage.

Meanwhile, Beshear's son, Andy Beshear, is running for Attorney General to replace Conway. The younger Beshear has defended the decision of his father to abandon marriage and force local officials like Kim Davis to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples that violate the state constitution. His refusal to grant them a reasonable accommodation is what landed Kim Davis in jail. NOM has endorsed Whitney Westerfield for Attorney General because he's stood strong for marriage and is determined to protect the religious liberty rights of marriage supporters.

Polls indicate that the Kentucky races are close and turnout will be the key. If you live in Kentucky or have friends or family there, please do what you can to urge them to get out to vote for Matt Bevin and Whitney Westerfield.

Elections have consequences, and the races in Houston and Kentucky are important ones. The other side has money and power, but we have the truth and the people. May truth and the people prevail.


Brian S Brown

Science Proves Family Structure Matters

Throughout history it's been obvious to any observer that children in intact families with a married mother and father do much better than children from broken homes or those living in alternative family structures. In recent years, there's been an attempt to deny that reality and convince people that children raised by gay or lesbian parents are somehow exempted from the realities of family life, claiming there are "no differences" in outcomes for these kids or even sometimes suggesting they do better than children raised by a married mother and father in the home. Increasingly, social scientists have been examining this "no differences" claim and, as you might suspect, find it without merit. A distinguished social scientist from the University of Virginia, W. Bradford Wilcox, writes a detailed piece this week for National Review reviewing three recent developments that make it harder for the "family structure denialists" to continue to make the "no differences" claim. He says:

"It’s been a rough two weeks for the family-structure denialists, those progressive academics (Philip Cohen, “How to Live in a World Where Marriage Is in Decline”), journalists (Katie Roiphe, “New York Times, Stop Moralizing About Single Mothers”), and pundits (Matthew Yglesias, “The ‘Decline’ of Marriage Isn’t a Problem”) who seek to minimize or deny the importance of marriage and family structure. That’s because three new pieces of scholarship — a journal, a report, and a study — were released this month that solidify the growing scientific consensus that marriage and family structure matter for children, families, and the nation as a whole."

The studies and reports mention by Wilcox confirm many of the outcome problems that children who lack a married mother and father in the home experience, especially boys lacking the presence of their father at home. Wilcox says these children "are floundering in school and society" and details findings including problems in the areas of truancy and educational attainment, increased behavioral problems, higher cognitive disability, perform worse on standardized school tests and are less likely to graduate from high school. And the article details important new findings that states with higher levels of married parenthood enjoy higher levels of growth, economic mobility for children growing up poor, higher median family income and markedly lower levels of child poverty. Says Wilcox,

"[W]ith study after study showing that children, families, and now even states benefit from strong and stable married families, the job of those who would seek to deny that marriage and family structure also play an important role — the family-structure denialists — is getting harder and harder. That’s because the facts just aren’t with those who seek to deny the scientific evidence that family change is having a major impact on our social environment and — in particular — our boys.

The complete article is available at National Review.

NOM Endorses Matt Bevin, Whitney Westerfield for Kentucky Governor, Attorney General

Contact: Paul Bothwell (202) 457-8060 x-105 [email protected]


Washington – The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today announced they have endorsed Matt Bevin in his race for Governor of Kentucky, and Whitney Westerfield as Attorney General of the state. Kentucky is one of three states with off-year elections and will elect a new governor and attorney general on November 3, 2015.

"Matt Bevin and Whitney Westerfield are the clear choices for the 75% of Kentucky voters who cast ballots to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Bevin and Westerfield have stood up to defend traditional marriage and religious liberty while their opponents, Jack Conway and Andy Beshear, have abandoned voters on marriage and religious liberty."

Jack Conway, the incumbent Attorney General and Democratic candidate for governor, refused to defend the state's marriage amendment when it was challenged by gay activists. Andy Beshear, son of current Democratic governor Steve Beshear and the Democratic candidate for Attorney General to replace Conway, has defended his father's refusal to grant an accommodation to independently elected county clerks who do not wish to personally issue 'marriage' licenses that violate the Kentucky state constitution as well as their religious beliefs. Kentucky clerk Kim Davis spent nearly a week in jail before public pressure resulting in her being freed.

Meanwhile, Matt Bevin, the Republican candidate for governor, has a strong record in support of marriage and religious liberty. He appeared this week at a religious liberty rally in Owensboro, KY and said, "I will fight for our first amendment rights." Whitney Westerfield similarly has a strong record on marriage religious liberty and has called for Governor Beshear to issue an exemption for clerks like Kim Davis or call the Legislature into special session to deal with the problem. "There's a way to do this…to protect the religious freedoms of those people who object," he said at a recent debate with Andy Beshear.

"The issue before the people of Kentucky is whether they want a governor and attorney general who will fight for the rights of Kentuckians to preserve marriage and religious liberty, or will throw in the towel when those rights are challenged by wealthy gay activists," Brown said. "Kentucky deserves to determine its laws for itself, and the voters of Kentucky are entitled to have their decisions respected and defended. Jack Conway and Andy Beshear have abandoned them, but Matt Bevin and Whitney Westerfield will restore honor and leadership to those offices."

NOM referred voters to a statement recently issued by over 60 prominent legal scholars who have declared the recent US Supreme Court ruling to be "anti-constitutional and illegitimate." The scholars say that the ruling should not be considered binding precedent or settled law on anyone but the plaintiffs in the case, and called on state officeholders in Kentucky and elsewhere to "recognize the authority of states to define marriage, and the right of federal and state officeholders to act in accordance with those definitions."

"The people of the Commonwealth of Kentucky are not peasants conscribed to do the bidding of their 'masters' on the US Supreme Court," Brown said. "The constitution of the Unites States is the supreme law of the law, not what five unelected judges say it is, and the constitution of Kentucky is the supreme law of the Commonwealth. Voters should demand that their elected officials adhere to the constitution, including the decision of 75% of voters to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

# # #

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, please contact Paul Bothwell, [email protected], (202) 457-8060 x-105.

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.

Oregon Agency Takes Legal Action to Force Payment of Fine By Christian Bakers

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries is taking legal action to attempt to force Aaron and Melissa Klein, the Oregon bakers who declined to bake a ‘wedding’ cake for a same-sex couple based on their religious views, to pay a $135,000 fine. The Kleins have refused to pay the money because it was levied by a bureaucratic agency and the matter is now on appeal to the courts. In the meantime, they’ve made it clear that they have no animosity toward those who filed the complaint, even going as far as sending them handmade cakes. Their objection is to using their talents to help celebrate something that is contrary to their Christian beliefs.

It’s a tragedy that the bureaucrats who acted as judge and jury in ruling against the Kleins (after engaging in substantial private discussions with the state’s top gay rights group) now think they can bully the young Christian couple into paying before the courts have even examined the case. What this family is experiencing is representative of what will happen to the religious liberty rights of Christians and other people of faith whose personal participation in celebrating a gay ‘wedding’ is being routinely demanded by lesbian and gay activists.

The Daily Signal has the story:

Image via The Daily Signal

Image via The Daily Signal

The agency that ordered Aaron and Melissa Klein to pay $135,000 in damages for refusing to bake a cake for a same-sex couple began the legal process last week to seize the money the Oregon bakers are refusing to pay.

“Our agency has docketed the judgment and is exploring collection options,” Charlie Burr, communications director for the agency, told The Daily Signal. “They are entitled to a full and fair review of the case, but do not have the right to disregard a legally binding order.”

Docketing the judgment is a preliminary step the agency must take in order to seize the Kleins’ house, property, or other assets in lieu of payment.

On July 2, Brad Avakian, commissioner of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, ordered the Kleins to pay $135,000 for the emotional, physical, and psychological damages they caused Rachel and Laurel Bowman-Cryer for refusing to make a wedding cake.

Since then, the Kleins have been vocal about their plans to resist the order, and they told The Daily Signal they have no intention of backing down.

“There’s legal reasons and there’s also kind of personal reasons,” Aaron Klein told The Daily Signal in a phone interview. “If a civil court or a circuit court judge had made this order, I would consider it legally binding. But when a bureaucracy does it and I didn’t get due process, I don’t call it legally binding.”

Talking about the personal reasons, Aaron cited a July interview in Willamette Week, where the complainants suggested that the case wasn’t about money.

“We didn’t have a choice in how this was prosecuted,” Rachel Bowman-Cryer said. “We didn’t have a choice in the fine. If we had been given the option, we probably would have said: ‘Just apologize. Just say you’re sorry and go away.’”

Her wife, Laurel, added, “[W]e’re not asking for anything. We’ve never asked for a penny from anybody.”

“When you have these girls come out and say we never wanted the money,” Aaron said, “it wasn’t about the money and we don’t need the money … and I say this isn’t right, I shouldn’t have to pay this money, and the only person saying the money should exchange hands seems to be Brad Avakian.”

Image via Focus On The Family

Image via Focus On The Family

In order to pay the $135,000, the Kleins were given two options: obtain a bond or an irrevocable line of credit, which would guarantee their obligations to the Bowman-Cryers unless the Kleins won their case.

“A bond is going to cost roughly $7,000. That’s $7,000 I’m never going to get back, even if I won on appeal,” Aaron said. “Should I have to pay $7,000? I don’t think that’s fair.”

Taking out a line of credit, he said, would be the same as handing over money to the state.

“I couldn’t find a bank that would do it without just depositing the full amount of money, so it’s not a letter of credit at that point. It’s just the same as giving the state money, and having them hold it, which I don’t trust the state to hold my money any more than I trust them to give me the evidence.”

Instead, the Kleins’ attorneys asked the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries to issue a stay, which is a legal process that would have put the damages payment on hold until their appeals ruling comes out.

(The Kleins filed a petition for review with the Washington Court of Appeals in July, after the final order came out.)

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries denied their request for a stay.

. . .

After the order came out, multiple fundraisers were set up to help the Kleins pay the damages.

Although those fundraisers raised thousands of dollars, Aaron claimed the “half million” figure is “bloated” but did not disclose the final tally.

“The number they’ve given out is bloated,” Klein said. “It is not what we have available, it is not what we have on hand, and there are so many variables to where that money has to go, what has to happen with that money, that we’re not touching that money for any purpose because I don’t know what the future holds.”

If the Kleins eventually win their case in the appellate court, Aaron said they’d like to use that money to first pay their own bills, then “bless” others.

“I’d like to say that we’d definitely help some people out. We’ve had a huge financial hardship through this, so it would be nice to catch up on some bills, but we’d definitely love to bless others.”

Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis Says Pope Francis Told Her to 'Stay Strong'

As reported by AP, Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis says that she had a private meeting with Pope Francis during his visit to the United States. Davis, who was jailed for refusing to issue same-sex "marriage" licenses because of her religious beliefs, says that Pope Francis thanked her for her courage and urged her to “stay strong.” A New York Times article, reported that the exchange was done via an arranged, private meeting, which a Vatican spokesperson has now confirmed.

The AP story via US News is as follows:


Image via ABC News/Getty Images

A Kentucky clerk who went to jail for defying a federal court's orders to issue same-sex marriage licenses says she met briefly with the pope during his historic visit to the United States.

The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, didn't deny the encounter took place but said Wednesday in Rome that he had no comment on the topic.

Rowan County clerk Kim Davis and her husband met privately with Pope Francis on Thursday afternoon at the Vatican Embassy in Washington, D.C., for less than 15 minutes, said her lawyer, Mat Staver.

"It was really very humbling to even think that he would want to meet me or know me," Davis said in an interview with ABC.

Davis, an Apostolic Christian, spent five days in jail earlier this month for defying a federal court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. In a telephone interview late Tuesday, Staver would not say who initiated the meeting with the pope or how it came to be, though he did say that Vatican officials had inquired about Davis' situation while she was in jail. He declined to name them.

"He told me before he left, he said 'stay strong.' That was a great encouragement," Davis said of the pope during the ABC interview. "Just knowing that the pope is on track with what we're doing and agreeing, you know, it kind of validates everything."

She didn't say in the interview whether she had a private audience with the pope or she was part of larger crowd.

Davis was in Washington for the Values Voter Summit, where the Family Research Council, which opposes same-sex marriage, presented her with an award for defying the federal judge. While in Washington, the longtime Democrat said she was switching to the Republican party because she felt abandoned by Democrats in her fight against same-sex marriage.

Pope Francis did not focus on the divisive debate over same-sex marriage during his visit last week. As he left the country, he told reporters who inquired that he did not know Davis' case in detail, but he defended conscientious objection as a human right.

"It is a right. And if a person does not allow others to be a conscientious objector, he denies a right," Francis said.

Orthodox Anglican Media Outlet Says ‘Obama out to shame and humiliate Christians, the Pope and the Church'

As part of his historic visit to the United States, during which he will canonize Fr. Junipero Serra and address the World Meeting of Families, Pope Francis will also attend a White House dinner organized by President Obama. As head of state of the Vatican, diplomatic protocol would hold that friends and allies of the Catholic Church and prominent American Catholics be on the guest list. And while some of those types of individuals have been invited, President Obama has gone out of his way to shove the LGBT agenda in Pope Francis’ face. He’s invited the openly gay-Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson who “married” his same-sex partner several years ago.

According to the website Virtue Online, which bills itself as the voice for global orthodox Anglicanism, Robinson, “has almost single-handedly brought the Anglican Communion down to its knees as it teeters on the edge of implosion.” In addition to Robinson, Obama has invited numerous gay, lesbian and transgender activists. One of the activists was reportedly told by the While House to ‘invite several friends.’ From the story:

Image via ABC News/Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo

Image via ABC News/Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo

Obama's form of in-your-face diplomatic protocol includes trotting out every form of sexual deviant and parading them before Pope Francis. It's enough to embarrass the gentle humble Pontiff.

The Pope was being compassionate with his comment concerning his priests, who are struggling with a homosexual orientation, when he commented, "Who am I to judge?" However, he stands pat on the Catholic Church's firm doctrine and teaching on homosexual practice, pro-life, and traditional marriage issues, as well as an all-male priesthood.

CNS News describes some of the known invitees on the guest list as "several gay and transgender persons, a controversial nun, a radical preacher, and a gay Episcopal bishop."

The gay Episcopal bishop is none other than Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson (IX New Hampshire-retired). As the first openly gay and partnered man to be consecrated a bishop in Christendom, he has almost single-handedly brought the Anglican Communion down to its knees as it teeters on the edge of implosion.

The referenced "several gay and transgender persons" include: Vivian Taylor, a transgendered "woman" who was executive director of Integrity-USA and involved with TransEpiscopal. Obama her/him to Pope Francis' formal Sept. 23 televised White House Arrival Ceremony. S/he was told to bring five friends.

"I was told I could bring several friends with me," Taylor said, noting that s/he was "glad we can bring some LGBT representation to the event."

Taylor is looking forward to meeting the Pope, "I'm very happy to meet my brother in Christ, Pope Francis."

The five representative LGBT friends Taylor invited are Nicole Santamaria, the Secretary of Asociacion Colectivo Alejandria an Hispanic LGBT advocacy group; Marcia Garber a member of Dignity-USA and the mother of a transgendered child; Mateo Williamson, a cross-dressing transgender Catholic and the former co-chairman of Transgender Caucus for Dignity-USA; the Rev. Canon Stephanie Spellers, an LGBT advocate, liberal Episcopal theologian, the director of Mission & Reconciliation at General Theological Seminary and chaplain to the Episcopal House of Bishops (reports are that Canon Spellers will be unable to attend the Pope's soiree because she didn't RSVP in time); and the Rev. Cameron Partridge, a transgendered Episcopal priest who preached at the Washington National Cathedral.

. . .

Obama is very gay-friendly and a champion of gay rights. There is also much speculation as to whether Obama is actually a Bible-believing Evangelical, a progressive Christian, or a closet Muslim. When the recent Supreme Court marriage equality ruling came down, making same-sex marriage the law of the land, he bathed the White House in Gay Pride rainbow colors in celebration of the earth-shattering event. Many God-fearing Christians were horrified at the spectacle. Chances are the President will not light up the White House in papal yellow and white to honor his diplomatic guest from the Vatican City-State.

Latest research shows that fewer than four percent of Americans identify themselves as being LGBT, while more than 70 percent of Americans consider themselves Christians. Of that number, more than 25 percent are Roman Catholics with Episcopalians and Anglicans making up about 1.5 percent of American Christians. The remaining almost 75 percent of the American Christian population is spread between the Evangelicals, Mainline Protestants, Pentecostals, and other Christian believers -- Amish ... Quakers ... Holiness ... Reformed...

Fr. Dwight Longenecker, a former Anglican priest who swam the Tiber and is now a Pastoral Provision Roman Catholic priest in South Carolina, pinioned on his blog Standing on my Head: "There will be thousands at this 'audience' with Pope Francis and it's doubtful that Gene Robinson will be in the line up to meet Pope Francis personally, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him maneuvered into place for a photo with the Pope which will the mainstream media will then publish with the caption, 'Pope Francis and Gay Bishop: Who Am I to Judge?'"

"When the Supreme Court Oversteps Its Bounds, Citizens Are Right to Resist"

NOM’s chairman, John Eastman, expounds on the arguments surrounding the Kim Davis debacle, and how, “when the Supreme Court oversteps its bounds, citizens are right to resist”:



The double standard on display is palpable. I don’t recall Keegen or any of the other self-righteous, newfound devotees of the rule of law calling for the resignation of Kentucky’s attorney general when he refused to defend his state’s marriage law — or any of the other state attorneys general who did the same, from California’s Jerry Brown to Pennsylvania’s Kathleen Kane, and several others, including perhaps most notoriously Oregon’s Ellen Rosenblum, who was caught actively colluding with plaintiffs to ensure judicial invalidation of the Oregon marriage law she disliked.

“But Davis was refusing to comply with a decision of the Supreme Court,” it will be argued. So, too, did all those illustrious attorneys general. All of them refused to do their duty and defend their state’s man-woman marriage laws, even though the binding precedent of the Supreme Court at that time, a 1972 case called Baker v. Nelson, was that such laws were constitutionally valid.

Ms. Davis’s position has also been mischaracterized as asserting that because the Supreme Court’s decision is contrary to God’s authority, she cannot be compelled to comply with it and therefore can prevent same-sex couples from getting married in her county. Her position — so described — has been belittled by simpletons across the political spectrum as nothing more than the misguided stance of a crazy evangelical clinging to her Bible. But that is not her legal argument at all (however much merit it might have as a reaction to an illegitimate decision by the Supreme Court). Her actual argument is much more restrained.

Kentucky has a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which expressly prevents the government from imposing a substantial burden on someone’s religious beliefs unless the government’s mandate is narrowly tailored to further a compelling governmental interest. Because this lawsuit is pending in federal court, the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which contains the same protection, is also applicable. Ms. Davis’s lawyers have simply argued that these federal and state laws require that her religious objection to issuing same-sex “marriage” licenses over her own name be accommodated.

. . .

Abraham Lincoln famously said, in his first inaugural address, that although judicial decisions are binding on the specific parties to a case, “the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”

In short, Ms. Davis was much more faithful to her oath of office, and to the Constitution she vowed to support, than the federal judge who jailed her for contempt, the attorney general of the state who refused to defend Kentucky’s laws, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, who usurped the authority of the states and the more than 50 million voters who had recently reaffirmed the natural definition of marriage, in order to impose his own more “enlightened” views on the nation. One can only hope that Ms. Davis’s simple but determined act of civil disobedience will yet ignite the kind of reaction in the American people that is necessary to oppose such lawlessness, or at the very least bring forth a national leader who will take up the argument against judicial supremacy in truly Lincolnian fashion.

Visit National Review for the full article.

Oregon Judge Supports Traditional Marriage; Targeted By Investigation To Determine If He Is Unfit For Office

The nation has just witnessed the disturbing scene of a Christian clerk put into jail, because she did not want to be personally involved in licensing a same-sex ‘marriage’ since doing so would violate her deeply held religious beliefs. Now comes another story of gay activists attempting to destroy another official who similarly holds religious views that will not allow him to participate in same-sex ‘marriages.’

For the past year Marion County (Oregon) judge Vance Day has declined to solemnize any marriages because he does not want to participate in a gay ‘wedding.’ For this, he is now under official investigation against charges he is unfit for office. If found guilty he could be removed from office, costing him his livelihood and reputation for holding true to his religious convictions. This is the latest example of punishment of marriage supporters unleashed by the illegitimate decision of the US Supreme court to invent a “right” to same-sex ‘marriage’ and imposing it in every state without exception. The New York Times has the story:

ThinkstockPhotos-483608742Marion County Judge Vance Day is being investigated by a judicial fitness commission in part over his refusal to perform same-sex marriages on religious grounds, a spokesman for the judge said.

When a federal court ruling in May 2014 made same-sex marriage legal in Oregon, Day instructed his staff to refer same-sex couples looking to marry to other judges, spokesman Patrick Korten said Friday.

Last fall, he decided to stop performing weddings altogether, aside from one in March that had long been scheduled, Korten said.

"He made a decision nearly a year ago to stop doing weddings altogether, and the principal factor that he weighed was the pressure that one would face to perform a same-sex wedding, which he had a conflict with his religious beliefs," Korten said.

In an email, Day declined to comment and referred questions to Korten.

The issue of same-sex weddings is "the weightiest" of several allegations against Day that are being investigated by the Commission on Judicial Fitness and Disability, Korten said.

He declined to detail any of the allegations, saying he didn't want to defy the commission, which considers complaints confidential until it is ready to make them public.

Why Kim Davis Is Such A Threat To Liberals

Rachel Lu at The Federalist brilliantly takes to task the cartoonish and misleading nature of the press coverage of the Kim Davis situation by the liberal media:

Image via USA Today/Ty Wright/Getty Images

Image via USA TODAY/Ty Wright/Getty Images

The incarceration and subsequent release of Kim Davis has been a sensation in the liberal press. Virtually every liberal outlet participated in the feeding frenzy.

This is easy to understand. If we don’t slam the lid on this religious-freedom business, Christians might find some loophole they can exploit to go on practicing their religion outside of church. Once you open the door to “conscience objections,” religious people start coming out of the woodwork.

Without some strenuous efforts at media spin, these figures might easily win public approval. Most Americans, after all, say they support religious freedom. Most likely they won’t warm to the idea that Christians should be bludgeoned into submission when a minor legal accommodation could enable them to adhere to their religious beliefs with minimal inconvenience to anyone.

For a left-wing pundit, however, accommodation isn’t the name of this game. What fun is their Supreme Court victory if they don’t get to stick it to the anti-marriage-equality bigots? For the sake of the liberal morality narrative, Davis has to go down. To sell that to the public, she must be dismissed as a right-wing crank.

. . .

Conservatives know that the government is not God. Left-wing pundits have made much of Davis’ declaration that she is following God’s will. In their minds, this is crazy-talk, akin to listening to Little Green Men. Quite a few have tried to make this into the Right’s Kermit Gosnell moment, with Mark Joseph Stern going so far as to declare that Davis is “the monster conservatives created” who will undermine voters’ enthusiasm for religious freedom.

. . .

When Davis was elected, she had no problem doing her job. Post-Obergefell, she is now expected to do something she considers to be morally wrong. No court or politician actually has the authority to contravene the natural order, making wrong actions right. That is her point, and it is perfectly fair, although we all understand how liberal pundits occasionally get confused about the difference between “government” and “God.”

The law of the land is not just a rule book. It’s more accurate to understand it as an organic tradition, which already has many precedents for exactly the kind of problem that arises here: dealing with good-faith conflicts between legal norms and sincere moral or religious beliefs. So, in a sense, it is the law itself that gives us good reasons to look for ways to accommodate people like Davis, whose free exercise of religion is burdened by revisions to current laws.

Liberals, we get that you aren’t big fans of tradition. But maybe you could try to remind yourselves now and then that we aren’t reinventing the wheel every time interests conflict? Many people think they are being principled when they suggest that Davis should quit her job if she feels unable to discharge her duties. But that’s not how these sorts of cases have been handled in the past. Both the Federal Civil Rights Act and state Religious Freedom Restoration Acts (which Kentucky has passed) provide a legal framework for seeking accommodations for employees who are unable to execute specific duties for reasons of conscience.

It turns out, then, that our legal tradition gives us good reason to seek an accommodation for Davis, and, happily, such a fix could easily be provided along the lines of North Carolina’s already-existing model.

Kim Davis Stands Strong in the Face of an Unjust Law

The Kim Davis debacle presents the American public with something oddly reminiscent of events past. Pundits on both sides of the same-sex "marriage" debate have cited "the wrong side of history" as a reason to stop fighting for the truth about marriage. When put to the test of actual history, however, the argument holds no water. The Town Hall explains:

Image via New York Times/Ty Wright/Getty Images

Image via New York Times/Ty Wright/Getty Images

[One of] the main arguments from gay marriage proponents and conservatives who have given up the fight [is this:] The rule of law must be respected, and therefore everyone, from the clerk to the courts, must comply.

The rebuttal to this argument lies with Martin Luther King Jr., who sat in a jail cell for refusing to comply with Jim Crow: “An unjust law is no law at all.”

What defines an unjust law? One in which those who impose it do not comply with it. I would further add that any law which violates natural law or resists science or market systems falls into the same desiccated category. By the way, everyone seems hell-bent on forgetting that this national imposition of homosexual marriage did not occur from elected officials or democratic consensus, but the arbitrary turn of phrases from five unelected, unaccountable judges. Once again, former Arkansas Governor and Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee had it right: “The Supreme Court is not the Supreme Being.”

The court which justified “separate but equal” would overturn itself fifty-six years later. Roe v. Wade is facing increasing resistance from science and technology, as well as moral and legal suasion, and has not yet crossed the fifty-year mark. The Obergefell decision is barely two months old, yet across the country Americans are not complying, including Kim Davis. How amazing and compelling that her act of nullification occurs in Kentucky, where Founding Father Thomas Jefferson directed his Resolutions against federal tyranny three hundred years ago.


Kim Davis, like civil rights activist Rosa Parks, refuses to comply with an unjust court ruling based on a misunderstanding of sexuality and marriage.

Join Liberty Rally for Kim Davis, Tuesday Sept. 8

Please join this special Liberty Rally for Kim Davis!

With Special Guests:
Governor Mike Huckabee
Liberty Counsel's Mat Staver
Brian Brown

Tuesday, September 8, 3:00 PM ET

If you cannot attend in person, please spread the word via social media using the hashtag #IMWITHKIM, or email the attached flyer. We all need to stand strong for Kim Davis now!

Download the Flyer



Brian S Brown


Sign The Kim Davis Petition

Gov. Chris Christie is Targeting Christians

Gov. Chris Christie, falling fast in the presidential polls, is attempting to remake himself into the “law and order” candidate, and he’s targeting Christians who do not wish to personally participate in gay "marriage" ceremonies.

Image via ABC News/(Mel Evans/AP Photo)

Image via ABC News/(Mel Evans/AP Photo)

Across the country people have been sued, fined, had their businesses closed and been informed the state could seize all their personal assets because they do not wish to participate in something that goes against God’s design – marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Yet Christie calls this “discrimination” and says that they “need to follow the law.” What specific law is Christie referencing? Does he mean the federal law (Religious Freedom Restoration Act) that provides that government has a duty to provide reasonable accommodation to people with sincere religious beliefs? Or perhaps he’s referring to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which provides accommodation for “conscientious objectors”? Most likely he’s referring to the illegitimate ruling of the Supreme Court in redefining marriage, but that ruling said nothing about forcing everyone to participate in it. LifeSiteNews reports:

[R]egarding the religious freedom of Christian-owned businesses, he [Christie] said, "I'm someone in this country who believes in law and order. I'm a former prosecutor. ... We need to enforce the law in this country in every respect – not just the laws we like, but all the laws."

During the "Presidential Soapbox" at the Iowa State Fair last week, Christie said much the same thing. "We have a system of laws in this country, and those laws need to be followed," he said, referring to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision constitutionalizing same-sex "marriage."

"Businesses ... should have to be able to do business under the laws of our country," Christie expounded. "When I take an oath of office as governor, my oath of office is to enforce the laws of the state of New Jersey. Not the laws I like or the laws that I agree with, but all the laws."

Christie characterized Christians who seek to live their faith in the business world as discriminatory. "Businesses should not be allowed to discriminate, no."

In the past, Christie has also said that Christian clerks must violate their faith and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. He also signed a bill making it illegal for counselors and therapists to help gender-confused minors come out of the gay lifestyle.

Sadly, Gov. Christie has a history of abandoning marriage rather than challenging illegitimate judicial rulings. He dropped a defense of his state’s traditional marriage law because he thought he would lose the fight. In the presidential contest, Christie has so far failed to sign NOM’s Presidential Marriage Pledge.

Marriage Between One Man and One Woman Is Worth Celebrating

Mayor Andy Mack of Longview Texas declared August ‘Celebrate Traditional Marriage’ month. As a result, a coalition of citizens and East Texas Churches organized an event, to which a crowd estimated near one-thousand turned out to celebrate on the Gregg County courthouse lawn.

WSMV reported on the event:

ThinkstockPhotos-532815271Mayor Andy Mack proclaimed August 'Celebrate Traditional Marriage' month.

Around a thousand people came out to support the event, many with deep religious conviction.

"It's very important. I believe God put us together and he keeps us together every day," says Barbara Jones who's been married 47 years.

"It is a commitment and there will be ups and downs, so you just work through those things," says James McClemore, married 45 years.

Representative Brian Hughes was on hand with other elected officials in support of the event.

"We understand how important traditional marriage is. It was defined by God a long time before America was here. And it's so heartwarming to see
so many people come out to affirm that," Hughes says.

On the heels of the June gay pride event, and then the legalization of same sex-marriage, many believe the event was needed.

"It seems like the other side is always getting the headlines," said one married couple.

Marriage - the conjugal, lifetime, exclusive union between one man and one woman - is a sacred institution which is certainly deserving of celebration. Any union that deviates from this definition is not marriage.