NOM BLOG

Category Archives: States

NYC No Place for You or Me

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

"Stay out of New York City."

That is effectively the message that a City Councilman named Daniel Dromm has sent to you, me, and millions of pro-marriage Americans — including the millions who already live in the city that never sleeps. And none of us, least of all New Yorkers, can allow ourselves to remain silent about it.

Dromm sent his message by way of remarks to the Huffington Post, when he said of anyone who believes in marriage as the union of one man and one woman:

We don't need bigots coming to New York City. They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community. [...] We don't need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves. They need to wake up and see reality.

"Not welcome here." Yes, you read that right. An individual's own privately-held beliefs, if they conflict with Mr. Drumm's radical new orthodoxy, even if those beliefs are never publicly expressed, make that person guilty of a "thought-crime" and label him or her a "bigot" that doesn't belong in the Big Apple!

What spurred Dromm's remarks? The announcement that Chick-fil-A had plans to expand its operations into New York City. Dromm is one of those intolerant few who still cling bitterly to a misremembered moment in 2012 when Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy was reported in the press expressing his personal belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.

In Dromm's and others' imaginations, this meant that Chick-fil-A was an "anti-gay company" and that Cathy and the many thousands who work for him deserve punishment. You may remember how, at the time, several cities mayors and councilmembers said that Chick-fil-A was unwelcome in their jurisdictions. But Dromm's recent remarks go even further: he's effectively said that anyone who believes in marriage, regardless of how privately they hold these beliefs, is a "bigot" who doesn't belong!

I shudder to think I've lived to see the day when a public official in our great nation can make such an outrageously intolerant statement and not be taken to task in every quarter for such an un-American and uncivil position. These remarks should have stirred public outcry and a flurry of media attention: but instead we hear deafening silence from the media, which is tantamount to a tacit approval.

What does this say about our media culture? When Brendan Eich was appointed as the new CEO of Mozilla, and it came to light that years before he had given a donation to Proposition 8, a few activists on Twitter expressed disapproval. But the media eagerly leapt to the task of fanning that flame and ignited a true firestorm in the press that eventually ended with Eich's being forced to step down from his position.

But when the shoe is on the other foot, we don't hear a peep from the press. Where is the national outcry over the news coming last week from Portland, Oregon, about Chauncy Childs and the new business she's trying to start?

You haven't heard of her? I'm not surprised. That's because she's not a gay activist. She's not a radical leftist trying to redefine marriage and family to suit her own personal desires. Instead, she's a pro-marriage individual who posted on her private Facebook page some expressions of her beliefs.

So you probably haven't heard how gay activists are trying to force her business closed before it even opens its doors. They've even been posting lists of vendors that trade with her small shop, Moreland Farmers Pantry, and calling for a boycott of those other businesses until they sever ties with Mrs. Childs. One local restaurant owner, a man who actually supports same-sex ‘marriage,' spoke up against the bullying targeted at Mrs. Childs — and now his restaurant has been targeted by a separate boycott!

Is this the environment we want to pass on to our children and grandchildren? An environment where belief in marriage as God designed it is made into a "thought crime" and the sole criterion by which one can be excluded from a company position, a business relationship, or even a whole city community?

Of course not. Absolutely not. But the culture isn't going to turn around on its own. We need to stand up and speak out.

Here's what you can do.

So here's what you can do today to respond to these latest outrages waged against people like you and me who believe in marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

If you live in New York, send a strong message to the City Council that Mr. Dromm's remarks should be condemned, and the City should apologize to the millions of New Yorkers that have been insulted and hurt by this display of gross intolerance.

For those of us who do not live in New York, we can make our voices heard with this summer's March for Marriage on June 19th. We are working hard to make sure we bring as many people to the Capitol as possible, to show that a groundswell of support still exists in our country for the values you and I believe in.

But of course, the March requires a great deal of resources and planning, and we can use your help. Please consider making a gift to the March for Marriage today and help us to spread the word about this event which comes at such a critical time in the public debate over marriage.

We need to show the radical activists out to redefine marriage that their tactics of intimidation and bullying won't work — that they aren't going to silence us or crowd us out of the public square. On the contrary, we're going to take to the public square even more literally, marching in the streets of our capitol against their brash attempts to curtail our rights of free speech, free assembly, and free exercise.

Thank you for standing — and Marching — with us!

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown

National Organization for Marriage Condemns New York City Councilman’s “Outrageous, Intolerant” Remarks, Demands an Apology and Retraction from Entire Council

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 14, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"What Councilman Dromm has effectively said here is that anyone who believes in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is unwelcome in New York City. Mr. Dromm has alienated and insulted millions of New Yorkers." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) issued a strong condemnation of recently reported remarks by New York City Councilman Daniel Dromm which the organization characterized as "outrageous and intolerant." The organization called upon Dromm to apologize for his words, and for the City Council to condemn the remarks and clarify that they do not reflect the City's values and views.

Dromm's remarks, reported in an April 9th article on The Huffington Post, were in response to the announcement by Chick-fil-A of the company's plans to expand operations into New York City. Dromm was reported as saying, "We don't need bigots coming to New York City. They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community. […] We don't need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves. They need to wake up and see reality."

Brian Brown, NOM's President responded to the comments with condemnation. "These remarks are outrageous and intolerant, and sadly seem to be part of a trend developing in the public debate surrounding this issue," Brown said. "When Dan Cathy's pro-marriage views were first reported in 2012, we saw mayors and city councils saying similar things—it was a disgraceful circus then, and it is now."

But Brown said that Dromm's remarks go even further than previous attempts to punish Chick-fil-A for its CEO's personal views.

"What Dromm has effectively said here is that anyone who believes in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is unwelcome in New York City," Brown noted. "His remarks, coming amidst a climate of such unseemly attacks on pro-marriage people as we saw with the Mozilla controversy last week, simply reinforce a growing manifestation of hostility and intimidation in the public square toward folks with traditional values. Christians and others are now, it seems, going to be considered guilty of 'thought-crimes' and threatened with all manner of reprisals simply for holding their beliefs."

Brown called on the City Council to condemn Dromm's statements and to issue a formal apology to New Yorkers: "Mr. Dromm has alienated and insulted millions of New Yorkers and made them feel like they don't belong in their own home city. The Council should correct this and extend an apology immediately and undo the hurt and wrong that's been done."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Did This Councilman Really Just Tell Millions of New Yorkers They're Unwelcome There? Yes. Yes He Did.

We've shared with you before this insightful article by Ryan Anderson at Heritage about the recent resignation of Brendan Eich from Mozilla. In it, Ryan remarked:

The debate over the meaning and purpose of marriage will continue. We should conduct it in a civil manner. Bullies may win for a while, but theirs is a scorched-earth policy. They poison democratic discourse and fray the bonds on which democracy itself ultimately depends.

Even those who disagree with each other about morally charged issues of public policy need to be able to live together.

Councilman Daniel DrommBut lest we think that Eich's ouster is an outlier, a rare case, consider this more recent news out of New York City. Via the Huffington Post, a gay city councilman is quoted as protesting the entrance of an unwanted new presence into his city. From his remarks here, who might you guess he's talking about?

"We don’t need bigots coming to New York City," Councilman Daniel Dromm, who is openly gay, told HuffPost. "They are not welcome here unless they can embrace all of New York's diverse community, including the LGBT community."

What radical group could provoke such a fiery response and merit being slurred as "bigots", you ask? Well, unbelievable as it may seem... Chick-fil-A. And yet the company hardly seems like it should be so unwelcome to a sane observer.

Of course, the reason for Dromm's intolerance of the company is that its CEO personally values biblical beliefs about marriage as solely being the union of one man and one woman.

Chick-fil-A, NYC

But what's most horrifying in Dromm's remarks is his final say on the matter. You would think that maybe his first statement of unwelcomeness was a knee-jerk and misinformed reaction. What if he were told that Chick-fil-A's CEO has repeatedly said that he has no intention of bringing the company into the political debate surrounding the issue of marriage?

From HuffPost [emphasis added]:

... Dromm, the city councilman, said there was no place for Chick-fil-A in New York, even if it remains out of the political fray.

“We don’t need bigoted people even keeping their opinions to themselves,” he said. “They need to wake up and see reality.”

Not only is the sleight of "bigot," directed toward those who hold marriage to be the union of a man and a woman, completely unfair, mean-spirited, and wide of the mark. More than that: here we have the most compelling proof one could want of Ryan Anderson's assertion that the gay rights community is engaged in a "scorched earth" policy of bigotry and intolerance.

It is a "thought policy" regime in the making, and if anyone thinks a lesson was learned with the Mozilla controversy, he or she needs only consider this later story to realize that Eich's treatment was only a template for the radical homosexual lobby's plans for the future. For now, it's chilling enough to know that an elected city councilman in New York has just told millions of his fellow residents that they are unwelcome there simply on account of their pro-marriage values.

Alabama Legislators Call for U.S. Constitution to Be Amended to Define and Protect Marriage

The Montgomery Advertiser reported recently that a resolution sponsored by Alabama State Representative Richard Laird passed the Alabama House, calling for an Article V convention to amend the Constitution of the United States:

Alabama FlagThe resolution, sponsored by Rep. Richard Laird, I-Roanoke, quotes a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans same-sex unions, and calls marriage “a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman.” The resolution also cites several court cases, including five from the 19th century. It goes on to say that the U.S. Supreme Court “officially severed its respect for marriage” last year, when it struck down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prevented the recognition of same-sex spouses under federal laws.

Laird’s resolution calls for an Article V convention, which would require 34 states to ask Congress to call a convention to propose an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. According to the resolution, the convention would specifically propose an amendment defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and bar legal recognition of any other form of marriage.

Read more here.

The National Organization for Marriage Condemns Judge's Indication to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages in Ohio

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

The following statement should be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage(NOM).

Washington, D.C. — "We condemn the indication from Judge Timothy Black that he will order the state of Ohio to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere in violation of the Ohio constitution. This is an affront to the rule of law and to the people of Ohio who voted overwhelmingly to define marriage solely as the union of one man and one woman. The judge joins a list of others who have shamefully substituted their own views for the considered judgment of the people of America. We call on the state to be ready to file a vigorous appeal of this coming ruling, and for the US Supreme Court to move expeditiously to rule on this issue. Less than a year ago, the US Supreme Court held that it is up to the states to define marriage, and the federal government could not substitute its own definition of marriage for the judgment of the states. Judge Black and other federal judges have twisted this ruling into something unrecognizable. We call on the US Supreme Court to establish for good that the sovereign states have the ability to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Michigan's Catholic Bishops: Judge's decision "strikes at the very essence of family, community and human nature"

The Catholic bishops of the seven archdioceses and dioceses of Michigan released a statement Friday responding to the decision by federal district court Judge Bernard Friedman finding Michigan's Marriage Amendment unconstitutional - a decision they called "most regrettable."

Bishop CassockThe statement is posted on the site of the Michigan Catholic Conference, and reads in part:

Today’s decision from federal district court Judge Bernard Friedman to redefine the institution of marriage by declaring Michigan’s Marriage Amendment unconstitutional strikes at the very essence of family, community and human nature. In effect, this decision advances a misunderstanding of marriage, and mistakenly proposes that marriage is an emotional arrangement that can simply be redefined to accommodate the dictates of culture and the wants of adults.

[...]

Going forward, we, the Catholic bishops of this state, working through the Michigan Catholic Conference, will collaborate with those who are upholding Michigan’s Marriage Amendment and adoption statute and will assist to the greatest extent possible efforts to appeal Judge Friedman’s most regrettable ruling.

Read the full statement here.

National Organization for Marriage Calls On Indiana Attorney General To Investigate Reported Offer From Former State Republican Chairman Of Campaign Funding To Make Marriage Amendment 'Go Away'

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"The promise of money in exchange for official action is a serious felony that undermines the very integrity of the legislative process itself." — John Eastman, Chairman of NOM —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today called on Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller to investigate whether the former Chairman of the Indiana Republican Party, Jim Kittle, offered the Speaker of the Indiana House of Representatives a bribe in exchange for making the proposed marriage amendment then pending before the House to, "go away." The Associated Press reported on March 2nd that Kittle was the individual whom Speaker Brian Bosma was referring to when he told the media that someone had offered him unlimited campaign funding to make the issue go away.

"The promise of money in exchange for official action is a serious felony that undermines the very integrity of the legislative process itself," wrote John Eastman, NOM’s Chairman and a prominent law school professor and former dean. "Any credible allegation that the legislative process may have been subjected to improper influence threatens the integrity of government and must be treated seriously."

Eastman made his comments in a letter to Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller, in which he asked that a formal investigation be launched to examine the matter.

When HJR3, the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, was pending before the state House of Representatives, House Speaker Brian Bosma told the media that he had been offered "unlimited campaign funding" if he would make the issue "go away." Bosma refrained from identifying the individual who made the offer, saying at the time that the individual may have violated state or federal law.

On March 2nd the Associated Press reported that the individual who reportedly made the offer to Bosma was Kittle, the former state GOP Chairman.

Eastman wrote in his letter, "Mr. Kittle is a politically sophisticated individual. Surely a person with his experience knows that an offer of money in exchange for official legislative action is a serious criminal offense. It simply strains common sense to think that he was unaware of the implications of what he was apparently proposing to the top member of the House."

Eastman made clear that NOM was not alleging that Kittle had committed a crime, but rather requesting that the serious allegations originally raised by Bosma and recently reported by the media be investigated. "To safeguard the integrity of government, the people of Indiana are entitled to a fair and transparent examination of the facts by way of an independent, official investigation of this matter," he said.

###

To schedule an interview with John Eastman, Chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), [email protected], or Matille Thebolt (x143), [email protected], at 703-683-5004.

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

The National Organization for Marriage applauds Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear for defending the rule of law and Kentucky's marriage amendment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 4, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

The following statement should be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

Washington, D.C. — "We applaud Governor Steve Beshear's commitment to the rule of law and the people's definition of marriage. He is doing what every elected official, on every level of government across the country should do, defend the laws of the land. It is absurd that Kentucky's Attorney General Jack Conway is not doing what he swore to do upon taking office - defending the laws and constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the judgment of the Kentucky's citizens who voted overwhelmingly on this issue. We hope that voters hold him to account for abandoning his sworn duty."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

National Organization for Marriage Laments Today's Ruling in Texas, Says Citizens' Values Are Being "Trampled"

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 26, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Ordinary citizens' voices and values are being trampled in a headlong rush by activist federal judges to redefine marriage in defiance of thousands of years of human experience. The American people, and our leaders in Congress, need to step up and restore the powers of government to their proper balance." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) expressed deep disappointment and anger today at news of a ruling by Texas federal court judge Orlando Garcia that Texas's amendment in defense of marriage is somehow unconstitutional. While the judge immediately stayed his ruling pending appeals, NOM's President said that this ruling evinces a profoundly disturbing trend of judicial activism.

"We've seen a rash of these rulings in recent weeks, all making the same errors about binding Supreme Court precedents relevant to marriage and all issued by activist judges bound and determined to redefine marriage in defiance of thousands of years of human experience," said Brian Brown, NOM President. "These egregious decisions by unelected judges throwing out the votes of millions of Americans have been shamefully encouraged, aided, and abetted by the lawless actions of President Obama and his administration, especially the Attorney General. It simply has to stop. Critical issues like marriage that are foundational to civilization cannot be permitted to be taken over by activist judges and out of control political appointees. The voices and values of ordinary citizens are being trampled by judges determined to impose profound social change that affects citizens in the deepest and most fundamental ways. The American people, and our leaders in Congress, need to step up and restore the powers of government to their proper balance."

Brown said that this decision was a further signal of the near certainty that the question of marriage would return before the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court before long. He expressed hope that the Court, in that event, would hold to its own logic in the 2013 Windsor decision and affirm states' rights to determine marriage for themselves. However, Brown stressed the need for Congress to act decisively with respect to marriage by passing an amendment to the Federal Constitution.

"Congress needs to send a federal marriage amendment to the states for ratification and put an end to this mockery of government," said Brown. "From the President to the Attorney General, to activist federal judges around the nation and even to some state attorneys general and governors in the various states, we're seeing a shameful lack of integrity and an utter rebellion against the rule of law and the sovereign rights of the American people. Power needs to be returned to the American people to uphold the right of the people to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Just the Facts: What Arizona's Religious Liberty Bill Actually Says

With the media buzz surrounding Arizona's SB1062, it's no wonder there is so much confusion and misinformation about the contents of the bill. Time for a quick fact check...

SB 1062As Ed Whelen points out today in the National Review Online, SB1062 does NOT mention, much less single out, gays or same-sex ceremonies. Rather, the bill would simply amend Arizona’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act "to address two ambiguities that have been the subject of litigation under other RFRAs."

Douglas Laycock, along with nearly a dozen law professors from Harvard, Stanford, Notre Dame and other top institutions, writes in a letter to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer:

It would provide that people are covered when state or local government requires them to violate their religion in the conduct of their business, and it would provide that people are covered when sued by a private citizen invoking state or local law to demand that they violate their religion.

But nothing in the amendment would say who wins in either of these cases. The person invoking RFRA would still have to prove that he had a sincere religious belief and that state or local government was imposing a substantial burden on his exercise of that religious belief.

...to be clear: SB1062 does not say that businesses can discriminate for religious reasons. It says that business people can assert a claim or defense under RFRA, in any kind of case (discrimination cases are not even mentioned, although they would be included), that they have the burden of proving a substantial burden on a sincere religious practice, that the government or the person suing them has the burden of proof on compelling government interest, and that the state courts in Arizona make the final decision.

Read more.

National Organization for Marriage To Focus on Holding Legislators Accountable; Will Not Pursue Attempts to Put Marriage Amendment on 2014 Ballot

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 21, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to Brian S. Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

“After reviewing all legal options, the National Organization for Marriage has decided not to bring litigation seeking to allow voters to have the right to vote on the marriage amendment in 2014. While we believe a strong legal case can be made that the amendment could appear on the ballot this year, we think that the time and expense of such an effort would be better devoted to holding legislators accountable for their votes, and to preparing to elect a strong pro-amendment Legislature to pass the pending amendment in 2015. Accordingly, we will be working with our allies in the state to impact elections this year, beginning with the upcoming May primary races. We look forward to continuing to educate Hoosiers about the importance of the unique nature of marriage as society’s only institution that brings men and women together for the benefit of the couple and any children born of their union.”

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

TAKE ACTION: Support the Protection of Conscience

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

If there's one thing we've learned over the years from witnessing the redefinition of marriage in several states and in other places around the world, it is that there is an inevitable impasse between the genderless marriage regime and the conscience rights of those who believe in marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Wherever marriage is redefined, the story is the same: florists, photographers, bakers, caterers, social hall owners — anyone who runs a business that caters to the celebration of nuptials — these individuals are forced to choose between their deeply held beliefs about marriage and the prospect of being forced out of business by onerous lawsuits claiming 'discrimination.'

So I'm asking you to take action today to support two state-level pieces of legislation which aim to protect individuals and their businesses from legal reprisals for declining to participate in same-sex 'marriages.' The bills are pending in Arizona and Kansas.

Urge Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to Sign the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Both the Arizona Senate and House have approved a bill that would prevent business owners from being targeted in lawsuits for declining to participate in same-sex wedding celebrations on the grounds of religious objections.

With the spate of lawsuits we've seen around the country brought against business owners who have declined service for same-sex 'marriage' celebrations, we know how critical legislation of this nature is to protect the First Amendment rights of people of faith.

The Arizona legislature should be commended for passing this crucial bill, and now we must ask Governor Brewer to sign it immediately into law!

Unfortunately, another bill of a similar nature in Kansas is stalled in the legislature and might not even make it to the Governor's desk — unless we speak up!

Urge Senate President Susan Wagle to Allow a Vote on HB 2453!

The bill in Kansas does essentially the same thing as the one in Arizona: it protects people of faith from onerous lawsuits that threaten their livelihood simply because they would decline to lend their support to the idea of genderless marriage.

The Senate leader, Susan Wagle, is refusing to allow the bill to proceed to committee hearing and a vote on the floor after it was passed in the House. She needs to hear from you today that this bill deserves hearing by the Senate and a straight vote!

Even though these two bills are at the state level, they are important to a larger debate going on nationwide about the rights of individuals and businesses who hold to the idea that marriage is solely the union of a man and a woman. Passage of this legislation will send an important message that people of faith need such protections and that the rights of conscious must be firmly protected by our lawmakers!

So please take action today on this important issue, and when you have done so forward this email to your family and friends using the buttons below so that these lawmakers hear in no uncertain terms that religious people in America will not consent to be bullied or coerced into violating their consciences to please a radical movement bent on reshaping marriage and family!

Share This   Facebook This   Tweet This   Email This   Share on LinkedIn

Thanks for standing with us to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown

Statement from the National Organization for Marriage Regarding Oregon Attorney General's Decision to Abandon Defense of Marriage Amendment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 20, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum is shamefully abandoning her constitutional duty to defend the marriage amendment overwhelmingly enacted by the people of Oregon. She swore an oath of office that she would enforce all the laws, not just those she personally agrees with." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following may be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

"Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum is shamefully abandoning her constitutional duty to defend the marriage amendment overwhelmingly enacted by the people of Oregon. She swore an oath of office that she would enforce all the laws, not just those she personally agrees with. The people are entitled to a vigorous defense of the laws they enact, and the marriage amendment is no exception to that solemn obligation. Further, Ms. Rosenblum is dead-wrong in her conclusion that the amendment cannot be supported by rational legal arguments. Just last June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that regulating marriage is the purview of the states, not the federal government. Most recently, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ordered a decision to invalidate Utah's marriage amendment to be stayed, strongly signaling that the Court believes there is a good likelihood that the state will win its appeal against the ruling issued by an activist federal judge. Marriage is our only institution that exists to bring men and women together to benefit the couple and to provide an ideal environment for any children produced by their union. It can and must be defended as a unique, essential and profoundly good institution."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, [email protected], or Matille Thebolt, [email protected], at 703-683-5004

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. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Carl DeMaio's People

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

It's a beautiful summer day in southern California. Throngs of people line streets as paraders march by. They include transvestite brides (men in wedding gowns) who strut their stuff. Nearby a float with bare-chested, heavily muscled men in tight underwear that leaves nothing to the imagination hold hands and dance on a rolling stage as rainbow flags fly behind them. Not far away women kiss other women and tattooed men embrace, pulling their half-naked bodies tight to each other. A confused-looking child watches this scene unfold as she holds a 'we celebrate diversity' sign, not exactly the type of plaything we'd expect innocent youngster to cling to.

In their midst the candidate walks down the street holding the hand of his gay lover. He waves at the crowd and smiles approvingly. These are his people, and he is at home.

Who is he? He's Carl DeMaio. A homosexual activist who calls himself a Republican. And he wants to be a Member of Congress.

Do you want a person like Carl DeMaio in Washington serving as a role model, voting on issues affecting hard-working American families? If not, please help Kirk Jorgensen stop him.

Carl DeMaio claims to be 'one of us' but his vision of America is very different from ours. He comes from an environment where sexual morality is a thing of the past, where children are indoctrinated into questioning their own sexuality, where gender is considered fluid but sexual orientation is fixed, and where a candidate who supports abortion, gay 'marriage,' gun control and medical marijuana can call himself a conservative — and a "reformer."

Does Carl DeMaio represent the kind of "reform" that you think America needs?
You might think this is the beginning of a bad joke, but it's anything but funny.

You see, unless you and I do something about it, it's very likely that Carl DeMaio could win the primary election and go on to defeat the incumbent Democrat in one of California's most competitive house races this year.

Fortunately, there is something we can do about it. We can support a true conservative and American hero named Kirk Jorgensen.

Kirk is a former Marine who has served honorably and with distinction. As a Marine officer, Jorgensen was recognized with numerous awards and honors for his service including the Defense Meritorious Service Medal. He led human intelligence, counterintelligence and force protection missions in Asia, Central America, and the Middle East to thwart terrorism, espionage and sabotage against the United States and allied forces.

But Kirk Jorgensen is more than a military hero. He's a loving husband and a devoted father. And he is a proud, true conservative. He will be a champion for all the issues we care about. From defending marriage, to economic security, to repealing Obamacare, to reducing the national debt and ending deficit spending, to protecting our constitutional right to bear arms and to protecting the unborn, Kirk Jorgensen is advancing ideas that can move America onto a path toward security, prosperity and respect for hard-working American families.

Please make a generous contribution to help Kirk win election and become a proud, trusted conservative leader in Washington.

The choice in California's 52nd Congressional District is much greater than Carl DeMaio vs. Kirk Jorgensen. It's about the future of the Republican Party itself, and the struggle for conservatism in our nation's capital.

Believe it or not, there are leading Republican officials in Washington who are backing DeMaio and helping finance his campaign. If he wins, there will be a slew of liberal Republicans on future ballots who will be advanced by these same Washington insiders who don't much care about what elected officials believe. They care about gaining and maintaining power.

The only thing that will stop candidates like DeMaio and their platform of abortion, redefining marriage and gun control are people like you and me who still revere American values and believe that a return to conservative principles is what America needs. If you want our beloved nation to reclaim a conservative direction, please join with me in supporting a true conservative — Kirk Jorgensen.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Brian S. Brown

A Man With the Courage of His Convictions

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

In the midst of news of activist judges, cowardly legislators, and state officials lawlessly abandoning their duties, it's always good to stop and thank heroic leaders who have the courage and convictions to carry out their oaths-of-office.

Last week we asked you to thank Reince Preibus, Chairman of the GOP, for his and the party's strong stand on marriage and life.

Today I ask you to send a 'thank you' note to Alaska Attorney General Michael Geraghty for his commitment to the rule of law and the sovereign voice of the people of Alaska. The Associated Press wrote the following article as picked up by the San Francisco Chronicle.

JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Attorney General Michael Geraghty says he will continue to defend Alaska's constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

He says his personal feelings are immaterial. He says he has sworn an oath to uphold the constitution and the law of the land.

Alaska voters in 1998 approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman. In the past year, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a provision of the federal Defense of Marriage Act that prevented legally married same-sex couples from receiving certain federal benefits. Federal courts have struck down state constitutional bans in Utah and Oklahoma, though appeals are pending.

Geraghty says he won't make his decisions based on federal district court decisions that still must be reviewed by appellate courts or, perhaps, the U.S. Supreme Court.

Please take the time right now to send Attorney General Geraghty a 'thank you' note. Men and women in his position across the country need to know that the people are behind them when they stand for the rule of law and the sovereign right of citizens to vote on marriage.

Geraghty's commitment to his duty stands in stark contrast to Attorney General Herring of Virginia. Instead of fulfilling his oath-of-office, Herring not only refused to defend the Constitution of Virginia but actively litigated against the people of his state!

Geraghty's position also flies in the face of activist judges across the country who, rather than following the law and Supreme Court precedent, have inserted their own feelings into the matter and tried to impose same-sex 'marriage' on the people of several states.

Geraghty's commitment to the rule of law and to the will of the people of Alaska is additionally a positive counter-point to the cowardice of Nevada's Governor and Attorney General who have betrayed their people and refused to fulfill their duty to execute and defend the laws of that state.

America needs more brave and conscientious leaders like Attorney General Geraghty. Please take the time today to thank him for his position.

Thankfully,

Brian S. Brown