NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Oregon

NOM Endorses Colm Willis in Oregon 5th Congressional District



Dear Marriage Supporter,

I'm pleased to let you know that the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has endorsed Colm Willis in his race for the 5th Congressional District in Oregon. Colm is a proven champion for life, religious liberty and marriage, and will be a fantastic member of the US House of Representatives fighting for issues we care deeply about.

Colm faces two challengers in the Republican primary election on May 17th, one of whom is Ben West, a gay 'marriage' activist who sued the people of Oregon to invalidate the state's marriage amendment adopted by 57% of voters. Because of West, the people of Oregon had their votes stolen from them by unaccountable judges.

It's outrageous that someone like Ben West, a nursing student, thinks he can steal the votes of the 57% of Oregonians who voted for marriage and then turn around and ask those same people to give him their votes for Congress. How hypocritical!

This race presents a stark choice — Colm Willis is a champion on our issues, while Ben West is a gutless turncoat who abandoned Republican and constitutional principles. West didn't have the courage to take his gay 'marriage' position to the people of Oregon; rather, he went to judicial elites to impose his radical views on the citizens of the state despite their overwhelming votes to the contrary.

Support Colm Willis for Congress Today!

Colm Willis has a distinguished background and has been a leader on critical issues. A husband, father and small business attorney in private practice in Stayton, Oregon, Colm is an Oregon native who served for many years as the chief advocate for Oregon Right to Life. He has experience as a staff member in the US Senate, and has applied his expertise on a host of economic issues. To his tremendous credit, Colm left his congressional staff position because of his opposition to the decision by Congress to spend taxpayer money bailing out big banks and other corporations rather than return the money to taxpayers.

In the past several years, we've seen attempts by GOP elites to move the Republican Party away from its position in support of life, marriage and religious liberty and make it "Democrat lite." This move is nothing but political correctness run amok. The fact is that supporting marriage as the union of on man and one woman is not only the right policy for the country, and especially for children, it is immensely popular with voters, over 50 million of whom have cast ballots for traditional marriage. In fact, voter support for marriage has run far stronger than support for the Republican ticket.

NOM worked hard during the 2014 election cycle to defeat Republican US Senate candidate Monica Wehby, another GOP turncoat who abandoned marriage, and the Republican platform. Not surprisingly, Ben West endorsed Wehby and campaigned on her behalf. Now we will work hard to ensure that West himself is defeated and a strong champion for marriage, religious liberty and life — Colm Willis — is elected.

Please join us in supporting Colm Willis for Congress. You can learn more about his candidacy here. We urge you to make a donation directly to his campaign via his website.

In 2014, NOM played a critical role in electing pro-marriage champions to Congress in numerous states, and defeating those GOP candidates, such as Carl DeMaio in California and Monica Wehby in Oregon, who had abandoned marriage. We had a 100% track record in 2014 and are pledged to repeat that in 2016, starting with the election of Colm Willis.

I hope you will act today to support Colm Willis for Congress.

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown


PS — Please share this email with all your friends and family so they, too, can join the Colm Willis campaign.


Act Today!

State Seizes Christian Couple's Bank Accounts To Pay Lesbians Over 'Wedding' Cake Dispute

In a shocking development, the state of Oregon has raided three bank accounts owned by Aaron and Melissa Klein, the Oregon bakers who politely refused to bake a "wedding" cake for a lesbian couple because of their sincerely held religious beliefs. At the time of the refusal, same-sex "marriage" was illegal in Oregon, but that mattered not to the lesbian activists who claimed "emotional distress" that a devoutly Christian couple would not want to participate in celebrating their "wedding." After they filed a legal complaint, an administrative commissioner ordered the couple to pay $135,000 in damages to the offended lesbians -- a ruling that has been widely condemned by legal experts both for its outrageous amount and for its abject failure to comply with religious liberty protections guaranteed under state and federal law.

The Klein's are appealing the decision -- which was issued by a bureaucrat at the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries -- and asked for a delay in collections while the appeal was pending. The same bureaucrat who issued the order denied the delay and moved aggressively to seize $7,000 in funds in the Klein's personal bank accounts -- one of which contained money set aside for their tithe to the Lord!

The Klein's have decided to pay the $135,000 judgment (fortunately, faithful Americans across the country donated enough to cover the fine) while they continue their appeal.

The experience of this young Christian couple is one of the reasons why NOM continues to fight the lie of same-sex 'marriage' and its corresponding falsehood that redefining marriage won't have consequences for average Americans.

Fox has the story here.

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.”

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.

An Example of True Anti-discrimination

Melissa and Aaron Klein, owners of the Oregon Sweet Cakes by Melissa, made famous for turning down the business opportunity to serve a same-sex wedding, have made a surprising and generous gesture to the LBGT community. The Klein family has baked several custom cakes that they are sending to some of the largest LBGT advocacy groups on the West Coast. This is an effort to show that although they cannot serve their weddings, the Kleins “really do love” same-sex couples for the persons that they are. The Daily Signal explains:

Image Credit/The Daily Signal

Image Credit/The Daily Signal

Because of their Christian faith, the Kleins don’t support same-sex marriage. But they say that doesn’t mean they can’t still love those who choose to live that lifestyle.

“I’m not asking anybody out there to change their beliefs and believe the way I do,” Melissa said. “I’m just saying they want to live their life freely and I also do, too.”

. . .

In the coming weeks, they plan to send baked goods to other LGBT groups across the country.

“We’re doing this to show that we don’t harbor hard feelings toward the narrative that’s been put out about us. We don’t want to see these people hurting,” Aaron told The Daily Signal.

. . .

“This is a small thing that I can do. I can bake them something, take my time and put my energy into expressing how I feel,” she [Melissa] said.

The inside of the cakes are colored red, white and blue to stand for freedom, because “everybody should be free to live as we want to live,” Melissa said. Outside, she decorated the cake with fondant and a red heart as a gesture of “being kind and loving.”

On top, she wrote, “We really do love you.”

The Kleins are an example of a the type of family our nation depends on, and invests hope in for the future. They are reaching out to a community, which houses some members who have tried to destroy their business and demonize them personally. They are exhibiting powerful examples of a true Christian attitude, and a truly anti-discrimination mindset. Let us look to the Kleins as an example of how to treat those with whom we disagree with respect and dignity.

See The Daily Signal for the full story.

All Dissenting Voices Must Be Silenced: SSM Erodes Free Speech

In a fiery article featured on Breitbart, John Nolte pens a loaded opinion piece, that comments on the recent developments in one of the infamous “wedding cake” episodes. Aaron and Melissa Klein have been not only unjustly fined for invoking their religious rights, but they have been ordered to remain silent after trying to speak up about the discrimination they have faced from the state, and from the proponents of “tolerance” - the same-sex marriage agenda:

ThinkstockPhotos-517523279A judge in Oregon has issued a gag order denying two Christian bakery owners from speaking out against same sex marriage.

“The Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries hereby orders [Aaron and Melissa Klein] to cease and desist from publishing, circulating, issuing or displaying, or causing to be published … any communication to the effect that any of the accommodations … will be refused, withheld from or denied to, or that any discrimination be made against, any person on account of their sexual orientation,” [Administrative Law Judge Alan] Avakian wrote.

The gag order is meant to stop Aaron and Melissa Klein from publicly speaking out about their desire to not bake cakes for same sex weddings. The State’s order came after the Kleins were interviewed by the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins, and after the State fined the Kleins $135,000 for “emotional damages” incurred by a lesbian couple after the Kleins refused to bake their wedding cake.

Towards the end of the article, John Nolte gives a terse summary of how quickly religious rights and free speech have been eroded and slashed with the onset of the same-sex marriage movement. Consider their arguments through the years:

1995: We don’t want marriage, just civil unions.

2005: Our marriage won’t affect your rights.

2014: Bake me a cake, or else.

2015: Your opinion against same sex marriage is illegal.

The same-sex marriage agenda may believe they have scored a victory, but Americans don’t take being tread on lightly. We expect these types of attacks against American principles will awaken the silent majority to demand action protecting their rights.

Collusion, Improper Communication, and Bias Against ‘Sweet Cakes’

Kelsey Harkness of The Daily Signal exposes actions by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Basic Rights Oregon to persecute the small business of Sweet Cakes by Melissa. Sweet Cakes held to their religious beliefs by turning down business that involved a wedding cake for a same-sex ceremony, before same-sex marriage was even legal in Oregon.

It appears that the advocacy group and the government agency had been holding meetings, as well as exchanging emails and texts, to conspire against Sweet Cakes before same-sex marriage was legal, and in a completely biased manner.

ThinkstockPhotos-176997365The Daily Signal has exclusively learned that the government agency responsible for enforcing Oregon’s anti-discrimination law appears to be working closely with a powerful gay rights advocacy group in its case against Aaron and Melissa Klein, owners of Sweet Cakes by Melissa.

Communications between the agency, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, and the LGBT organization, Basic Rights Oregon, raise questions about potential bias in the state’s decision to charge the Kleins with discrimination for refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding.

Communications obtained through a public records request show employees of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries—which pursued the case against the Kleins—participating in phone calls, texting, and attending meetings with Basic Rights Oregon, the largest LGBT advocacy group in the state.

Harkness explains the issues in these discriminating communications:

“That’s a clear conflict of interest,” Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.

State agencies have a duty to represent the best interests of the general public, not the interests of one particular advocacy group. The relationship shown by these communications is inappropriate and raises basic questions about the objectivity, bias, and fairness of this agency and its proceedings.

According to emails, Avakian met with Basic Rights Oregon on multiple occasions.

Read the full article at The Daily Signal.

National Organization for Marriage Defeats Every Republican It Targeted Who Embraced Same-Sex 'Marriage'; Group will Target Sen. Rob Portman for defeat in 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 10, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"When candidates speak out in support of marriage, voters will reward them; when candidates ignore marriage or actually want to redefine it, they are rejected." — Brian Brown, NOM president —

nom_logo

Washington, DC — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) claimed victory in their efforts to defeat three prominent Republican candidates for the US House and US Senate, and announced they will set their sights on defeating Sen. Rob Portman for reelection in 2016, or if he decides to run for president. Through their Super PAC, the NOM Victory Fund, the nation's largest organization supporting natural marriage opposed the election of Republican US House candidates Carl DeMaio (CA52) and Richard Tisei (MA6) as well as Republican US Senate candidate Monica Wehby of Oregon. Tisei and Wehby were defeated on Election Day while DeMaio conceded defeat yesterday.

"I hope that our success in defeating these three Republican candidates sends a message to the Republican leadership in Washington that the GOP faithful demands candidates who are committed to defending marriage, which is a critical element of the Republican platform," said Brian Brown, NOM's president. "Together with our success with independent expenditure and grassroots campaigns to help elect pro-marriage Republicans like Thom Tillis, Tom Cotton, Joni Ernst and Ben Sasse, we've proven that speaking out in support of traditional marriage is a winning issue for Republican candidates."

NOM spent over $200,000 in independent expenditures on television ads and mailers in the Tillis and Cotton races, and mounted substantial grassroots efforts including co-sponsoring a bus tour and turning out conservatives to help Joni Ernst (IA), Ben Sasse (NE), and Pat Roberts (KS), along with supporting Governor Sam Brownback (KS).

"Republicans want to support candidates who stand with them to advance policies that promote liberty, prosperity, national security and the natural family," said Brown. "Marriage is the most pro-family, pro-child institution ever devised, one that brings men and women together and forms the ideal environment for any children born of their union. When candidates speak out in support of marriage, voters will reward them; when candidates ignore marriage or actually want to redefine it, they are rejected."

US Senator Rob Portman announced his support for redefining marriage in 2013 after his son told him he was gay. Portman faces voters in Ohio in a 2016 reelection race, but has also been mentioned as a possible Republican candidate for president.

"Rob Portman can forget about getting elected President of the United States," said Brown. "If he runs we will make sure that GOP primary voters are aware of his desire to redefine marriage and his willingness to see federal judges set aside the votes of 50 million Americans who enacted marriage amendments across the country because his son is gay. Rob Portman's son has a right to live as he chooses, but that does not give his father the right to redefine marriage. The same voters who just elected pro-marriage candidates like Joni Ernst, Tim Scott, Tom Cotton, Pat Roberts and Thom Tillis are not going to support someone like Rob Portman."

Brown said that if Portman runs for reelection, they will oppose him in Ohio. "The people of Ohio deserve a US Senator who respects their votes for marriage. We hope that Portman faces a stiff challenge in the Republican primary from a candidate who will proudly stand for marriage. We intend to oppose Sen. Portman for reelection, and if he survives a primary challenge we will urge Republicans and Independents to refuse to vote for him in the General Election, just as we successfully did with DeMaio, Tisei and Wehby."

In addition to its work in federal races, NOM also noted the defeat of Republican state Senator Mark Grisanti in New York. Grisanti was one of four GOP Senators who switched their votes and redefined marriage in that state.

"When these Republican Senators betrayed us, we vowed that we would defeat them all," Brown said. "We previously had defeated three of the turncoat Senators, and now we have kept our word that all would be defeated with the ouster of Grisanti. This should also serve notice to Republican leaders that it is political suicide to back Republican candidates who do not fight for traditional marriage."

###

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: Traditional Marriage Achieves Overwhelming Victory Across United States

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 5, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


"In red states and blue, candidates who supported marriage as the union of one man and one woman won election and those who didn't were rejected by voters. The Republican Party should take note that their nominees who favored gay 'marriage' were opposed by NOM and they were resoundingly defeated." —Brian Brown, President, NOM—

nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today said that their efforts to support candidates who supported traditional marriage and oppose those who favored gay 'marriage' were overwhelmingly effective and played a pivotal role in the Republicans capturing control of the United States Senate. NOM won all the races in which they were engaged.

"Marriage won an overwhelming victory last night," said Brian Brown, president of NOM. "In red states and blue, candidates who supported marriage as the union of one man and one woman won election and those who didn't were rejected by voters. The Republican Party should take note that their nominees who favored gay 'marriage' were opposed by NOM and they were resoundingly defeated."

The NOM Victory Fund spent more than $200,000 on television advertisements and mailers supporting successful US Senate candidates Thom Tillis (NC) and Tom Cotton (AR). NOM also mounted extensive grassroots efforts in support of newly-elected Senators Joni Ernst (IA) and Ben Sasse (NE), in addition to Governor Sam Brownback (KS) and Senator Pat Roberts (KS).

A major storyline emerging from the election was the rejection of Republican candidates who abandoned marriage and instead supported redefining marriage. NOM actively opposed Richard Tisei (MA6), Carl DeMaio (CA52) and Monica Wehby, the GOP candidate for US Senate in Oregon. Tisei and Wehby were defeated, and the outcome of the CA52 contest was too close to call on election night.

"It's time for the GOP elite and consultant class to wake up and realize that marriage is a winning issue, in red states and blue," Brown said. "Traditional marriage amendments have received 50 million votes across America, and candidates who embraced marriage this election won, while Republicans who rejected marriage were themselves rejected. The election results tonight were a stunning rebuke of those who wish to redefine marriage. We look forward to working with Congress to advance the cause of marriage."

###

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).

Reject Monica Wehby's Campaign For Gay 'Marriage' and Abortion...And for the US Senate

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

It wasn't long ago that Monica Wehby was riding high, having captured the Republican nomination for US Senate and being looked at by leaders in Washington as a new face for the Republican Party. A highly educated physician, considered a moderate, she was just the type of candidate many in the GOP Washington elite like to support.

Consistent with her own views, she then made a move that some of these Republican leaders in Washington praised, but countless others, especially those of us in the grassroots, rejected:

She embraced same-sex 'marriage' with a vengeance, even paying for a statewide television commercial featuring two gay men who had sued to overturn the votes of Oregonians in favor of the state marriage amendment.

That was the beginning of the end of Monica Wehby's chances of winning election to the US Senate.

Now her campaign is in tatters. If you have not already sent in your ballot, I urge you refuse to vote for Monica Wehby. Just skip the race entirely and refuse to let someone who abandons principle get your support.

Wehby's defeat will also send a powerful message to Republican leaders and the elite who wish to abandon principle and back candidates like Wehby. Not only has she abandoned the truth of marriage, she also has embraced abortion.

As you well know, in endorsing same-sex 'marriage' Wehby threw a sop to the left, hoping to attract support from Democrats and Independents who, she calculated, would favor this move. And she figured that Republicans would have no choice but to stay with her.

The calculation was fatal to her campaign, for two reasons.

First, she apparently forgot that Oregon's marriage amendment was passed with strong support among Democrats and Independents. She also failed to appreciate that all citizens regardless of party affiliation rightly resent the state of Oregon refusing to defend their vote for marriage and allowing gay activists to redefine marriage by default. This behavior by people like state Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum was totally disrespectful of voters and an affront to democracy itself. Yet Wehby embraced this duplicity.

Second, Wehby miscalculated in believing Republicans and conservatives had no choice but to support her. Actually we have the choice of refusing to support her.

And that is exactly the choice we are asking you to make. Skip the race. Send a Message. And then let's look for a real Republican, someone who represents all our values of liberty, economic prosperity, national security and support for the family to support in the future.

Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to the rejection of Monica Wehby's policies, and candidacy, on Tuesday.

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown


NOM Keeping Up Fight for the People of Oregon

Oregon State CapitolOregonians have been so far shamefully denied their fundamental rights and role as citizens in a self-determinative democracy by a system of judicial tyranny run amok, but NOM is continuing our fight there to get the people of Oregon their day in court and ensure that they values are represented in the matter of how marriage is defined.

OregonLive reports:

Despite a string of legal defeats, the National Organization for Marriage is continuing its battle against the May 19 federal court decision overturning Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage.

Two weeks after a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the group's attempt to intervene in the case, the National Organization for Marriage on Wednesday asked the full Ninth Circuit Court to reconsider the decision.

You can read the rest of the article here.

Two Roads

National Organization for Marriage

Dear Marriage Supporter,

A couple of court cases have attracted some interest this week, and they provide an interesting contrast highlighting why we are both concerned about the future of marriage in America, but also optimistic in the long run.

Oregon

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied NOM's motion this week to intervene to defend the state's marriage amendment in court.

Because the state Attorney General and Governor both abandoned their sworn duty to defend the law, NOM was left as the sole entity willing to publicly defend the statute on behalf of our members within the state of Oregon. We filed the appeal on behalf of our supporters, who did not wish to be named publicly, fearing reprisal.

There is well-established precedent for this under the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of NAACP v. Alabama allowing membership organizations to pursue the interests of their members when there are substantial hurdles to the members litigating in their own name, such as the real threats of harassment and violence that have been manifested elsewhere in the country around the marriage issue.

Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit did not agree and denied our motion, saying that we lacked legal standing.

Which raises the question: in America today, who DOES represent the interests of the voters? Elected officials who have sworn oaths of office to do so are refusing to do so when the issue is perceived to run counter to the popular culture. And when that happens, what can the voters do?

It's a serious crisis begun by the Supreme Court's decision last summer that the defendants of Proposition 8 didn't have legal standing which is now calling into question the entire validity and purpose of the referendum process — the truest form of democracy in our great Republic.

Of course, the legal process isn't necessarily over, and NOM will be exploring whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc with the full Ninth Circuit or whether we will seek review in the Supreme Court itself.

Because, right now, the sovereign act of the people of Oregon — voting in 2006 to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman — went entirely undefended by the elected officials of Oregon, an abdication of duty that resulted in the long-standing understanding of marriage in Oregon being rewritten by a single federal court judge.

The policy fight over the definition of marriage is something that should ultimately be resolved by the people, not unelected judges. For now, Oregonians have been denied their voice on that important policy issue, and that is truly regrettable.

North Dakota

In contrast to Oregon, we have the example of the leaders in North Dakota. Like so many other states, North Dakota's marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is under attack in federal court.

But the actions of the Governor and Attorney General in defense of the law have been exemplary to this point. They recently filed a response to the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment in the case that outlines — brilliantly — so many of the critical and compelling arguments in defense of marriage.

Among many other critically important points, they make a few that I would like to highlight here:

The case involves two conflicting marriage institutions that cannot coexist.

As I mentioned in my email on Wednesday, they point out that "this case involves two mutually exclusive and profoundly different marriage institutions, marriage institutions that serve separate, distinct, and conflicting societal purposes."

In fact, in making the argument, they cite the minority opinion of Justice Alito in the Windsor case of last summer — an opinion that cites NOM co-founder Robert P. George's book, What Is Marriage? in making precisely that point!

They correctly point out that "North Dakota can have only one social institution denominated 'marriage.' It cannot simultaneously provide the historically proven valuable social benefits of man-woman marriage and the asserted benefits of the new genderless marriage. One necessarily displaces or precludes the other."

The States have the power to define marriage.

It should be obvious, but in light of the blatant activism of federal judges recently, it must be pointed out. So they do: "In cases spanning three centuries, the Supreme Court has emphasized that '[t]he whole subject of the domestic relations of husband and wife, parent and child, belongs to the laws of the states, and not to the laws of the United States.'"

Furthermore, nothing in federal constitutional law requires North Dakota to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

The media likes to say that last year, the Defense of Marriage Act was struck down in the Windsor case. But that's simply not true — only ONE of the FOUR sections of DOMA was struck down — the section that dealt with the federal government's recognition of marriage. The other three sections are still the law of the land — including Section Two, which clearly says states do NOT have to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.

Perhaps most importantly, they point out that:

North Dakota marriage law does not violate either the Due Process Clause or the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

The defendants point out that "[t]he due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is not a charter for restructuring [marriage] by judicial legislation." (see Supreme Court case, Baker v. Nelson).

In fact, they further point out that "Windsor also makes no mention of Baker and certainly does not inform lower courts that they are no longer bound by Baker. Windsor dealt with the constitutionality of a federal law defining marriage, not a state law" [emphasis added].

I realize that this is quite a bit technical, but I wanted to let you see that marriage can and IS receiving a phenomenal defense in court.

As cases like the one in North Dakota make their way up to the Supreme Court in the coming months, rest assured that NOM will be doing everything we can to support the defense of marriage in the courts and throughout society. If you are able this Labor Day weekend, could you please consider making a generous contribution to support our efforts to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it?

Faithfully,

Brian S Brown

Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage

Brian Brown

PS: Enjoy your Labor Day weekend!

National Organization for Marriage Statement on the 9th Circuit's Ruling

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 28, 2014
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Matille Thebolt (703-683-5004)


nom_logo

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

"We are of course disappointed with the Ninth Circuit's decision today. The Ninth Circuit did not reach the appeal of the denial of motion to intervene, holding instead that even if NOM had been allowed to intervene on behalf of its members (including Oregon voters, wedding services providers, and a county clerk), it had no standing to appeal the judgment below even though the elected officials of the state refused to provide any defense of the marriage amendment adopted by a strong majority of Oregonians.

"We believe that the decision conflicts with a prior Ninth Circuit opinion specifically recognizing that a County Clerk with the duty to issue marriage licenses likely would have standing to intervene and appeal an adverse judgment. NOM alleged under oath that it had among its members just such a county clerk, and it sought to intervene on the clerk's behalf under the Supreme Court's well-established precedent in the case of NAACP v. Alabama allowing membership organizations to pursue the interests of their members when there are substantial hurdles to the members litigating in their own name, such as the real threats of harassment and violence that have been manifested elsewhere in the country around the marriage issue. Because of that conflict, we will certainly be exploring whether to file a petition for rehearing en banc with the full Ninth Circuit or whether we will seek review in the Supreme Court itself.

"Ultimately, though, NOM remains concerned that a sovereign act of the people of Oregon went entirely undefended by the elected officials of Oregon, an abdication of duty that resulted in the long-standing understanding of marriage in Oregon being rewritten by a single federal court judge. The policy fight over the definition of marriage is something that should ultimately be resolved by the people, not unelected judges. For now, Oregonians have been denied their voice on that important policy issue, and that is truly regrettable."

###

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).

Statement by the National Organization for Marriage on the Decision of the US Supreme Court to Deny Its Request to Stay the Decision of a Federal Judge in Oregon to Redefine Marriage

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


nom_logo

Washington, D.C. — The following statement may be attributed to John Eastman, Chairman of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Claremont Institute:

"We are disappointed that the US Supreme Court has declined to issue a stay of a federal judge's order redefining marriage in Oregon. Because the state Attorney General has worked in concert with the plaintiffs to deny the people of Oregon a defense of their state marriage amendment, and because the trial judge refused our request to defend the amendment, the people have at least temporarily lost their common-sense law which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It's important to recognize that the Supreme Court has not decided the merits of the underlying issue. NOM has filed an appeal of the trial judge's decision to prevent us from intervening in the case to defend Oregon's marriage amendment. That appeal is on track, with briefs due in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal in August and September, and oral argument sometime afterwards. We will continue to press this case because we believe that the people of Oregon are entitled to a vigorous defense of marriage, and because it is in the public interest to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman."

###

To schedule an interview with John Eastman, Chairman 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).

EWTN Covers March for Marriage

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

Watch him here: