NOM BLOG

Category Archives: Youth

"Privacy for All Students" Campaign Submits Record Number of Signatures

From the Christian Post:

Privacy for All StudentsPrivacy For All Students (PFAS), a grassroots organization founded in 2011, announced Sunday that they hit the 620,000 signature mark, which is well above the minimum needed for an initiative to get on the ballot.

Karen England, member of the PFAS coalition's executive committee, said in a statement that she believed the number might be the largest amount of signatories garnered for any California ballot initiative.

"As far as we are aware, this is the largest number of volunteer signatures ever submitted in a California referendum campaign," said England.

You can read more of the article here.

Or, to find out more about the Privacy for All Students campaign, visit their website.

"Privacy for All Students" Effort Continues to Gain Steam

PFAS

We've been keeping our readers informed about the ongoing efforts in California to overturn AB 1266, the "Co-ed Bathroom Law" - efforts which have brought together a broad coalition effort in the Privacy for All Students campaign, including NOM California and NOM's political consultant Frank Schubert.

In case you missed it, Frank was interviewed last Friday for National Review Online and explained to Alec Torres why he is optimistic about the initiative underway there:

Once people become aware of [the law], then they oppose it.... We’ve done a survey and what we’ve found is that only 35 percent of voters support this law, and 51 percent oppose it. When you [talk with individuals and] go through the pro and con arguments, we end up at over 60 percent opposition to the law.

A victorious repeal of the law is almost certain if the matter can be put on the ballot. That's what the Privacy for All Students coalition is busy working to do, gathering petition signatures to meet a November 8th deadline.

To find out how you can help, visit the coalition's website today.

Standing for Marriage on the College Campus

To hear mainstream media tell it, every 20-something in the United States agrees with same-sex ‘marriage.’  Evidently Christine Guttery did not get the memo.  The 20-year old English major from Louisiana State University recently penned a post for the school’s paper thoughtfully and winsomely defending the traditional definition of marriage.  She writes:

College StudentsI am against same-sex marriage, not because I hate the LGBT community — I don’t. Everyone deserves to be treated with equal respect and kindness, regardless of their sexual orientation. I am against same-sex marriage because same-sex relationships do not adhere to the definition of marriage, and there is no logical reason to redefine it.

The most common argument I hear is that everyone deserves to be happy with the one they love, and government should not deny anyone that right. But opponents of same-sex marriage are not proposing that same-sex couples be banned by law from choosing to have a relationship, but rather that such a union cannot be defined as marriage, because the nature of the union contradicts that of marriage.

College CampusAs the definition of marriage broadens to mean different things and accepts different kinds of relationships, it loses its distinct identity and meaning. In this case, there is no point in recognizing marriage at all.

I am not against homosexuals having rights, but granting same-sex couples the right to marry is erroneous. Redefining marriage will deconstruct its original value. Louisiana should continue to defend the institution of marriage as outlined in the state constitution. (Read More)

It’s great to hear young people, especially on the college campus, carrying the banner for true marriage.

Millennials Will Save Marriage

Here's a fantastic piece from Chris Marlink over at Marriage Generation. Millennials, he argues, the same generation poised to throw it all away, will ultimately be the ones to redeem and restore marriage:

FriendsMillennials, those approximately 18 to about 31, are the generation most supportive of redefining marriage. They’re increasingly likely to delay or forgo marriage altogether (just 26% of adults aged 20 to 29 were married in 2008, compared to nearly 70% in 1960), and they’re the most convinced that marriage is becoming obsolete.

But here’s my counterintuitive thesis: Millennials, that same generation poised to throw it all away, will save marriage. They’ll do it the way sailors have made progress in strong headwinds for thousands of years. They’ll tack.

...using the word “marriage” to solemnize same-sex relationships wouldn’t be a redefinition so much as a natural conclusion. In the public mind, marriage has already been redefined—that is, separated from its true and full meaning. Consider this paragraph from Molly Ball at the Atlantic, writing on the fallout of the Prop 8 electoral victory:

In survey after survey, researchers would ask people what marriage meant to them -- not gay marriage, but the concept of marriage itself. And the answers were always the same: Marriage meant love and commitment. Even people who'd been divorced three times would say the same thing. Then the researchers would ask, "Why do you think gay people want to get married?" and the answers would change: They want rights and benefits. They're trying to make a political point. They don't understand what marriage is really about. Most commonly, respondents said they simply didn't know. [emphasis mine]

Millennials who hold orthodox convictions on marriage are not in a race to stop marriage from being redefined. Supposing most Americans understand marriage as “love and commitment,” then let us acknowledge that this exclusively personal understanding of marriage, sundered from any of the societal implications of the union, already represents a redefinition. Same-sex “marriage” is a near unassailable eventuality if marriage means solely “love and commitment.” Our task then, is not to stop a redefinition of marriage: it is to correct a redefinition. It is to redeem and restore marriage in the hearts and minds of our neighbors. If we do that, the law will follow.

The truth about marriage can't be changed, and the millennial generation will be the ones to recognize that truth! Finish reading Chris Marlink's article here and let us know your thoughts below.

When Our Laws Start Losing Sight of Children

Alex Saitta writes a thought-provoking letter to the editor of the Easley Patch this week, pointing out what happens when our laws start catering only to adults and ignore the best interests of children's when it comes to their growth and development.

GirlThe arguments for gay-marriage and abortion are fundamentally flawed because both put the rights of the adults ahead of those of the children. Adults create our laws and naturally have written them to benefit adults and the point of view of the child has been given too little weight. That’s wrong! This would be like the captain of the Titanic saying adults off first; leave the children behind. Children need to be thought of first.

You can see this clearly with the abortion issue. The abortion debate has devolved into what is best for the mother or “father”. Birth is not about the adults, but the life of a new child. In the case of abortion the mother and father walk out; the child is killed. If children made the laws, it is safe to say abortion would be illegal.

Looking at the same-sex marriage issue, we don’t have to look far to see what happens when society gets careless about the togetherness of parents and their raising of children. Just look at the divorce craze that began in the 1970’s. So called sociological experts of the “me” generation said if you aren’t happily married, leave your spouse, and all will be better off. As the trend unfolded, marriage was further trivialized with the onset of terms like the “starter marriage”.

Today what we see in the wake of the divorce craze are millions of broken families, millions more children and their offspring suffering from emotional and psychological issues that prevent them from reaching their potential in school, their careers and even their personal relationships. That’s what happens when marriage focuses on the adults and loses sight of the children.

Likewise, those advocating gay-marriage, it is all about them – the adults. The children are secondary. Just look at the recent Supreme Court case. It dealt with gay couples having a claim to their partner’s federal benefits. When the focus of marriage turns to the adults and adult issues, and it is no longer about the children, the children suffer.

CBN Video: "Traditional Marriage Movement Gaining Steam"

Check out this great video and article from CBN News on young marriage defenders!

"...a traditional marriage movement whose leaders represent a new generation has entered the game, and it is gaining steam.

"The other side has been preparing the seeds for this debate for 20 or 30 years and they've been well-prepared, well-organized and the response is just in its infancy," Ryan Anderson, with the Heritage Foundation, told CBN News.

... The New York Times recently recognized Anderson and other movement leaders like Caitlin Seery, who directs the Love and Fidelity Network on college campuses.

"We are trying to help students prepare themselves for healthy marriages so they will then raise healthy families because healthy families are the foundation of our society," Seery told CBN News.

What Seery, Anderson, and other supporters of traditional marriage have in common is a willingness to face fierce opposition and think outside the box about what is possible."

Refusing to Stay Silent: A Millennial Case for Marriage

citizenRyan Anderson and Andrew Walker of the Heritage Foundation are featured this month on the front page of Citizen, the Focus on the Family magazine.

One of the great lines from their article: "There’s no such thing as being on the “right” or “wrong” side of history. There’s only being on the right or wrong side of truth."

Amen!

Here's how their article begins:

Two of the younger conservative voices in the nation explain why marriage needs to be preserved for the next generation—their own.

The media claim we don’t exist. OK, that’s a slight exaggeration. But after all, we’re Millennials, born during the Reagan administration. We’re supposed to be of the generation that is embracing same-sex marriage in droves.

Instead, we’re standing strong on upholding the truth about what marriage is.

We’ve been asked—repeatedly—whether the position we’re promoting is pointless. Are we willing to endure cultural scorn for holding to a position as supposedly outmoded as natural marriage?

Politicos and pundits offer hyperbolic missives on how conservatives are losing young Americans, who are likely to be more libertarian on social issues. The preferred talking point is to assert the demise of the opposition; Same-sex marriage is “inevitable.”

A justly revered conservative columnist, George F. Will, has said twice on ABC’s “This Week” that opposition to same-sex marriage is a dying trait. “Quite literally,” he said, “the opposition to gay marriage is dying. It’s old people.”

Tweet to Mr. Will: Reports of our death have been greatly exaggerated. #NotDeadYet

Read the rest here.

Baptist Press: "They Exist"

The Baptist Press reports on the youthful contingent of next-gen pro-marriage leaders represented, in part, by some of the speakers at the historic "March for Marriage" last month:

Young Christians still will face growing temptations to conform to the world's understanding that marriage is primarily about emotional fulfillment. The scorn they endure may one day include discrimination in the workplace. Anderson, for example, faces uncertain job prospects in secular academia as an author of a book defending traditional marriage. But Christian millennials were among those taking a stand on the stage, among the crowd, in the march, on television, and inside the courtroom on the day that marriage went on trial.

Read the whole thing here.

Thousands of French Youth Protest French Government "Fast-Tracking" SSM

New photos are coming in from France showing dozens of spontaneous pro-marriage rallies that have been erupting all over the country. LifeSiteNews reports:

Since last Friday, public demonstrations against same-sex “marriage” and adoption in France have been escalating, not only in Paris but also in remote provincial towns and even abroad among French expatriates. The Senate’s approval of the gay marriage bill (known as the “loi Taubira,” after the Justice Minister that proposed the text to the legislature) has sparked off a wave of anger, and groups of determined young people all over the country have decided to make their presence felt."

Check out the photos:

 

Photos from Le Salon Beige

Photo: French NextGen for Marriage

Organized via La Manif Pour Tous (the umbrella group organizing resistance protests to SSM):

Shame on Piers Morgan and Suze Orman -- I Stand With Ryan!

Earlier this week Piers Morgan and Suze Orman conduct one of the most rude, condescending "debates" I've ever seen. I've seen dozens of debates on marriage where rudeness and incivility were directed towards those with pro-marriage views but this takes the cake.

Ryan Anderson, a fellow at Heritage and co-author of "What is Marriage?" patiently gave lucid answers to their questions, even as Piers peppered him with questions without giving him time to respond.

It wasn't a conversation, it was a trial.

They didn't even allow Ryan to sit at the same table as them. Orman went so far as to call Anderson "uneducated" on the question of marriage and insultingly called him "sweetheart".

On the "uneducated" remark, consider what Denny Burk points out:

"Ryan Anderson graduated Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude from Princeton University and he’s a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Notre Dame. He just co-authored a book that is probably the definitive case for traditional marriage. He’s a fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an all-around brilliant guy. "

At the 12 minute mark, Orman loses control and lashes out at Anderson, pointing her finger at him, etc.

Piers did nothing to intervene or stop her, even as he continually interrupted Anderson.

Then, as if that was not enough, she called on the audience to express their disapproval of Anderson personally by booing, etc.

This is a travesty and Piers Morgan and Orman owe Anderson and pro-marriage Americans an apology.

That's why I'm proudly proclaiming I STAND WITH RYAN on Twitter and Facebook.

Watch the video and see for yourself:

New York Times Profiles Young Marriage Activists!

The New York Times covers an often ignored story -- the young men and women who are active in the fight to protect and promote marriage in politics and culture! Ryan Anderson, co-author of "What is Marriage?" and our Communications Director Thomas Peters were interviewed for this article, as were many inspiring young pro-marriage voices:

"...opponents of same-sex marriage say they must argue in favor of traditional marriage, not against gay people or gay rights. “It’s really a broader defense of marriage and a stronger marriage culture,” said Will Haun, 26, a lawyer and member of the Federalist Society.

In the highest-profile effort, the National Organization for Marriage is gearing up for a march on the National Mall on Tuesday, the day the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on California’s 2008 voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage.

Last week, the Heritage Foundation released a report by Ryan T. Anderson, 31, in defense of traditional marriage,"Marriage: What It Is, Why It Matters, and the Consequences of Redefining It.” Mr. Anderson, a Heritage Foundation fellow, has also held briefings for members of Congress, their staff and others to explain his arguments against same-sex marriage, and he and two co-authors released a book last year laying out their case in depth.

...“If you take the longer view of history — I’m not talking just 15 years, I’m talking 40 years or even 100 years — I can’t help but think that the uniqueness of man-woman marriage will be adjudicated over time,” said Andrew Walker, 27, a policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Either way, they are not planning on giving up any time soon.

“Even if we are doomed, and I’m totally naïve, I think it’s important that I do this work anyway,” Mr. Teetsel, of the Manhattan Declaration, said. “If what I believe is true is true, then I’ve got a responsibility to be on its side for as long as I can be.”

Young Conservative LTE: SSM Denies Children a Fundamental Right

Tommy Valentine in a letter to the editor of the Washington Examiner:

There are too many fallacies in Michael Barone's same-sex marriage column to address in a letter to the editor. But I would like to hit a couple points.

The statement that in 2004 the Massachusetts Supreme Court "discovered that the state's 1780 Constitution required recognition of same-sex marriages" is utterly ridiculous. No serious person actually believes that Samuel Adams and John Adams had homosexual marriage in mind as they wrote the Massachusetts Constitution. The 2004 decision was legislating from the bench at its finest.

I do agree with Barone's point that homosexual marriage is a bipartisan issue. This is neatly summed up in the ignored story of 11-year-old Grace Evans, who testified before the Minnesota House of Representatives on the importance of every child having a mom and a dad -- a right homosexual marriage inherently and deliberately denies children.

"Which parent do I not need? My mom or my dad?" Grace asked a panel of lawmakers. They were silent. She repeated the question and again got no response, because there is no response. Every child deserves a mom and a dad, and support for that right definitely crosses party lines.

NOM's Thomas Peters: Pro-Marriage is Pro-Life

NOM's Communications Director Thomas Peters shares in the Daily Caller his conviction that the pro-life and pro-marriage movements must unite to become one united voice for justice to children:

How can you be pro-life unless you are also pro-marriage? I’ve been thinking about that question ever since I moved over from pro-life activism to pro-marriage activism. Since that transition, my conviction that the movements are essentially one has only been reinforced.

Pro-life is in my blood. My parents met at an event to welcome pro-life activists who had been recently bailed out of jail for conducting a peaceful sit-in at an abortion clinic. When I moved to Washington, D.C., five years ago, I knew I would be a pro-life activist, and so I was.

But as my activism matured, so did my conviction that the pro-life movement must become explicitly pro-marriage or risk its future. The Guttmacher Institute tells us that 85% of women who opt for abortion are unmarried. The community most afflicted by abortion, African-Americans, is also the community that suffers the lowest marriage rate.

He concludes with a call for pro-life activists to join the March for Marriage:

"...as an ardent pro-life activist, I’m calling on my fellow pro-life warriors to formally join in the pro-marriage cause. One concrete action we can take in the next months is to show up for the March for Marriage (www.MarriageMarch.org) on March 26 in Washington, D.C, the same day the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Proposition 8 case.

Pro-lifers once needed a scientific instrument — the ultrasound — to renew their cause. Today I believe they only need a bit of encouragement to acknowledge the deeper truth embedded in the biology of the human beings they defend — the truth that unborn children are conceived by men and women. The cultural question which every civilized society before us, and our nation throughout most of its history, has resolved is that this new life deserves to be born and raised by its parents who are united in marriage.

What could be more pro-life than that?"

Video: Pro-Marriage Vlog by a Young Conservative Activist

This is an awesome vlog (video blog) by a young conservative activist at Counter-Cultured -- check it out then spread the word!

The woman in the video, Anna Maria, explains that "it's ridiculous that people should be labeled with words like "hateful," "homophobic," "heteronormative," and "bigot" for wanting to restore a culture of marriage in society."