The New York Times Says You Are a 'Bigot,' 'Nasty' and 'Radical' and Rails Against the First Amendment Defense Act


Dear Marriage Supporter,

There has perhaps never been a media outlet more of a mouthpiece for the far-left's assault on American values than the New York Times. They have championed the sexual revolution, cheered the abortion industry responsible for the death of over 55 million unborn Americans, and led the push for gay 'marriage.'

The First Amendment protects their right to publish whatever they wish. But as is so often the case with the far-left, they wish to deny the protections of the First Amendment to those of us who support traditional marriage and who wish to prevent the government from discriminating against us. In the twisted logic of the New York Times, the constitution exists to protect their views but does not protect our rights. In fact, just as they advocated that marriage be redefined, they would like to redefine the First Amendment to neuter its guarantee of religious liberty.

The reason they wish to do this is because they hate the idea that people still support traditional marriage and they are disgusted that we are asserting our right not to be discriminated against. An editorial they published the other day essentially refers to marriage supporters as "nasty" and "bigots" and accuses us of supporting radical "anti-gay" proposals when we advocate for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act.

I am sick and tired of this far-left assault on our constitutional rights from pampered media giants like the New York Times. Will you stand with us to fight back against their leftist agenda of discrimination by making a contribution of $20, $35, $50, $100 or even $250 or more? Your donation will enable us to more forcefully advocate for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act, critical legislation that will protect our right to live out our beliefs about marriage in our daily lives.

The New York Times wants to redefine the constitutional protection of religious liberty into a "right to believe" provision. But that is not what the constitution guarantees — it protects the free exercise of religious belief. Religious liberty is far more than the right to hold a particular religious perspective; it is the right to uphold that belief in the conduct of your everyday life.

Right now in America, people are losing their jobs, being put out of business, having to pay massive fines and even being put in jail all because they do not wish to personally be involved in celebrating or supporting a same-sex 'marriage.' If the New York Times' view of religious liberty takes root, the very concept of religious freedom will be destroyed, and there will be no protections for people who simply wish to live out their beliefs consistent with the truth of marriage as it has existed since the dawn of time.

I am asking you to make a generous donation today so that we can fight this dangerous ideology that we may have the right to believe in traditional marriage but we don't have the right to demonstrate that belief in our conduct.

And I have some good news in our struggle to preserve marriage — a generous donor has stepped forward with an offer to match, dollar for dollar, every contribution NOM receives through the end of the year, up to a total of $200,000! Whatever you can afford to give to NOM will be doubled, meaning that there has never been a better time to make a donation to support our work.

I'll make a quick donation of $15, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $30.

I'll make a quick donation of $25, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $50.

I'll make a quick donation of $50, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $100.

I'll make a quick donation of $75, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $150.

I'll make a quick donation of $100, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $200.

I'll make a quick donation of $250 or more, which will be matched and result in NOM receiving $500 or more.

The fact that the New York Times is so opposed to the First Amendment Defense Act shows how important it is to enact the legislation. The fact that they are so willing to mislead people about the legislation and vilify those of us who support it only serves to put a fine point on why we need to fight for our rights. If we don't fight today, tomorrow our rights will be gone.

The First Amendment Defense Act is a straight forward proposal. It says the government cannot discriminate against any individual, small business or religious group simply for acting on the belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. They can't deny a federal benefit, contract or grant; they cannot strip a charity of its tax exemption; they cannot deny a group a license or accreditation because of its views of marriage; nor can they refuse to hire or promote someone because of his or her views of marriage.

Does this sound like a "radical" proposal to you?

The New York Times calls it "anti-gay" and makes wild accusations about what might happen if the First Amendment Defense Act were to be enacted, such as alleging that a person could be fired for being gay. That is preposterous. Nothing in the legislation restricts an individual from pursuing their full legal rights against alleged discrimination, including filing a discrimination lawsuit.

While exhaustively playing the "discrimination" card, those on the far-left like the New York Times ignore the fact that it is people of faith like the recently jailed county clerk Kim Davis who are the real victims of discrimination. The examples of people who have been punished for living out their beliefs about marriage are long and growing every day. Aaron and Melissa Klein were fined $135,000 because they did not wish to personally bake a cake for a gay 'wedding' because doing so violates their religious beliefs. Their business has been closed and Aaron now is a trash collector. Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran was fired because he wrote approvingly of traditional marriage in a personal memoir. Baronnelle Stutzman, a 70-year old grandmother and florist in Washington state, has been sued by that state's Attorney General and threatened with financial ruin. I could go on and on — the list of Christians and other faithful people who are targeted by gay activists for punishment is growing.

Help Us Defend Marriage Today

Meanwhile, there is not a gay couple in the country — not a single one anywhere in America — who has not been able to get a 'marriage' license, obtain a 'wedding' cake, order floral arrangements, hire a photographer, book a 'wedding' or reception venue or otherwise organize a ceremony that fulfills their every desire.

But, you see, it's not enough for gay activists and their media sycophants like the New York Times, that gays and lesbians are able to obtain a 'marriage' license or access to the full array of wedding-related services, they want to force everyoneespecially people who are deeply opposed to same-sex 'marriage' on religious grounds — to be personally complicit in celebrating the act.

It's not enough that a gay couple can get a marriage license in Kentucky; they demand it be personally issued by the faithful Christian clerk who does not wish to violate her beliefs. So she is thrown in jail when she asks for an accommodation.

It's not enough that a gay couple can order flowers to be arranged for their 'wedding' ceremony from any number of florists eager to serve them, they demand that the flowers be arranged by the Christian grandmother whose religious beliefs preclude her from participating in such a ceremony. So the state Attorney General sues her and threatens to take all her assets unless she succumbs and settles the case.

There are plenty of wedding photographers willing to record a same-sex 'ceremony' but the activists demand that a young Christian woman photograph the ceremony. When she explained that this violates her religious beliefs, they filed a legal complaint and she was punished by a fine of thousands of dollars.

In every one of these cases the gay couple was accommodated — they got the 'wedding' of their dreams. And not in a single case were the religious beliefs of those targeted accommodated.

We are fighting for passage of the First Amendment Defense Act in Congress and in the states because it is wrong for gay activists to attempt to force every American to endorse and personally participate in a same-sex 'marriage.' We must fight for our rights, or we will lose our rights.

There are millions of us who fervently believe that marriage is only the union of one man and one woman, and that is true regardless of what five judges on the Supreme Court claim. This is one of the most hotly-contested issues of our time, something that splits the country in two. But now that gay activists have won in court, they want to shut down public discussion by harnessing the full power of government to punish individuals, businesses, churches and religious groups who continue to advocate for the truth of marriage.

Please make a generous contribution to NOM so that we can push back against intolerance and discrimination, and fight for our rights against far-left bullies like the New York Times who support the First Amendment only as far as it protects themselves.

Your contribution today will be matched, doubling its effectiveness. There's never been a more important time to support our work. The New York Times' advocacy against us shows that we are engaged in an epic battle and that the stakes are high. Please give today so that we are able to continue fighting for your rights.


Brian S Brown

PS — Thanks to a generous donor, any gift you give NOM through the end of the year will be matched dollar for dollar, up to a total of $200,000. Please take advantage of this great matching gift opportunity by donating whatever you can afford to give today — whether that be $15, $25 or even $250.

Donate Today

Copyright 2015