Greetings from the state of Minnesota, where good people marched for marriage!
Hundreds of good people of every race, creed and color showed up to make it clear: Marriage is the union of husband
and wife, not to be redefined by politicians.
I spoke on your behalf and on behalf of God's vision of marriage. WCCO-4
in Saint Paul, MN reported my speech this way:
"Proponents
of same-sex marriage want
us to believe that this is inevitable, this is going to come no matter
what we do, so we might as well pack up and go back to our homes and
stop
fighting. We will never stop fighting for the truth," said Brian Brown
of the National Organization for Marriage.
Senate
Minority Leader David Hann (R-Eden Prairie,) also spoke up for marriage
on Thursday: "We believe that
marriage is not something that legislatures created or government
created. We believe that marriage is something that God created and
reflects an
order that God created and it is the thing that unites children with
their parents."
You'll
recall that opponents of the 2012 Minnesota Marriage Amendment had
promised voters the amendment was unnecessary—that you could
vote "no" and nothing would change in the law on marriage. That proved about as true as promises in so
many other states that civil unions and gay marriage bills would not compromise religious liberty.
Well, there is hope that Minnesotans are beginning to see through the other
side's duplicity: a StarTribune poll released this week found Minnesotans oppose gay marriage 53 percent to 38 percent.
March for Marriage Update: Momentum Continues to
Grow!
The March for Marriage in our nation's capital takes place on March 26—if
you plan to attend, you can RSVP on Facebook by clicking here.
I was excited by the news recently reported by EWTN: "Leaders within the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops are encouraging their brother bishops
to support the upcoming March for Marriage."
"We
are grateful for this
opportunity to express support for the Marriage for March and to
encourage participation in this event," said Bishop Kevin C. Rhoades and
Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone in a letter to their fellow bishops.
"The
march
will be a significant opportunity to promote and defend marriage and the
good of our nation, to pray for our Supreme Court justices, and to
stand in
solidarity with people of good will," their letter went on to say.
NOM Leaders Remind Us What We're Fighting For
We
will be on the steps of the Supreme Court as the Justices take up oral
arguments on the case that could ban Prop 8 and bring gay marriage to
every state in the union, including yours. I hope that you can join us
and stand
alongside us as we demand justice for children and respect for our
Constitutional right to speak, to donate, to organize, and yes to vote
for marriage
as the union of husband and wife.
NOM's
Chairman of the Board, the distinguished law
professor and litigator John Eastman, recently took our case to the
media, smacking down the legal arguments for gay marriage in U.S. News and World Report.
There is no civil right to same-sex marriage,
he points out, because "the Supreme Court's recognition of marriage as a
fundamental right has always been grounded on what makes marriage a
unique relationship." He explains:
In
Loving v.
Virginia (1967), the Court defined marriage as a "fundamental" right
because it is one of the "'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental
to our very existence and survival," a point which is only true because
the institution is rooted in the biological complementarity of the
sexes,
the formal recognition of the unique union through which children are
produced. [...] [The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause] requires
that
individuals who are similarly situated must be treated similarly. It
should be obvious, but as long as procreation is an important part of
why society
lends its weight to the institution of marriage, same sex and opposite
sex relationships are simply not similarly situated with respect to that
important aspect of marriage.
Here's
the bottom line, according to
Professor Eastman: "Laws that foster the one relationship because of its
unique ability to further the public good serve legitimate, even
compelling governmental interests, and should be upheld."
Also
recently, NOM's
Communications Director, the dynamic young Thomas Peters, was on CNN,
arguing the Supreme Court must respect our rights and the rights of 7
million
Californians who voted for Prop 8. I really enjoyed watching him smack
down the absurd meme that gay marriage is somehow important for economic
growth (some people will say anything!):
Another member of NOM's family, Christopher Plante (NOM's Northeastern
Regional Coordinator), was recently featured
as a 'Rhode Island Power Player' in the local press, described as a
person having a "large impact" on the state. As Chris told the media,
"We've been told time and time again that same-sex marriage was
inevitable and time and time again that has proven false. Of particular
importance to us is working closely with our grassroots supporters,
having
them call, email, and visit their Senators, because it's the people who
will ultimately hold these elected officials accountable."
They also asked him what his advice would be for the next Christopher Plante: "Have a thick
skin and good sense of humor!"
Heightened Points of Interest in the SCOTUS Marriage Cases
President
Obama,
who has written movingly of his own longing for his absent father's
love as a boy, is now in Court sadly arguing there's no evidence
children
need either a mother or a father.
Obama's Justice Department
filed a brief
"rebutting" the arguments made by supporters of Prop 8 that the ideal
for a child is a mom
and dad. "The [California] Voter Guide arguably offered a distinct but
related child-rearing justification for Proposition 8: 'the best
situation
for a child is to be raised by a married mother and father,'" said the
administration's brief, submitted to the court by Solicitor General
Donald
B. Verrilli, Jr.
"As
an initial matter, no sound basis exists for concluding that
same-sex couples who have committed to marriage are anything other than
fully capable of responsible parenting and child-rearing," the Obama
administration told the court. "To the contrary,... children raised by
gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well adjusted as children
raised by heterosexual parents."
There
are a lot of objections you and I could make
to irresponsible statements like these. But I like the response raised
by a reporter who covered this story very well for CNSnews, Terence
Jeffrey:
So
far in the history of the human race, no child has ever been
born without a biological father and mother. Now, in the Supreme Court
of the United States, the Executive Branch of the federal government is
arguing
that, regardless of the biological facts of parenthood, states have no
legitimate and defensible interest in ensuring that children conceived
by a
mother and a father are in fact raised by mothers and fathers.
In
other SCOTUS news, Justice Anthony Kennedy—the swing vote who will
likely determine whether our rights to fight for marriage in a
democratic fashion will be respected and upheld, or whether our beloved
Constitution
will be misused as a weapon to strike down the definition of marriage in
all 50 states and make gay marriage a part of our Constitution—had some
interesting things to say recently.
Now,
Kennedy has proved very sympathetic to various
gay rights arguments and many people fear he will find a right to gay
marriage in our Constitution. Of course, we won't know for sure until
he
actually issues a decision.
But
for us, there was some hopeful news this week, when
Justice Kennedy returned to Sacramento on the occasion of the opening of
a federal courthouse library named for him. According to the Associated Press:
Justice
Anthony
Kennedy says he is concerned that the U.S. Supreme Court is increasingly
the venue for deciding politically charged issues such as gay marriage,
health care and immigration.
The 76-year-old associate justice said Wednesday that major
policies in a democracy should not depend 'on what nine unelected people from a narrow legal background have to say.'
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Ted Olsen and David Boies must be shaking in their boots as they read those words.
Do
not believe the falsehood that gay marriage is inevitable. Join us on
March 26 and speak truth to power; stand up for God's vision of
marriage.
Speaking of which — here are some brave military chaplains doing just that — standing up for marriage and speaking truth to power.
If you haven't seen it yet, please check out our brand-new MarriageADA video released yesterday about the perilous
threat to our military chaplains posed by efforts to redefine marriage. And please send these brave men a note of support for standing up and lending their voice to bring attention to this
important cause!
I look forward to standing with you myself in our nation's capital
later this month! With your help and God's help, we will not only stand for marriage—we will march!
Faithfully,
Brian S. Brown
President
National Organization for Marriage
Its “avowed purpose,” he said, was to “impose” a “disadvantage,” “separate status” and “stigma” on those who enter into “lawful” marriages recognized by the states they live in.
Conservatives are rightly dismayed by many of the actions of the current Administration, but this week we can celebrate some true victories in North Dakota--victories achieved in large part due to the leadership and energy of two of FRC's top pro-life advocates coming alongside state leaders.
These days it can be difficult to live out your Christian faith on college campuses. On one Florida University campus, it is especially difficult for students whose grade point average depends on their willingness to stomp on Jesus. Ask Florida Atlantic University Junior Ryan Rotela. When Rotela refused to participate in a 
