"After attending a several-day seminar in Southern California last summer at an interfaith organization, the Ruth Institute, BYU law student Alisa Rogers rallied support for a conference on strengthening the family."
(read it all here)

And "LDS Leader Stresses Importance of Marriage, Family":
"Marriage and families are at the heart of mortal life, Elder Bruce D. Porter of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' Quorum of the Seventy said during the Stand for the Family conference held at BYU Friday. If the family breaks down, so does everything else, he said."
(read it all here)

Dear Friends of Marriage,

A few words about where we are in D.C.

Notice the headlines from the mainstream media: a persistent drumbeat of despair. Recognize that the keenest weapon in the hands of our opponents are these spiritual weapons--which means they are weapons we can strip from them any time we see that they are being wielded against us.

That's a longwinded way of saying: Don't believe the lies. It's not over in D.C. by any means.

Here's what really happened. The people of D.C. have a right, granted by Congress in their charter, to vote to overturn legislation passed by elected officials, just as people in many states (like Maine) have that right. The City Council not only passed gay marriage, it went the next extraordinary step and claimed the right to block citizens from voting on gay marriage. Their legal arguments are quite weak, but as we all know, in a world with too many activist judges that doesn't really matter. Politically, it is remarkable to see politicians claim that the right to gay marriage trumps the people's right to vote.

The lower courts are sitting on the decision, running out the clock. So we tried to jump over their heads and get the Supreme Court to weigh in immediately with an injunction. It was always a long shot so we were not surprised when Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts declined to do so. We were encouraged, though, by his opinion, in which he took the trouble to say that the legal argument we are laying out "has some force."

Meanwhile, as I told the Washington Times, the response from Congress was disappointing. We knew with the powerful Pelosi/Reid majority we were not likely to win a vote, but we were looking for a few good marriage supporters willing to insist on Congress taking a vote. There is no real time clock on Congressional intervention, despite what you hear on the press. If either political party in Congress wants to stand up not only for marriage but for the core civil rights of all the people in D.C. they can, and we will be making sure they hear from you!

That's the beauty of NOM. We don't want to live in a world where we beg elected officials to do us favors. We all come together to build an effective movement that can make your voice heard. Speak truth to power and be not afraid!

The attacks on Christian institutions in D.C. are intensifying. Archbishop Wuerl faced a sad choice when D.C. politicians refused to build any reasonable conscience protections into the gay marriage bill: Once again the government has pushed a Catholic adoption and foster care agency out of public service. And this week, the government essentially forced Catholic Charities to drop spousal insurance coverage for future employees. Otherwise it would be forced to recognize and provide benefits to gay couples as if they were spouses, which is deeply contrary to Catholic teaching.

Maggie Gallagher wrote about this in her syndicated column. "Archbishop Wuerl is a brave and kind man," she said and then she went on to ask a key question: "What was the point of those kind of government impositions on Christian institutions?"

The Catholic Church's position on gay sex and gay marriage are well-known, or should be. Surely it could come as no shock to a potential employee or gay parent to discover that a Catholic organization is not the right place to pursue their career if they want gay marital benefits? What gay person in D.C. is practically better off as a result of the mean-spirited and successful attempt to drive the Catholic church out of the public square in key ways? If this were left up to ordinary gay people, I'm betting it would all turn out very differently. Live and let live is the American impulse across ideological and moral disagreements.

But in today's world, Donald Wuerl, the Archbishop of Washington D.C. is both a brave and a kind man. He went to the city council and asked for permission to continue helping poor and vulnerable people in partnership with the city. The City Council spurned his request. They were not interested in helping mute the conflicts between gay marriage and religious liberty. They want the right to use government to brand traditional Christianity as bigoted and discriminatory.

Shame on them. Shame on them. They will only fuel Americans' legitimate fears about what the real motivations behind gay marriage are.

And Americans of good will clearly have to come together over the heads of politicians to find a better solution.

But governments run by secular liberals are feeling newly energized and motivated to impose on religious faiths--and not just Christianity. There is now in the state legislature in Massachusetts a proposal to ban infant circumcision, a law which if passed would come very close to making it illegal to be a Jew (or at least a Jewish parent--circumcision of infants has been a requirement of Jewish faith and identity since the time of Abraham).

Meanwhile, just a year ago this week, two very powerful state legislators in Connecticut proposed a bill that would have let the government take over the finances of the Catholic Church.

What is the point of pushing Catholic institutions out of the public square? To show they can. To desensitize the American conscience to acts that would have been shocking just a few years ago. To prepare us to acquiesce to the next attempt to misuse the law to reshape our culture in ways that will brand faith itself as an evil, as our marriage tradition is now being branded.

If you can persuade people to accept the idea that Genesis is the moral equivalent of racism, you can do virtually anything.

As Maggie says, shame on them. Shame on them.

The truth will not only triumph in the end, it will set us free.

Stay strong! God bless you, and please keep praying for victory for marriage in 2010.

Faithfully, 

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

PS: The battles are tough. But when we band together, we can make a difference! Whether you can give $20, $50, or perhaps $100--or maybe a monthly donation of just $5--every dollar counts, and every dollar helps make your voice heard as you stand up for marriage.

NOM Featured Interviews
"Supreme Court Won't Stop DC Gay Marriage Law"
CBN News
March 3, 2010

Brian Brown, the executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, is a staunch opponent of the new law. He appeared on CBN News' Midday program to talk about the Supreme Court's ruling. Click play to watch the interview.

Maggie Gallagher interviewed on RPC Radio
March 2, 2010
Download by clicking the link above.

NOM Featured Article
"Should It Be Illegal to Be a Jew in Massachusetts?"
Maggie Gallagher
March 3, 2010

New legislation now being proposed in the Massachusetts state legislature to ban circumcision of any male children, including Jewish children, comes very close to saying, "Yes, it should be a crime." Circumcision of infant males has been a requirement of Jewish faith and identity since the time of Abraham.

NOM in the News
"Lawmakers Blamed for Gay Marriage Law"
Washington Times
March 4, 2010

"I'll be straight with you: I think they could have done more," Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, said of Republican leaders. "We needed a vote, and we didn't get one."

"Dr. Jennifer Morse's Complete Comments About the Ruth Institute"
YouTube--excerpts from FOX Strategy Room
February 12, 2010

"Guild Institute in Christian Family Studies Announces Inaugural Lecture"
Houston Baptist University press release
March 2, 2010

The newly established Guild Institute in Christian Family Studies at Houston Baptist University has selected Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, founder and president of the Ruth Institute, as speaker for its inaugural lecture, which will be held on Monday, March 29, at 7 p.m. in the Morris Cultural Arts Center's Belin Chapel on the HBU campus.

"Pro-Family Leaders from 35 Countries Oppose Institution of Same-Sex Marriage in Mexico City"
Christian Newswire
February 25, 2010
In response to a move to institute same-sex marriage in the Federal District which includes Mexico City (on March 4), more than 120 pro-family/pro-life leaders from 35 countries have signed the "World Congress of Families Leadership Petition To Save Marriage In Mexico City."

"Beverly Hills Doesn't Care for (Conservative) Free Speech"
Christian Coalition of America
February 25, 2010
In this case, the city council of Beverly Hills -- the very city which Lauren Ashley will represent -- has condemned her views and is demanding that the pageant not allow her to use the moniker "Miss Beverly Hills" in the competition.

"Four Candidates for RI Governor Pledge Support for Same-Sex Marriage"
Providence Journal
March 4, 2010
Christopher C. Plante, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage's Rhode Island chapter, said the issue should be decided by voters, the same way voters had their say on a casino.

"Family-Advocate Summit Draws Protest"
Providence Journal
February 28, 2010
Christopher Plante, executive director of National Organization for Marriage Rhode Island, said the New England Family, Life, and Marriage Summit -- a one-day gathering that drew 75 traditional family advocates from Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island sought to build grass-roots support for the traditional family.

Dear Friends of Marriage,

It is a sad day in our nation's capital, as District offices begin accepting marriage applications from same-sex couples.

Local officials in Washington, DC have done everything possible to silence District residents opposed to same-sex marriage, even going so far as to deny their civil right to file a referendum.

And despite strong efforts in Congress, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Democratic leadership refused to step in to protect voters rights in DC.

However, while same-sex marriages will be permitted in the District for the time being, NOM is continuing to fight bring an initiative to the ballot to restore marriage to what it has always been -- the union of a husband and wife.

We will fight on!  This battle is far from over.

Standing shoulder to shoulder with Bishop Harry Jackson, Dr. Walter Fauntroy, and the entire StandForMarriage team, we are confident that at the end of the day, DC voters will have the chance to repeal this bill at the ballot box.

Although lower courts have allowed the DC Board of Elections to hide behind the Human Rights Act as a reason to deny voters the chance to have a say on marriage, we are confident that we will ultimately prevail on appeal. Just yesterday, although Chief Justice John Roberts did not grant our request for an injunction to stop the same-sex marriage bill from taking effect, he noted that the initiative effort is still pending, and that our arguments for bringing the initiative to the ballot have "some force," and could be pursued in the initiative case.

We will continue to pursue every avenue available to make sure that initiative right, guaranteed to DC voters by the District Charter, is upheld -- and while we press the legal case, we are also continuing to grow the relationships and coalitions in the District that will be key to our success during the campaign.

This is our nation's capital, and we're determined to do what it takes to make sure marriage is protected.

Unfortunately, these marriage battles tend to be long, drawn-out efforts. Our opponents have spent years laying the groundwork for same-sex marriage, and we are in this for the long haul -- mission-focused to rapidly respond wherever the need arises. To do that, we depend on the support of our monthly partners who, month in and month out, give whatever they are able to protect marriage. Would you become a monthly partner today? Think one less Big Mac a month -- can you give $5 to save marriage? Please click here to make a monthly give of $5, $25, or even $100 a month. Or if you're not sure you can make a monthly commitment, click to make a secure one-time donation.

Thank you for your sacrifice to save marriage.

Faithfully, 

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

news here

"The second choice was to do what the Washington Archdiocese has done: eliminate benefits for all spouses.

"'For decades, the church has been at the forefront of worker benefits, so this move cuts against their understanding of social justice and health benefits to all possible,' Tuttle said. 'But obviously, you can see they felt there was a real conflict between those values. They feel they weren't left with much of a choice.'"

Click here to read the full story in the Washington Post. [edited to fix URL]

Dear Friends of Marriage,

Is our government out of control? A lot of voters are asking themselves that question these days, for a lot of reasons you can read about in the media, or hear on Fox News.

Working to be your voice on marriage has been such an honor and such a gratifying experience. The victories we won together I would not trade for anything in the world.

But this week, I have to tell you, I've been thinking hard about what one sees in the front seat of this battle, about the lawlessness and unresponsiveness of political and yes, even judicial figures.

According to the D.C. City Council's website, they are going to start permitting gay marriages on March 3. Speaking procedurally, this is an outrage. The law clearly gives Congress 30 days to review city council legislation, and that law clearly specifies that it is not 30 calendar days but 30 days in which Congress, meaning both Houses of Congress, are in session. And yet city officials are deliberately and flagrantly ignoring that law, needlessly counting the days Congress was out of session for snow, all in order to rush through a bill as fast as possible.

"The history of liberty is largely the history of procedural safeguards," Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter famously wrote. But gay marriage right now is movement of people who believe that they are right and you are wrong, so their rights count but other people's don't.

The bias of politicians is less shocking that the outright bias of the judicial branch. We saw it first with Judge Walker in the Prop 8 case in California, who so callously ignored the rule of law and elementary fairness that even the Ninth Circuit and the Supreme Court had to intervene to rap his knuckles. What most people don't recognize is that the same thing is happening all over again in the D.C. lower courts. D.C. law gives voters a limited number of days to collect enough signatures to overrule politicians' decisions like the imposition of gay marriage. D.C.'s constitution--its charter--gives citizens of D.C. the right to vote on City Council decisions. Now the city council is holding that this doesn't apply to gay marriage because protecting marriage as the union of one man and one woman would somehow violate the city's Human Rights Code, passed by the legislators. The legislators, in other words, are saying elected politicians can vote to take away D.C. citizens' constitutionally-given right to vote.

We are confident this strange and radical legal argument will fail when it gets to the highest courts. But here's what's happening right now: The lower courts are refusing to rule on this argument. We cannot appeal until they rule. Normally when voters' rights are obviously at stake, courts expedite their decisions. They don't sit on a case and run out the clock and make the situation moot. But that's what we face right now: A judicial system that too often appears to respect the civil rights of only one party to the case. The right to vote is too important a civil right to permit this outrage to go unnoticed. Working with Bishop Harry Jackson and others, NOM will continue to fight for the civil rights of all the citizens of D.C. and for every American who believes, as we do, that our marriage tradition is good, and should be respected and protected in law and culture.

The Maryland attorney general provided another instance of flagrant disregard for the rule of law. Maryland's family code clearly states that "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid." Maryland's highest court recently upheld this law and clearly stated that it was the province of the legislature to change the law, if voters so desired. So why is the attorney general, the state's highest law-enforcement official, ordering state workers to treat as valid gay marriages performed outside of the state? What part of "only a marriage of one man and one woman is valid" doesn't he understand?

This is a movement driven to lawlessness and lies by a self-righteous sense that only they are right, and therefore only they have rights. We are fighting, in other words, not only for marriage but for fairness, for democracy, for the rule of law, for civility and for the ordinary civil rights of all Americans.

Maggie was in West Virginia yesterday, at a pro-marriage rally sponsored by the feisty and impressive young Family Policy Council of West Virginia, headed by an equally impressive young lawyer named Jeremy Dys. In West Virginia, almost 80 percent of Democrats say they want the right to vote for marriage. The threat from the courts is now real and obvious and the only way to prevent the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia from imposing gay marriage is to put the current law in the state constitution. Thirty states now define marriage as one man and one woman in their state constitution. How can something that's constitutional law in Virginia, Oregon, Wisconsin, Michigan and even California be considered too radical for West Virginia? So why are certain West Virginia politicians dragging their heels?

The excuses are getting pretty thin. 

NOM began today reaching out to 300,000 West Virginian households to let them know what their politicians are doing--or in this case not doing--to protect marriage. The response so far has been overwhelming! "I've never seen results like this," my tech guy said when he called me to give me the first preliminary reports on how effective NOM's Call to Marriage Campaign has been. 

We shouldn't have been surprised. On the steps of the West Virginia capitol building, Jeremy Dys plopped two big boxes on the tables and said, "In these boxes are more than 4,600 petitions, asking for a marriage amendment. We told leaders here we would collect 2500 in less than a week. Instead we gathered more than double that." The crowd went wild. (This morning I got an email from Jeremy saying the count is now over 5,000 and growing.)

This is about whether our government is going to be responsive and honest. The excuses of politicians are wearing pretty thin. There is no good reason to deprive the people of West Virginia of the right to vote on marriage at this point--unless you as an elected official are for gay marriage. In that case you should be man enough to let the voters know.

A few more items of good news you won't hear on the mainstream media, or even Fox News. The Australian senate just followed in the footsteps of New York and New Jersey and rejected gay marriage.

If you have a moment, take a look at the story in the Mormon Times on Cardinal George's historic speech at Brigham Young University on religious liberty. Among other things, Cardinal George pointed to the flood of hatred from Prop 8 opponents as an example of our need to stand together in defense of human rights and human dignity. Speaking of that Prop 8 opposition, the Cardinal said, "What I most regret is not the opposition, that is understandable. ... And those of us who have gay people in their family as I have, know the anxieties and the conflicts in their own life. And we have to be there for them and love them and support them."
 
But when Prop. 8 opponents "respond by thuggery, by quasi-fascist tactics, then the common good, our whole society, stands in great jeopardy," Cardinal George said.

Amen.

Thank you again for all you do to make our work possible. These are your fights, and these are your victories. Standing shoulder to shoulder with you in speaking truth to power is, as I said, the greatest honor of my life.

Until next week, keep fighting the good fight! And please, pray for all of those who suffer for their courage in standing for God's truth about marriage.

God's blessing be on you,

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

P.S. As we work together to protect marriage, we need your help! We need you to speak out for marriage in your community. We need your donations--whether you can spare $10, $20, or even $200, every dollar makes a difference. And most of all, we need your prayers. Thank you for all you do!

NOM Featured Article
"LDS, Catholics Must Defend Religious Freedom, Cardinal Says"
Mormon Times
February 23, 2010
"There is nothing like being in the trenches together to make common cause," said Maggie Gallagher, a Catholic and president of the National Organization for Marriage. "I think we all need the courage to stand up for our core beliefs -- especially the belief that our marriage tradition is good. I'm very grateful for the LDS faith community's leadership, but even more for the ordinary member's ordinary courage. We all admire it and seek to emulate it."

NOM in the News
"The Chastity Ring-Around"
Lena Chen
The American Prospect
February 18, 2010

NOM has also launched its own college initiative that emphasizes the "importance of man-woman marriage" and fosters "pro-life, pro-family" student groups. "The social climate on campus really encourages indiscriminate sexual activity, and to some extent, even promiscuity and pornography. We're just coming out of Sex Week at Yale, which is a celebration of unrestrained sexuality," says Dr. Jennifer R. Morse, who heads NOM's Ruth Institute. "If you live the hook-up lifestyle, and you live that way for 10 or 15 years and then decide you want to get married, you have 10 or 15 years worth of stuff you have to unlearn."

"Crowd Asks Politicians to 'Let Us Vote' on Gay Marriage"
Charleston Gazette
February 25, 2010
About 150 people gathered outside the state Capitol on Thursday to say they want voters to decide whether the West Virginia Constitution should ban same-sex marriage.

"Voters May Decide Marriage Issue"
Parkersburg News and Sentinel
February 25, 2010
The Family Policy Council of West Virginia will be holding a "Let Us Vote" marriage rally on the north steps of the state Capitol at noon today in support of the resolution and efforts to get it out of committee.

The event will feature Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage; Randy Wilson, national field director for Family Research Council, and Jeremy Dys, president and general counsel of the Family Policy Council of West Virginia.

"Md. AG: State Can Recognize Same-Sex Marriages"
CBN News
February 25, 2010
The National Organization for Marriage disagrees, saying the law clearly states only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in Maryland.

"Covering the Prop 8 Trial: Can the Gay Press Maintain Objectivity (And Should It)?"
Karen Ocamb
Huffington Post
February 18, 2010
Having served on the board of the LA Press Club with Ted, I suspect this topic was selected long before the San Francisco Chronicle published a political column noting the "open secret" that Prop 8 trial Judge Vaughn Walker is gay -- which I wrote about citing some facts to counter the spin from the National Organization for Marriage. But the timing is terrific because it may well draw many more straight people who quietly have questions and harbor a lingering doubt about Walker -- and our coverage, which is sometimes cited by the mainstream media.

"Women's Dignity: The Forgotten Agenda"
Mercator.Net
February 25, 2010
I have a radical idea for promoting the dignity of women: the idea that giving birth to children inside marriage is good and worthy use of one's time and talent. This idea has come under assault from many directions. --Jennifer Roback Morse

"Gay Republicans Draw Support, Concern at CPAC"
CNN
February 19, 2010
GOProud has a booth at CPAC just two spaces away from the exhibition for the National Organization for Marriage, which wants the government to define marriage as between a man and a woman.

"GOProud Director: National Organization for Marriage Are 'Pansies,' 'Wusses'"
The Washington Independent
February 19, 2010
One of the odd coincidences of CPAC is the location of the National Organization for Marriage's booth just 20-odd feet away from the booth of GOProud, the upstart gay Republican organization. On Thursday, leaders of both groups posed for an impromptu meeting in view of CNN's cameras, joking about the possibility of a beer summit. But on Friday morning, the National Organization for Marriage preemptively blasted GOProud in a surprisingly acid press release.

"Ethics Panel to Take Up Donor List Controversy"
Bangor Daily News
February 20, 2010
More than three months after Mainers voted down same-sex marriage, the organization that provided much of the money to the traditional marriage camp is still fighting to block the state from forcing disclosure of their donor lists.

"Southern Evangelical Seminary Event to Uphold Marriage"
The Layman Online
February 23, 2010
The featured speakers for the April 1 event will be Maggie Gallagher, president of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, and Robert George, one of the original drafters of the Manhattan Declaration. Their topic will be "Marriage: Why It Can and Must Be Saved -- The Case Against Same Sex Marriage." SES President and host of nationally-syndicated radio talk show "SoundRezn" Alex McFarland said he anticipates the 2010 installment of the series to be the most significant yet.

"Beverly Hills Slams Beauty Contestant for Speaking Out Against Gay Marriage"
FOXNews.com
February 24, 2010
"I'm not surprised that Miss Beverly Hills, Lauren Ashley, opposes gay marriage -- after all 45 percent of young Californians voted for Prop 8, as did 7 million Californians generally," the organization's president, Maggie Gallagher, told us. "But I have to say, I am impressed with her courage in coming forward and for speaking up for Carrie. The elected officials of city of Beverly Hills are not demonstrating tolerance or kindness by continuing the avalanche of hatred against supporters of Prop 8."

"Beverly Hills Slams 'Anti-Gay' Pageant Queen"
Money Times
February 25, 2010
The Miss California Pageant is still months away, but Miss Beverly Hills 2010 and upcoming Miss California contender Lauren Ashley has already stirred the controversy after speaking out against same-sex marriage.

"The Fate of Gay Conservatism, Ctd."
Andrew Sullivan (reader mail)
February 19, 2010
There was one point of debate on which I felt you had a strong argument against Maggie that you didn't use: Maggie was constantly trying to throw gay marriage off the table, and yet continued to put it back on the table herself, particularly when she referenced supposed violations of religious conscience related to laws that restrict discrimination by institutions whose religious beliefs define marriage as between a man and a woman.  In the context of that debate, she mentioned that part of what makes the traditional definition of marriage sacrosanct is that only a union between a man and a woman can produce new life.

"The Conservative Future of the LGBT Movement"
Steven Cheslik-deMeyer
February 22, 2010
The video is long, so get a snack and a cup of coffee and resist the urge to fast-forward through it. The details are important. And how often do you get to see Andrew Sullivan and Maggie Gallagher face off in person? 

Dear Friends of Marriage,

(WASHINGTON, DC) - Brian Brown, Executive Director of the National Organization for Marriage issued the following statement in response to Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler's decision yesterday to recognize same-sex marriages from other states:

"Maryland's statutory law clearly states that 'Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid' in Maryland. The Maryland Supreme Court upheld the law and stated clearly it was the province of the legislature to change it. What part of the law doesn't the Attorney General understand? What other laws is he unwilling to enforce? This is an outrageous example of running roughshod over the rights of the people of Maryland in pursuit of a private political agenda," said Brian Brown.

Click here to take action (Maryland residents only)

To schedule an interview with Maggie Gallagher, President, or Brian Brown, Executive Director, of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray, eray@crcpublicrelations.com, (x130) or Mary Beth Hutchins, mhutchins@crcpublicrelations.com, (x105) at 703-683-5004.

###

Dear Friends of Marriage,

"Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid in this state."

Who would have thought it would take 55 pages for Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler to explain what these 14 words mean? 

Tell your state legislators to set the record straight by adopting a constitutional amendment on marriage. Click here to send your message now!

In a lengthy opinion released yesterday, Attorney General Gansler unilaterally interpreted Maryland law to permit same-sex marriages in Maryland -- so long as the wedding takes place in Washington, DC, or Massachusetts, or somewhere else where same-sex marriage is valid.

One might be inclined to think that if same-sex marriages aren't "valid" in Maryland, government agencies ought not treat them as valid. And that's precisely what Mr. Gansler's predecessor concluded six years ago in a formal opinion issued on the same question. 

But even though state law specifically declares same-sex marriages invalid, Mr. Gansler concluded that there was no strong policy against same-sex marriage in Maryland. In support of this extraordinary conclusion, Attorney General Gansler cited the legislature's failure to adopt additional prohibitions against same-sex marriage -- prohibitions that the former attorney general had argued were unnecessary.

And it doesn't stop there. Yesterday's opinion specifically encourages the governor and state agencies to adopt appropriate regulations to implement this new view of Maryland policy -- effectively shifting the burden of proof to those who would challenge the recognition of this new policy.

So how do we respond when the Attorney General refuses to recognize the plain language of Maryland law? 

The Attorney General doesn't make law. He doesn't enforce it. And he doesn't offer any binding interpretation. He was elected to defend the law, not change it. Attorney General Gansler has overstepped his bounds, unilaterally rewriting Maryland law on marriage.

The legislature clearly defined marriage once. But some people refuse to listen. It's time do it again, and to give voters a chance to be heard.

We need to contact our state legislators to press for a constitutional amendment on marriage that would go to the voters to settle this question once and for all.

Please use this link to send your state senator and representative an email today! Tell them we've had enough of politicians messing with marriage: Pass a constitutional amendment on marriage and let the people of Maryland have the final say.

But I need you to do one more thing as well. 

Please forward this message to at least 5 friends today!

The only way to put a stop to politicians messing with marriage is to organize, creating a massive groundswell of opposition to same-sex marriage that politicians can't ignore. We need voters in every legislative district in the state to contact their legislators, telling them it's time to protect marriage.

As you know, NOM is active all across the nation, working to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it. We've recently seen how effective grassroots organization can make the difference for marriage in states like New York, New Jersey and Maine. Would you consider a one-time gift of $35, $50, or even $100 to help protect marriage across the nation? Or perhaps you could better afford a monthly gift of $10, $25, or $50 as a sustaining partner of NOM. Either way, we promise that your dollar will have maximum impact - helping to win marriage in all 50 states!
Click here to make your secure online donation today!

This is not a solicitation for activities in Maryland.

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization with QNC status, are not tax-deductible. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept contributions from business corporations, labor unions, foreign nationals, or federal contractors; however, it may accept contributions from federally registered political action committees. Donations may be used for political purposes such as supporting or opposing candidates. No funds will be earmarked or reserved for any political purpose.

Dear Friends of Marriage,

Less than a year ago, voters in a Midwestern farm state were shocked when their Supreme Court overturned the state marriage laws, forcing same-sex marriage on the state and leaving Iowa voters with a long slow process to reverse the damage.

Don't let West Virginia become the next Iowa!

Take action today to take marriage out of the hands of unaccountable judges, and keep it where it belong - with the people of West Virginia.

West Virginians from all across the state are rallying at the State Capitol today, delivering petitions to their senators and representatives. But for those not able to make it in person, we have set up an online action center to make sure that your voice is heard in Charleston.

Click here to send an email to your state senator and representative, telling them it's time to let the people vote on marriage!

 Polling by the Family Policy Council of West Virginia shows that 86% of West Virginians agree that "marriage should only be between one man and one woman in West Virginia."

And yet Democratic party leaders say they're too busy to bring the amendment to the floor for a vote! When is the last time politicians were too busy to take action favored by 86% of their constituents?

Tell your senator and representative it's time to bring marriage to a vote. No more special interests. No more backroom delays.

This year's session ends March 13th. Time is short. Please take action today!

Here's what I need you to do:

1. Forward this email to every family member, friend, or coworker. When nearly 90% of voters agree, there's no excuse for politicians to block an important issue like marriage. Make sure everyone you know contacts their legislators today!
2. Send your senator and representative an email right now. We've made it as easy as possible to contact your elected officials. In just three minutes, you can send a personalized letter to your own state senator and representative. We've provided a template that you can personalize, and we take care of the delivery, then send you the confirmation.
   Just click here to get started.

As of yesterday, nearly half of the state senators had already signed on as cosponsors, but Democratic leadership in the House is currently blocking the bill from a floor vote.

Enough with the political games. It's time to send a message to Charleston: Let us Vote!

As you know, NOM is active all across the nation, working to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it. We've recently seen how effective grassroots organization can make the difference for marriage in states like New York, New Jersey and Maine. Would you consider a one-time gift of $35, $50, or even $100 to help protect marriage across the nation? Or perhaps you could better afford a monthly gift of $10, $25, or $50 as a sustaining partner of NOM. Either way, we promise that your dollar will have maximum impact - helping to win marriage in all 50 states!
Click here to make your secure online donation today!

This is not a solicitation for activities in West Virginia.

Faithfully,

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

Contributions or gifts to the National Organization for Marriage, a 501(c)(4) organization with QNC status, are not tax-deductible. The National Organization for Marriage does not accept contributions from business corporations, labor unions, foreign nationals, or federal contractors; however, it may accept contributions from federally registered political action committees. Donations may be used for political purposes such as supporting or opposing candidates. No funds will be earmarked or reserved for any political purpose.

Dear Friends of Marriage,

The National Organization for Marriage is at CPAC this week--the annual gathering of political conservatives across this country. NOM's booth is awesome! If you are around in D.C. today (and a member) stop by and visit us! 

MSNBC's uber-liberal pundit Rachel Maddow just stopped by. She grabbed a National Organization for Marriage pen and said, "Wow. You guys have great pens. Can I have one?" "Sure," I told her. And then Rachel said: "I got to go tell the NRA guys they really should get your pens." A few moments later an NRA guy shows up and says, "Rachel Maddow says NOM has the best pens. ...Can we have one?"

Surreal, huh?

Not as surreal, though, as what just happened in the District of Columbia. The local city council not only passed gay marriage, but relentlessly refused to even attempt any real religious liberty protection.

And so this week, sadly, the Archdiocese of Washington announced that the Catholic Church was ending adoption and foster care services in D.C. The Catholic Charities adoption and foster care services will be handed over intact--so as not to hurt any kids--to a third party.

Maggie Gallagher was at the Cato Institute this week debating Andrew Sullivan, who said the city council is right. He said taxpayer funds shouldn't be used to "discriminate" against gay couples. But who is it that is getting hurt here? Who is being helped by driving one of the best charities for deprived children out of the public square? Will one gay couple really be better off because no Catholic adoption and foster care service exists?

And yet the politician in the D.C. city council ruled that to let a Catholic institution be Catholic, and still help in the public square, would be "aiding discrimination."

I said it is sad, and it is, but truthfully my blood boils when I think about it. I never imagined living in an America where the government would tell the church how to run its charities. Remember this day the next time someone tells you that gay marriage is about love and tolerance, that it won't have any consequences. 

The featured speaker at Cato on the panel with Maggie and Andrew Sullivan was Nick Herbert, a British member of Parliament who proudly noted that there is no political party in Britain anymore who would defend marriage as the union of one man and one woman. All parties are devoted to what he calls "gay equality." He laid out very clearly, in far more measured tones than Andrew, that this vision includes a massive expansion of government power to repress the forces of intolerance and inequality, everywhere from the sports arena to the schools. (Including, Nick said incredibly, faith schools.) I don't know many Americans who want to head in the direction that Great Britain is pioneering, where the government tells Catholic bishops they may not fire school principals who enter a same-sex civil union, or fined an Anglican bishop more than $100,000 for refusing to hire a proudly and actively gay youth minister for his diocese.

Noelle wrote to us the next day to tell us what a difference NOM's work has made for her:

I have been reading and admiring your work since early 2008, when, as a California voter tasked with voting on Prop 8, my intellectual instincts told me to vote for it in defiance of my exclusively left-liberal education, San Francisco cultural inheritance, and entirely opposed twenty-something peer group. Nagged by a guilty conscience about this, I began researching the marriage question, and your rigorous, fair-minded, arguments single-handedly confirmed me to the cause of preserving traditional marriage and the unique public goods it provides society.

Noelle added, "P.S. I'm also a fan of everything your NOM has done and will donate what little I can spare."

Wow, Noelle. Thank you. NOM exists because of people like you. Because you care. You care about truth. You care about civility, democracy, about justice and the common good. Against all probabilities you first felt the truth and then you found the truth, and knowing you are not alone, you are standing your ground for marriage. Thank you for making our day here at NOM with your letter.
 
I have to get back to manning the booth at CPAC. Until next week, semper fi! 

God bless you and your family, always,

Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org,

P.S. If you want to swell Noelle's mite with one of your own, you can donate to NOM and help us build an army of marriage supporters $5, $10, and $100 at a time.

NOM Featured Interviews
Jennifer Roback Morse on National Marriage Week USA
Video here

Chuck Stetson on National Marriage Week USA
FOX News
February 12, 2010
Video here

NOM in the News
"Why Everyone's Sick of Washington"
Maggie Gallagher
New York Post
February 17, 2010
Cultural power, explains Hunter, is the power to "name reality." Culture is mostly created in urban centers and spread to the periphery. E.g.: Harvard Law School decides that gay marriage is a basic human right, which spreads through judges until it runs smack up into the one source of cultural power in America that isn't controlled by urban centers -- the American people.

Video interview: Christopher Plante of NOM--Rhode Island and Jimmy Lasalvia of GOProud
Politico.com

"Marriage Leads to Better Overall Health, Scholar Says"
Deseret News
February 16, 2010
"The most important thing is to speak up, in love, for the truth about marriage," said Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage and co-author with Waite on the book, "The Case for Marriage: Why Married People Are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially."

"There Is a Place for Gays in Conservative Politics, Says British Politician"
Talk Radio News Service
February 18, 2010
Conservatism is not only compatible with the principle of equality between homosexuals and heterosexuals, but such equality is an essential element of conservatism, says prominent British politician Nick Herbert.

Herbert, who was elected and became the first openly gay conservative member of Parliament in 2005, participated in a panel discussion on Wednesday hosted by the Cato Institute, along with notable gay blogger Andrew Sullivan and National Organization for Marriage President Maggie Gallagher.

"Why Maggie's Wrong"
Chris Geidner
Metro Weekly
February 17, 2010
How can I write this so that Maggie Gallagher -- of National Organization for Marriage (NOM) infamy -- will understand?

A child loses his or her parents. That child is then an orphan. Still others are removed from their parent or parents' home for any of a number of reasons.

Dear Friends of Marriage,

The San Francisco Chronicle broke the news that Judge Vaughn Walker is gay. I don't know if it's true or not, but here's the really big indisputable fact the mainstream media should be focusing on: Judge Walker has been incredibly biased in his rulings from start to finish.

He ordered an expensive trial over the objections of Protect Marriage, in a case where frankly the issues are primarily matters of law. He further ruled that the private and personal feelings and attitudes of Protect Marriage folks and their campaign consultants--things by definition never communicated to voters--were properly subjected to subpoena power. This was a fishing expedition of a major order: Judge Walker tried to give gay-marriage advocates access to more than a million emails by ordinary Californians who worked on the campaign, and also to internal campaign strategy memos. (The Ninth Circuit rapped his knuckles on that one.) He refused to play fair by ordering opponents of Prop 8 to open up their strategy, too. Worst of all, he broke all the rules to try to get this case televised, over the objections of Protect Marriage (who are the defendants in this case).

The Supreme Court had to step in to rap his knuckles on that one, acknowledging the reasonable fears of intimidation--but by then two-thirds of the expert witnesses in this case had withdrawn.

So why did Bill O'Reilly say on "The Factor" that Judge Walker is a "straight shooter"? I'm a big fan of "The Factor." I'm sure if Bill knew the real story, he wouldn't have called Judge Walker a "straight shooter." Instead he would've told the real, no-spin truth: Judge Walker has acted like a biased partisan, not a neutral referee in this case. Why? Only God and Judge Walker know for sure.
 
The 7 million Californians who voted for Prop 8 deserve a fair shake and so far their rights have been profoundly disregarded and disrespected by this judge. And that's just a plain and simple fact.

Check out Sen Rick Santorum's op-ed on the subject in the Philadelphia Inquirer, which you can read below. He's been a brave spokesman for marriage at a time when few elected officials dare to face the Gill machine and the mainstream media. Kudos and thank you, Rick! 

And kudos to Kevin Smith of Cornerstone Policy Research, who helped bring some good news out of New Hampshire this week. According to the Union Leader,

Rep. David Bates, R-Windham, is spearheading the petition drive [to allow New Hampshire to vote on repealing gay marriage] and has formed the group "Let NH Vote" to promote the effort in towns across the state. Yesterday, Bates said he expects votes will take place in at least 125 towns, and he is waiting to hear from more.

Towns in some remote areas have gone ahead and gathered petitions without any help from Let NH Vote, he said.

"It's all over the state. Every county will have (towns with) a question on the ballot," Bates said.

Gill money flowed big time into New Hampshire to push a gay marriage bill voters did not want--just as the Gill money flowed into Iowa, where the Democrats continue to block the people's rights to vote. I got a call recently from Indiana, where a frustrated marriage supporter complained that the speaker there is blocking a vote on a state marriage amendment that more than two-thirds of the representatives and senators would support. And this week in D.C., a new Washington Post poll showed that by a 2-1 margin the people of D.C. want the right to vote on marriage--that includes, by the way, a big chunk of pro-gay-marriage voters who believe in democracy and the civil right to vote guaranteed by the D.C. Charter.

Finally, a word about that new non-monogamy study, which according to the New York Times shows that half of gay male couples interviewed are in open relationships (and other research suggests men in three-quarters of the theoretically closed relationships "cheat"). The Baptist Press filed a story this week suggesting something worth thinking about: How will the "planned infidelity" of gay couples reshape our marriage culture?

The first step is to claim that gay couples are just the same as married couples. But even an anti-Prop 8 expert witness had to concede that monogamy--sexual fidelity--just isn't the norm in the gay male community.

"The study demonstrates clearly what we've been arguing: That gays bring a different definition to marriage," Glenn T. Stanton, a sociologist who is the director for family formation studies at Focus on the Family, told Baptist Press. "And it's not just a different definition that male and female become optional, but that monogamy becomes optional as well. They are coming into marriage with a wholly different view of marriage than anybody has -- left, right, conservative, liberal.... They come in with that understanding of openness. These are people who come into marriage with a wholly different and really radical definition of what marriage is about." 

The Baptist Press quotes other prominent gay men who've acknowledged this obvious truth: "Gay male couples generally don't view monogamy as the defining characteristic of a loving, committed relationship," gay columnist Dan Savage wrote. Troy Perry, founder of the Metropolitan Christian Churches, an organization of homosexual churches, said the same thing: "Monogamy is not a word the gay community uses," Perry told the Dallas Morning News in 2003.

"Marriage Equality" will be a two-step dance. The first step is to claim that gay unions are just like opposite-sex unions. The next step will be to say, "Gay marriages are just as much marriages as yours, so if gay men don't want fidelity, then fidelity shouldn't be considered a basic part of marriage." Making fidelity an optional part of the cultural perception of what marriage means is already on the gay rights agenda. Consider when Andrew Sullivan first made this argument back in 1993. The uproar caused him to immediately recant and say that gay marriage would be sexually exclusive like other marriages. 

Now the groundwork is being laid in the pages of the New York Times for a "fidelity-optional" version of marriage. Look for it to be taught in a public school near you soon.

Thank you again for your letters of encouragement, your prayers and your financial sacrifices. Without you, we would be nothing. Together we can make a difference.

God's blessing,
Brian S. Brown
Executive Director
National Organization for Marriage
20 Nassau Street, Suite 242
Princeton, NJ 08542
bbrown@nationformarriage.org

PS: NOM relies on your donations in order to protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Whether you can spare $100, $200, or maybe just $5 a month, your contributions make a big difference!

NOM Featured Article
"No Way to Preach Tolerance"
Rick Santorum
Philadelphia Inquirer
February 10, 2010
Kids need a mom and a dad. Californians who think the state's marriage law should reflect this deeply held belief were forced to appeal directly to the people, with a 2008 referendum to overturn a state Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage. Proposition 8, an amendment to the state constitution defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, passed easily.

NOM in the News
"'Outed' Judge Accused of Bias in Prop 8 Trial"
NBC Bay Area
February 10, 2010
While not suggesting that there's anything wrong with 9th District Court of Appeals Justice Vaughn Walker being gay, if that's true, National Organization for Marriage Director Brian Brown accuses Walker of bias against the defense in the Proposition 8 trial anyway.

"Don't Ask, Don't Judge?"
Ruth Marcus
Washington Post
February 10, 2010
Does it matter if the judge hearing the lawsuit challenging California's ban on same-sex marriage is gay? Would his sexual orientation interfere with his ability to render an impartial judgment in the case, or the public's confidence that he could decide the case fairly?

"Judge in High-Profile Prop 8 Case Is Gay"
Baptist Press
February 9, 2010
"We have no idea whether the report is true or not," Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, an organization that supports Prop 8, wrote in an e-mail to constituents. "But we do know one really big important fact about Judge Walker: He's been an amazingly biased and one-sided force throughout this trial, far more akin to an activist than a neutral referee. That's no secret at all."

"Prop 8's Gay Judge"
The Week.com
February 9, 2010
The legal fight over California's gay marriage ban is exploding, as new revelations bring the trial's simmering controversies to a boil. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the judge overseeing the federal challenge to the state's Proposition 8 is himself homosexual. Prop 8 supporters are accusing Judge Vaughn Walker of bias--but is Walker being unfairly maligned?

"Countering NOM's Missive on Prop 8 Judge Walker with the Facts"
Karen Ocamb
Huffington Post
What's that adage about spin - say it long enough, hard enough, loud enough and eventually it will take on the cloak of truth? Well, the latest missive from National Organization Executive Director Brian Brown reads more like a fairy tale - showing that this Emperor has no clothes.

"Marriage Equality Low Priority for Iowans"
The Edge Boston
February 8, 2010
Though national anti-gay organizations such as the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) have targeted marriage equality for repeal in Iowa, as in other states that extend legal parity to gay and lesbian families, Iowans themselves are largely unconcerned with the issue, rating the problem of drivers texting while at the wheel as being of greater significance than attempts to wrest marriage away from same-sex families, according to a Feb. 8 article at the Des Moines Register.

"RI Gubernatorial Candidates Pledge to Sign Gay Marriage Bill"
On Top Magazine
February 9, 2010
Carcieri publicly supports placing a gay marriage ban in the Rhode Island Constitution. And last spring, he and his wife, Sue, joined the state's newly minted chapter of the National Organization for Marriage, the nation's most vociferous opponent of gay marriage.