WASHINGTON - The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) responded today to Obama’s Department of Justice (DOJ) as they filed a brief pretending to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
Constitutional scholar Hadley Arkes marks the feast of the Epiphany with an epiphany of legal opinion arguing that donor information of traditional marriage groups should be kept confidential because of the intense intimidation tactics used by the radical homosexual lobby.
Today the 9th Circuit issued several rulings, denying standing to Imperial County's deputy clerk, and referring the question of whether Proponents of Prop 8 ("Protect Marriage") have standing to appeal Judge Vaughn Walker's ruling to the California Supreme Court.
The three judge panel that heard oral arguments in the Prop 8 case on December 6th has just issued a new ruling on standing ... and it's a punt.
Help NOM close out the year with our most ambitious challenge grant ever! There are 5 days left in the $1 Million for Marriage Challenge where your gift of $25, $50 or $500 instantly doubles to $50, $100 or $1,000. The new year promises many opportunities to strengthen and reclaim marriage – but we'll succeed only if you stand with us to start the year off right! Please take the challenge today at www.2010MarriageChallenge.com! Then invite your friends to join you by clicking the “Like” or “Tweet” buttons at the top of the page!
Radical activists have released an angry and degrading new video that they are using to garner publicity and raise money for same-sex marriage advocacy. Already watched by nearly 2 million people, the 2-minute video is laced with dozens of angry obscenities, even putting obscene language in the mouths of 8 and 10-year-old kids. Words fail me in trying to describe it . . . it’s vile, sickening and incredibly sad to see the way these children have been exploited for cheap shock value. I find myself thinking – is this the kind of thing they want to teach our children?
After the Prop 8 oral arguments on December 6th, I told you how Judge Reinhardt had called out Ted Olson and David Boies on their tactical maneuvers designed to prevent Judge Walker’s Prop 8 ruling from ever being reviewed by a higher court – and how Olson and Boies are desperate to keep the Ninth Circuit limited to Judge Walker’s unbelievably biased findings of "fact." That’s one of our important roles here at NOM – making sure you get the full story, and not just the edited version the New York Times wants you to read.
NOM Chairman Maggie Gallagher gives fellow proponents of marriage between one man and one woman plenty of reasons to be hopeful that traditional marriage will carry the day, legally speaking; not the least of which is that most liberal judge on the panel, Stephen Reinhardt—whom NOM asked to recuse himself from the case—clearly saw that the Boies/Olson arguments presented amounted to a back door attempt to overturn the will of the people. Watch Maggie's interview:
Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse--Dr. J--of NOM's Ruth Institute interviews Austin Nimocks--senior legal counsel at the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) and member of the Prop8 legal team--about the national implications if Prop8 were overturned and the reasons he believes that the pro-traditional marriage argument will carry the day in court and around the nation. Click the player below to hear Austin's insightful points.
One intriguing question in the Perry arguments was whether voters had done something wrong in "taking away" a briefly established scheme of "marriage" for persons engaged in homosexual behavior. To give some context to this line of questioning, the court was focusing on a brief window of approximately four months between the time the California Supreme Court (CSC) imposed same sex "marriage" and the effective date of voter-enacted Proposition 8, an amendment to the state constitution that restored the definition of marriage in California. Since some same-sex couples were allowed to "marry" during this time, the argument claims the mean-spirited voters obviously intended to take away this "right." In other words, the voters knew it existed, didn't like it, and acted accordingly.
After the arguments today, Dr. Morse sat down with ProtectMarriage Chairman Ron Prentice to get his reaction. Listen in.