Note: we apologize to Amy Contrada for wrongly attributing her critique of Massachusetts Family Institute’s pro-marriage-amendment strategy in the Bay State to Brian Camenker. Here is an updated version of her compelling piece on the MassResistance blog:

VoteOnMarriage Failed the People, June 14, 2007

By Amy Contrada, MassResistance.org 

http://massresistance.blogspot.com/2007/06/voteonmarriage-failure-predicted-here.html

The VoteOnMarriage amendment went down in flames today, with an even more appalling result than anyone could have imagined. Prayers without compromising the truth may work. Prayers when the truth is compromised cannot.

VoteOnMarriage’s campaign failed because the debate was boiled down to “letting the people vote” and ensuring “children have both a mother and a father.” But it left out the important truth about homosexual “marriage”: It’s based on immoral and unhealthy sexual perversions. Morality and public health needed to be part of the debate.

But VoteOnMarriage (and its prime actor, Massachusetts Family Institute) never spoke about these issues. Why didn’t they say plainly that disordered sexuality cannot become an accepted basis for “marriage”? And after compromising with [the then Massachusetts Republican governor], they could hardly address preserving the integrity of our constitution, and the common accepted meaning of the words therein.

VoteOnMarriage depleted our side’s energy and financial resources in pursuit of a terribly flawed amendment. We’ve warned about their failing strategy (“Be polite! Dialogue with the other side!”) and compromised amendment wording for two years now. We said: “Don’t feed the bears! They’ll just come back for more and more. They’ll smell your weakness. And they’ll eat you alive.”

But VoteOnMarriage said they had a good relationship with MassEquality. They spoke to the homosexual newspaper Bay Windows, badmouthed MassResistance to them and to people on Beacon Hill (including the last several governors) and to pro-family conservatives around the nation. They rigidly controlled what people said in their demonstrations, including their signs. It was a top-down movement, no real grassroots sentiments allowed. Time and again, as we walked through the VoteOnMarriage demonstrators, we would hear individuals corrected if they stepped out of line, said something “inappropriate” or with a little too much emotion.

Their strategy of endless compromise with evil, their attempted appeasement of those destroying the minds of children, and their puerile censorship of pro-family rhetoric has no origin in the Old or New Testament, and anyone who thinks otherwise has subconsciously blacked out the most powerful parts of the Holy Scriptures.

We hear from an MFI insider that they plan to regroup! How do you regroup with failed leadership, and a failed vision? Just a week ago, we heard that another MFI insider said the homosexual lobby was tiring out! They are detached from reality. They don’t understand the foe we’re facing.

When leaders fail to achieve their goal, they should be fired. VoteOnMarriage and the Massachusetts Family Institute have been discredited, they have failed the faithful pro-family people of Massachusetts. So we say to them: Don’t ask for another penny, another drop of our blood and sweat.

Listen to this podcast interview between Christian Civic League of Maine Executive Director Michael Heath and MassResistance founder Brian Camenker (scroll and click on “Homosexual Totalitarians”). Camenker explains how the pro-family movement’s compromising, defensive approach contributed to the defeat Thursday of the marriage amendment in the Massachusetts Statehouse.

Camenker describes how pro-family efforts to be “reasonable” by watering down the amendment (e.g., it would NOT overturn existing “same-sex marriages”) actually boomeranged on the pro-marriage forces. Rather than let down their opposition, aggressive and savvy “gay” activists continued to insist that the amendment was a full-blown assault on their “marriage” rights.

Meanwhile, Camenker says, Massachusetts pro-family forces evaded any discussion of homosexuality for fear of being perceived as “anti-gay.” They floated a “Benefits Fairness Act” which awarded marriage-like benefits to “two dependent adults who are ineligible for marriage,” hoping that would placate the homosexual activists. (It didn’t.)

The question remains — not just for Massachusetts but the whole nation: can we defend marriage (and that includes blocking “civil unions” laws) without critically discussing and exposing homosexual behavior, and explaining the pitfalls of normalizing such behavior through public policy?

Listen to Heath’s interview with Camenker by clicking HERE; for now it plays automatically, but later you may need to scroll down to “Homosexual Totalitarians” and click it to play. 

“Polite just doesn’t cut it,” says Maine Christian Advocate 

Mike Heath — and Brian Camenker of Mass Resistance — are right on here: appeasement of a sort did not work in Massachusetts. Compromises within the pro-family camp are paving the way for the continued success of the homosexual activist movement. The “gay” lobby, sensing weakness — with even some Christian evangelicals now accepting “civil unions” as a viable compromise — is emboldened to push even harder for its goal of full “same-sex marriage” and an array of “sexual orientation” laws that will effectively criminalize opposition to their lifestyle. — Peter LaBarbera

http://business.mainetoday.com/newsdirect/release.html?id=4503

The Massachusetts Legislature deep-sixed a pro-marriage referendum proposal today.  Notwithstanding the fact that pro-family forces compromised hoping to ease the concerns of social moderates in the Bay State, the government of pro-homosexual Governor Deval Patrick (D) unbelievably decided to deny the people an opportunity to vote.   In Maine, the Legislature cannot stop a referendum of the people.   If the people want a vote in Maine , they get one. Not so in Massachusetts .

Reflecting on the development in Massachusetts, Christian Civic League of Maine executive director Mike Heath said it is only a matter of time before Maine politicians eliminate the institution of marriage.  Heath said he doesn’t believe Maine can stop them unless the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland decides to strongly oppose it.   

“I don’t want to be overly pessimistic here,” said the 45-year old Executive Director.  “But, I’ve been fighting these guys for almost twenty years.   Polite just doesn’t cut it.”

The following is excerpted from LifeSiteNews.com, a must “go-to” site for pro-family advocates and citizens no matter what country you live in. Needless to say, you would have heard a lot more about this huge Italian rally had it been an “anti-Bush” protest against the war, or maybe a pro-“gay marriage” protest. The people “get it” regarding marriage and family; the secular media are obsessed with political correctness. One wonders how the political/cultural equation over homosexuality would be different if the media’s coverage were anything close to being fair rather than overwhelmingly pro-“gay”-activist as it is in most of the West today.— Peter LaBarbera  

1.5 Million Italians Turn Out in Massive Rome Protest Against Homosexual Civil Unions
Oraganizers Were Expecting Only 100,000

By Gudrun Schultz, LifeSiteNews.com

ROME, Italy, May 14, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Italians from across the country poured into Rome May 12 to join in a demonstration against a law that would give legal recognition to homosexual couples–reports showed up to 1.7 million people overflowed the St. John Lateran piazza. Organizers initially expected to draw about 100,000.

The proposed legislation would give homosexual couples–and unmarried heterosexual couples–similar rights to those of married couples, stopping just short of legalizing homosexual marriage.

“Living together is not family,” protester Anna Manara told the Associated Press.
“A commitment such as marriage cements the bond, while other models make it easier to be together and therefore end up making it less valuable.”

While the pro-family demonstration was backed by the Vatican and Italy’s Catholic bishops, it was organized by lay people independently of the Church. The “mind-blowing” success of the event is an outstanding example of the power held by ordinary citizens when sufficiently mobilized in support of traditional values, said Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, a priest in Rome who is the moderator of the Catholic Online Forum (see blogsite: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2007/05/winners-and-losers).

“The importance of this event is not merely that when left to their own devices the Italian people will support traditional values in great numbers, giving the lie to the script presented by the intellectuals in the press. It also means in concrete terms that the traditional values laity can organize and achieve results.”

“The success of “Family Day” also highlights a now deeply entrenched trend not only in Italy, but in the West: the marginalization of the Church from the public square,” Fr. Zuhlsdorf said. “Nearly everywhere the Church’s is being denied its right to speak freely. Committed Catholic and other religious politicians and public figures are pressured never to make reference to their religious convictions. The constant mantra is that religion should be a purely private matter than has no influence on public policy. Be religious, fine. But you may never act outwardly on your interior opinions.”

We are cheered by the following e-notice from the Family Institute of Connecticut Action, but this victory is bittersweet. That’s because, as you will learn from the link to the Hartford Courant in this story, Connecticut’s legislature passed “civil unions” (“gay marriage” by another name) in 2005. (Connecticut was “the first state in the nation to pass a civil union or same-sex marriage law voluntarily through the legislature and without judicial intervention,” Wikipedia notes.)

When the pro-family movement is reduced (in blue states) to proclaiming as a “massive victory” the mere stalling of a legislative vote for actual “same-sex marriage” — legislation that would have been laughed off just a few years ago — you know the hour is late in the struggle to preserve sexual sanity in this nation. Does that mean we give up? No, but it’s best that we view the present reality clearly.

Christians, conservatives, and traditionalists, let’s be honest with ourselves and the public: preserving “the word” marriage is only a minor — and many would say symbolic — victory, and no victory at all if we lose all else in the “culture war” over homosexuality. This small battle in Connecticut may have been “won,” but the war was almost lost two years ago when the Democrat-controlled legislature voted for a bill — which a Republican governor then signed into law — to give government approval to relationships based on homosexual perversion. — Peter LaBarbera

Family Institute of Connecticut Action writes: 

Massive Victory For Marriage!

 

Earlier today the Family Institute of Connecticut asked you, our supporters, to call your legislators and ask them to oppose holding a vote on same-sex “marriage.” That battle has now been won:

 

Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, and Rep. Mike Lawlor, D-East Haven, said Friday afternoon they do not intend to push for a vote on same-sex marriage this legislative session, saying the bill does not have enough votes to win…

 

Opponents of the bill were cheered by Lawlor and McDonald’s decision. “The Family Institute of Connecticut is thrilled that the legislature has heeded the majority of voters in the state who do not want to see marriage radically redefined,” said Peter Wolfgang, the institute’s public policy director.

 

This is a massive victory for marriage protection and it happened because of you: the pro-family citizens of Connecticut who heeded FIC’s call to make your voices heard at our state capitol. Thanks to you, our Feb. 21st lobby day was a tremendous success, turning out twice as many people as our opponents on a day picked by them. Thanks to you, FIC provided the outstanding testimony of Maggie Gallagher, Dawn Stefanowicz, Brian Brown-and over 40 pro-family activists like you-for the most successful public hearing on same-sex “marriage” we have ever had. And thanks to your phone calls and e-mails-whose effectiveness was grudgingly acknowledged even by our opponents-we have today’s massive victory for marriage protection.

 

Today’s victory came about because of your hard work. But our opponents have vowed to try again, which is why we need your support to continue to defend marriage from their attacks.

 

Our May 23rd Rally and Lobby Day for Marriage will go forward-beginning at 10 a.m. on the steps of the state capitol in Hartford. We need as many pro-family state residents as possible to attend.

 

And, even for this year, a radical redefinition of marriage is still possible. The state Supreme Court will be hearing oral arguments Monday in a case brought by activists seeking a judicial imposition of same-sex “marriage.” FIC and other pro-family groups have filed friend-of-the-court briefs. And FIC’s Peter Wolfgang will be appearing with pro same-sex “marriage” Rep. Mike Lawlor the following morning (May 15th at 9:00 a.m.) to discuss the case on WNPR’s “Where We Live” program.

 

Congratulations to all of you who stood with us and helped bring about today’s marvelous victory for families and children. May there be many more.

 

Your support for marriage protection made the difference! But the battle is far from over and your help is urgently needed. Please click here to double your donation to our matching grant campaign.

By Sonja Dalton

According to a Reuters article published Apr 5, 2007, the Walt Disney Co. has changed its policy and will allow same-sex couples to “marry” using Disney’s popular and lavish “Fairy Tale Wedding” program.

“We are updating our Fairy Tale Wedding guidelines to include commitment ceremonies,” Disney Parks and Resorts spokesman Donn Walker said. “This is consistent with our policy of creating a welcoming, respectful and inclusive environment for all of our guests.”

Disney will be marketing a fantasy wedding indeed — after all, homosexual pairs cannot obtain a marriage license in Florida or California.

So deluded homosexuals may shell out over $8,000 for a wedding planner, feast, flowers and decorations, and a ride in a giant pumpkin, but, at the stroke of midnight, when the mist clears and the last fleck of glitter floats to the ground, the perverted pair will discover ’twas all merely an illusion. Two men or two women may play dress-up in tiaras and tulle and tuxes (respectively), but afterward they will remain immoral in the eyes of God and unmarried in the eyes of man; same-sex pairs can never experience the mystery of becoming “one flesh” nor the miracle of procreation.

But never mind that — Disney will profit handsomely from such facades, and so they have rationalized:

“We are not in the business of making judgments about the lifestyle of our guests. We are in the hospitality business and our parks and resorts are open to everyone,” Walker said.

One can’t help but wonder: Will Disney now accept “Fairy Tale Wedding” reservations from parties of three or four — now that they’re not making judgments (or upholding state law)?

TAKE ACTION — Walt Disney executives may lack discernment, but we encourage readers to exercise their own. Why not skip “It’s a Small World” and instead plan a family vacation or Bible school field trip to the “Creation Museum,” scheduled to open June 2007 just outside Cincinnati, Ohio — where, among the other “Answers in Genesis,” your kids will learn the Truth about God’s design for human sexuality and marriage:

Then the LORD God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” …So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man He made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,

“This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. –Genesis 2:18-25

Linton: HB 1826 would “empty the institution of marriage of all substance” 

Memorandum

Date:  March 19, 2007

To:  Illinois pro-family groups, including Illinois Citizens for Life, Americans For Truth, Illinois Family Institute, CWA of Illinois, and Real Civil Rights Illinois

From: Paul Linton, Esq.

Re:  Analysis of Amendment No. 1 to House Bill 1826

Introduction

Amendment No. 1 to House Bill 1826, if enacted by the General Assembly, would create civil unions in Illinois for both same-sex and opposite-sex couples.  The Amendment would “deconstruct” the meaning of marriage in two vital respects:

First, it would allow same-sex couples to enjoy “all the same protections, benefits, and responsibilities under law . . . as are granted to spouses in a marriage.” § 105(a).  This is contrary to the longstanding public policy of Illinois (and, until very recently, every other State in the Union and every other country in the world) to confer such “protections, benefits, and responsibilities” only upon married couples who, by definition and the very nature of marriage, are opposite-sex. 

Second, it would allow opposite-sex couples to enjoy “all the same protections, benefits, and responsibilities under law . . . as are granted to spouses in a marriage,” § 105(a),  see also §§ 105(c), 106, 201, without actually being married, a legislative novelty that has not been adopted in any other State, including those States that have enacted civil unions statutes (Connecticut, New Jersey and Vermont) or their equivalent (California’s Domestic Partner Act).  Opposite-sex couples (who, of course, may marry under current law) are included for the twin purposes of diluting the meaning of marriage and blurring the distinction between opposite-sex and same-sex relationships (by calling them by the same name).

Amendment No. 1 would empty the institution of marriage of all substance, leaving only an empty form (i.e., the name, “marriage”) as a “consolation prize” for those who oppose same-sex “marriage.”  Marriage, however, is more than a name–it is an institution that is fundamental to the existence and continuity of societies throughout history, in all times and places.
 
Legal Land Mines

Apart from the public policy reasons for opposing Amendment No. 1, which are discussed below, there are legal reasons for opposing the Amendment, as well.

To express your appreciation to Indianapolis Colts Coach
Tony Dungy for his firm stand, click HERE.

From Dungy Affirms Opposition to Same-Sex ‘Marriage’, by Kevin Jackson, published Mar 21, 2007, by The Christian Post:

Tony Dungy, the Christian coach of this year’s Super Bowl champions, clearly laid out his position against same-sex “marriage” Tuesday night.

In front of a crowd of 700 at the Indiana Family Institute (IFI)’s banquet, the Indianapolis Colts coach agreed with IFI’s position of defining a marriage as being between a man and a woman.

“I appreciate the stance they’re taking,” he said, according to the Indianapolis Star, “and I embrace that stance.”

Before the awards dinner, several pro-homosexual and gay rights groups had criticized Dungy for attending the event. IFI, which has affiliations with Focus on the Family, has been a major voice in supporting a marriage amendment that is currently in the Indiana House, legally defining marriage as one man and one woman. The gay rights groups felt the professional football coach should stay away from all politics.

“We’re not anti-anything else,” explained Dungy, according to USA Today. “We’re not trying to downgrade anyone else. But we’re trying to promote the family – family values the Lord’s way.”

The coach went on to say that his comments should not be looked at as “gay bashing,” but that everything he said should be looked at from his foundation on faith.

Dungy attended the banquet held in Carmel, Ind., about 20 miles north of Indianapolis, to receive the group’s “Friend of the Family” award. Past recipients include Shirley Dobson, co-founder of Focus on the Family, and former federal independent counsel Kenneth Starr.

During his speech, the night’s honoree said he was not ashamed to be at the event.

“IFI is saying what the Lord says,” explained Dungy, according to USA Today. “You can take that and make your decision on which way you want to be. I’m on the Lord’s side.”