“It’s time for them to be held accountable for their vote.” —Brian Brown, NOM president—

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today launched a statewide newspaper advertising campaign to hold Republicans in the state House of Representatives accountable for failing to support HB 437, compromise legislation designed to repeal same-sex marriage while restoring civil unions for gay couples. The legislation was defeated in late March. The ads invite citizens interested in challenging Republicans who betrayed marriage to contact the NHforMarriage.com coalition.

“Dozens of House Republicans in New Hampshire betrayed the cause of marriage, betrayed the GOP party platform in support of traditional marriage, and stood in opposition to every major Republican candidate for president,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “It’s time for them to be held accountable for their vote.”

The newspaper ad can be seen here.

HB 437 was compromised legislation that repealed same-sex marriage while restoring civil unions for gay couples. This was the law in New Hampshire before marriage was hijacked in 2009 by Democrats and Governor Lynch, who took thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from out of state gay marriage activists, yet never disclosed to voters their intent to redefine marriage.

“In 2010, NOM spent over $1 million helping to elect pro-marriage candidates in New Hampshire,” Brown said. “We intend to play a significant role in supporting candidates this year as well. We invite pro-marriage candidates of either party, Republicans and Democrats, to step up and run for office so that we can help elect a pro-marriage legislative majority in November. The people of New Hampshire support marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and we will not rest until the Legislature corrects the mistake that was made in 2009.”

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Anath Hartmann, ahartmann@crcpublicrelations.com, at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Aren’t you fed up with politicians who abandon principle when the pressure is on?

If you are committed to restoring marriage as the exclusive union of one man and one woman, click here to fill out our Sign-Up Form today!

Click here to view the full print ad we’re running.

“We will hold legislators accountable for their votes today.” —Brian Brown, NOM President—

Washington, DC — The following statement made be attributed to Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM):

“We are very disappointed in the failure of the New Hampshire House of Representatives to pass compromise legislation restoring marriage and providing for civil unions for same-sex couples. This was the law prior to marriage being hijacked by legislators who accepted hundreds of thousands in campaign contributions from gay marriage supporters without ever telling voters they intended to redefine marriage. We consider any vote cast against HB 437 to be a vote in favor of gay marriage, and we will act to hold every legislator accountable for such a vote.

“While we are disappointed in this vote today, we remain committed to giving the voters of New Hampshire the opportunity to restore the traditional definition of marriage. The only time gay marriage activists are able to win is when they can bypass the people and get activist judges or legislators to do their bidding, usually after plying them with large campaign contributions.

“This is a sad day for New Hampshire families who in 2010 had elected what they thought was a solid pro-marriage majority. They were once again let down by politicians who promised them one thing and then left them at the altar when the vote was on the line. These legislators will be held accountable.”

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Anath Hartmann, ahartmann@crcpublicrelations.com, at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

In considering House Bill 437, the bill to repeal the gay marriage law passed in 2009, every member of the New Hampshire legislature needs to be reminded of why the voters elected veto-proof Republican majorities in both the House and the Senate in 2010. One obvious reason was the underhanded manner in which Democrat Senate President Sylvia Larsen violated Senate rules in order to pass the bill allowing same-sex marriage.

… Another reason they did that was to send a clear message to Governor Lynch that the voters didn’t like his deceiving them on his stand on same-sex marriage. He campaigned on his support for traditional marriage and then betrayed them by signing the same-sex marriage legislation into law. In 2010, the voters decided they didn’t want to chance his doing anything like that again.

… I would remind Representative Cohn and every member of the General Court that the only poll that counts is the one at the ballot box. When their voices were so outrageously silenced on this issue by the previous legislature and the Governor, the voters spoke as clearly as they possibly could in 2010. This time they chose to elect Republicans to the House and Senate who they believed would actually listen to them and restore the legal definition of marriage as quickly as possible to what it was prior to being redefined. Keeping that in mind, Republicans should not only vote to pass HB 437, but work together to pass it by the two-thirds majority necessary should the Governor be so arrogant as to veto it. — Ruth Institute Blog

“The redefinition of marriage was forced on New Hampshire with no vote of the people. We support letting voters decide this issue.” —Brian Brown, NOM president—

Washington, D.C. — The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today urged the New Hampshire legislature to pass HB 437, compromise legislation to restore civil unions for same-sex couples, and repeal same-sex marriage while protecting couples who have already been “married.” The bill’s author, Rep. David Bates, has said he will offer an amendment letting voters have the final say on the legislation through a statewide referendum vote.

“Gay billionaires like Tim Gill forced same-sex marriage on the state in 2009 without voters having any say,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “We urge the legislature to adopt this compromise bill and let the voters have the final say.”

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Anath Hartmann, ahartmann@crcpublicrelations.com, at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Standing Up for New Hampshire Families, the front organization for the national gay marriage lobby fighting against the restoration of marriage in New Hampshire, today continued its campaign aimed at fooling Granite Staters about the facts behind the flawed gay marriage law they bought and paid for in 2009.

Just this week, Standing Up for New Hampshire Families, which recently accepted a $50,000 donation from New York City’s liberal, millionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sent out this message to “supporters” on Twitter:

“Reality check: 82% of GOP Primary voters in NH want lawmakers to focus on the economy, not social issues.”

The problem?

It was national gay marriage lobbyists and activists like Standing Up for New Hampshire Families who brazenly advocated, and lobbied for, 2009′s gay marriage law in the midst of the worst economic recession since the Great Depression!

And, as we all remember, these same activists were lobbying for gay marriage in New Hampshire’s legislature, then under Democratic leadership, BEFORE legislative leaders even addressed the state budget.

And that “82 percent of GOP Primary voters” cited in the poll?

In December, the New Hampshire Union Leader cited a poll showing a clear majority—sixty one percent—of New Hampshire Republican primary voters support a legislative definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman, along with a provision returning to civil unions. (John DiStaso, Same-Sex Marriage: Different Questions, Different Results, NH Union Leader, Dec. 22, 2011)

And, a recent NH Journal reader poll shows “seventy-three percent of respondents said they support a legal definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Only 27% say they support same sex marriage.”

So, when you hear liberal, gay marriage activists citing poll numbers that show that Republicans want to focus on the economy over “social issues”, remind them that the struggling New Hampshire “economy” didn’t prevent them from enacting gay marriage in the first place.

Ron Paul, the de facto head of the libertarian wing of the GOP, has argued it is a state’s right to define marriage as it chooses. Here’s the case for why states should choose to support the traditional understanding of marriage and repeal same-sex marriage. Read more.

The Limited Government/Libertarian Case for Man Woman Marriage
by Jennifer Roback Morse, Ph.D

What does it mean to be free, with respect to marriage and family? How does the definition of marriage affect the size and scope of the state? This Backgrounder is designed to help advocates of limited government think through the issues presented by the question of the definition of marriage.

• The Limited Government/Libertarian Case for Man Woman Marriage, Executive Summary for New Hampshire
• The Limited Government/Libertarian Case for Man Woman Marriage

Ron Paul says, “[he] would VETO a same-sex marriage bill as a state governor.”

In 2009, liberal Democrats sent Governor Lynch a bill radically redefining marriage. Ron Paul says he would have vetoed a bill like that. Lynch signed it into law. None of the legislators who voted for gay marriage campaigned on it. Yet many accepted large campaign contributions from gay marriage activists and then voted to redefine marriage.

NH FOR MARRIAGE LAUNCHES STATEWIDE AD SUPPORTING TRADTIONAL MARRIAGE RESTORATION, CIVIL UNIONS

Concord – New Hampshire for Marriage today released a new radio ad supporting H.B. 437, legislation that restores traditional marriage in New Hampshire, while providing for civil unions for same sex couples.

The 60-second ad, called, “Compromise,” will air statewide beginning
today.

TRANSCRIPT:

WOMAN

I just read an article about compromise legislation on gay marriage.

MAN

A compromise on gay marriage?

WOMAN

Remember how this issue was forced on us?

MAN

Democratic legislators took out of state campaign money and then redefined marriage.

WOMAN

We’re already seeing consequences. Massachusetts second graders taught about gay marriage in school. Inn keepers in several states have been
sued because they don’t want gay weddings in their inn. A Methodist group lost its tax exemption because they won’t host gay ceremonies.

MAN

No wonder New Hampshire voters threw out most of those who voted for gay marriage and replaced them with more conservative representatives.

WOMAN

And that’s why there’s compromise legislation. HB 437 restores traditional marriage in the law but provides for civil unions for gay couples, giving them full legal rights. And gay couples already married would stay married.

MAN

Hmmm. That is a compromise. And it sounds like a good one.

ANNCR

Ask your legislators to support HB 437, a common sense compromise.

Paid for by the National Organization for Marriage.

###

The Dec. 28 editorial titled “Gay-marriage law assault perplexing” left me equally perplexed – and insulted.

What you characterize as an “assault” is actually a commonsense effort to finally put a much-needed check on a social activist agenda that doesn’t reflect the will of the people in New Hampshire.

Your editorial also drips with contempt for voters who last year rejected politicians who supported gay marriage when they should have been focusing on fixing our broken economy.

It may come as news to you, but voters are right to demand that their elected representatives show respect for the will of the people who elected them in the first place.

Unlike The Telegraph, I, for one, am glad to see politicians are heeding the message of 2010 and showing some backbone against liberal activists using New Hampshire to further their political and social agendas.

I was saddened to read your Dec. 28 editorial (“Gay-marriage law assault perplexing”). Rarely have I seen an editorial go so far out of its way to ignore the facts about New Hampshire’s gay-marriage law.

The notion that efforts to restore traditional marriage exist only because “conservative Republicans were emboldened by their landslide victory in 2010” completely ignores the fact that voters never asked for gay marriage in the first place.

I’d bet I’m not alone in wondering where your rant against this “distraction” and “social engineering” was when gay marriage activists and liberal legislators put gay marriage ahead of the economy in 2009?

Editorial elites at The Telegraph didn’t call the 2009 push to enact gay marriage a distraction when New Hampshire’s economy was in shambles, so why now?