[ + ] Text [ – ]
Opposition
The movement for full equality for all American families is succeeding in the face of an immense, well funded, aggressive opposition campaign that is not just opposed to marriage equality, but is also anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-civil-rights, anti-women's equality, and anti-separation of church and state.
Use the key resources below to learn more about the attack campaigns working against fairness for all families and how to respond to their unfounded arguments.
FROM EVAN WOLFSON:
Evan Wolfson Debates
Evan Wolfson directly addresses anti-gay and anti-family leaders in various debates. Listen and see his foolproof arguments draw support from every audience he debates in front of.
Winning marriage
Once again, America is heading into an Election Day with another round of ballot-measure attacks on gay people. While a shifting mood in the electorate may give our cause a boost—and as the public begins to wise up to Karl Rove's gay-scapegoat-distraction plan—we are still likely to lose most, if not all, of the ballot measures aimed against us this year. We need to be ready to explain that loss to ourselves, our media and the public so the right-wing cannot spin these defeats into a false claim that our cause undermines candidates or other concerns we share.
The freedom to marry: Keep dancing
Against the power of our truth and the inevitable rise to ascendancy of younger people who favor the freedom to marry, opponents of equality have only increasingly hollow appeals to "intuitions" and "traditions" that merely perpetuate rather than justify discrimination, present but curable discomfort that manifests itself in illogic and—here's where the ball is in our court—inertia that results from the failure of those who care to speak up and take action.
The Constitution protects us all: Say no to discriminatory amendments
Evan Wolfson discusses how the so-called "Federal Marriage Amendment," if passed, would force the intrusion of the federal government into the regulation of marriage. This unprecedented Constitutional intervention would prevent all states and all future generations from making their own decisions on ending sex discrimination in marriage, just as they ended race discrimination in marriage a generation ago.
Stand Up For Our Constitutions
Our state and federal constitutions are among the most important documents in the union. Download Stand Up For Our Constitutions and find out more about the consequences of enacting anti-gay marriage amendments.
[TOP]
RESPONSES TO ATTACKS:
Here are some of the leading themes in the right-wing's anti-gay attack campaigns and the truth behind the claims:
- The slippery slope to polygamy: The "polygamy" or "incest" red-herrings are common slippery-slope talking-points from the opposition. When opponents bring up polygamy or other diversions, it means they don't have an answer to the question, "What reason does the government have for denying same-sex couples who have made a personal commitment in their lives the equal commitment of marriage under the law?" Same-sex couples and their kids excluded from marriage are not saying, "Let's have no rules." They are saying, "Let us have what you have — the freedom to marry one person we love, with the same rules, the same responsibilities, and the same respect." This diversionary tactic put forth by the right-wing opposition does not answer the question why a choice of a marital partner should be dictated by the government based on sex or sexual orientation, for which there is no good reason, nor how anyone else's marriage is strengthened by shutting these committed couples and their kids out of the commitment and safety-net of marriage.
- Marriage is "protected" by denying it to some couples:The anti-gay forces continue to push discriminatory constitutional amendments in the states that assert they "protect" and "defend" marriage. However, it is clear that the true intention of these amendments is to enshrine discrimination in state laws and constitutions and deny any measure of protection for same-sex or unmarried couples and their kids, including prohibitions and rollbacks of civil union, domestic partnerships, or health coverage. Utah is a perfect example of this bait-and-switch: Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson, a Freedom to Marry Voice of Equality, recently signed a law to allow employers to provide benefits to domestic partners. Opponents are invoking the recent Utah constitutional amendment to try to block this law, despite having campaigned last year for the amendment with a promise that their intention was to protect families and "defend marriage." Time has shown that the real effect is to deny important protections to lesbian and gay families and their kids. As the harms sink in, and the opponents' true broad anti-gay agenda is revealed, the Salt Lake City Tribune has joined many Utahns in questioning the veracity of the forces who pushed the discriminatory amendment, and in calling for its repeal.
- Attacking our families: The odious claim that same-sex parents are harmful to children has been rejected by leading professional organizations in the fields of medicine, psychology, psychiatry, child-welfare, education, public health, and social work, including, for example, the American Academy of Pediatrics. The right-wing's attacks on the kids and their parents have been proven false by numerous studies by experts such as Michael S. Wald, Ellin C. Perrin, MD, presented at the American Academy of Pediatrics Conference, The Williams Project, the American Academy of Pediatrics (discussed years earlier here), and many others. In fact, it's the opponents who are harming real kids by denying them and their parents the support that would come to their families through the freedom to marry.
- Marriage exists to promote procreation: Gay and non-gay people have the same mix of reasons for wanting to marry, for many involving parenting, for many others not. Millions of non-gay married Americans are in non-procreative marriages (think of Bob and Elizabeth Dole, or George and Martha Washington). At the same time, across the United States, more than 39 percent of same-sex couples aged 22-55 are raising children. It makes no sense to punish these children by withholding the structure of marriage from their parents. Even U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia conceded the weakness of the procreation argument in Lawrence v. Texas.
- Equality means changing the "definition" of marriage: This couldn't be further from the truth. Same-sex couples and their families do not want to change how marriage is defined. Instead they only want to remove a restriction that prevents one group of citizens from access to the same rights and responsibilities afforded to another. These real couples are asking to be included in the current definition of marriage: love, commitment and security shared between two people. When same-sex couples marry, they don't change the "definition" of anyone else's marriage.
- Political diversion: In New Hampshire, a state panel was created to study the pros and cons of marriage equality, domestic partnership, and civil unions within the state and their effects on all aspects of life ranging from economics to parenting. Right-wing politicians, specifically Sen. Jack Barnes (R), hijacked the study and rushed the panel for a vote to propose a constitutional amendment banning marriage and family protections for NH's gay families. The panel had not even completed hearing witnesses, but the right-wing struck when it could, undoubtedly because the vast majority of experts and citizen witnesses who had come forward made a strong case in favor of ending discrimination in marriage, not deepening it.
[TOP]
WHERE YOU CAN GO TO GET INVOLVED OR LEARN MORE:
Ballot Initiative Strategy Center
The Ballot Initiative Strategy Center is a 'think-and-do' tank for ballot initiatives across the country. They present the truth behind the anti-marriage constitutional amendments which do not protect families, but indeed write discrimination into our constitutions.
Fairness for All Families
Fairness for All Families is the campaign of fair-minded Floridians who say NO to the anti-marriage amendment proposed in Florida.
Equality for All
Equality for All is preparing to lead the fight against proponents of discrimination in California. This statewide coalition of LGBT and civil rights organizations, labor and business, straight and gay, is determined to defeat any attempts to write discrimination into our constitution.
[TOP]
LEGISLATIVE STATUS IN THE U.S.:
[TOP]
THE NUMBERS: POLLING & STATISTICS:
53% of registered voters nationwide oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to ban the freedom to marry for same-sex couples and their families. [ Quinnipiac University Poll, November 2006]
[TOP]
PUBLICATIONS:
Same-sex marriage initiatives and lesbian, gay and bisexual voters in the 2006 elections
This analysis of election returns and data from the National Election Pool exit poll finds that same-sex marriage ballot initiatives did not help Republican Senate candidates in 2006. Support for same-sex marriage bans has fallen most dramatically in states where people identifying themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians make up an identifiable minority of residents.
The Money Behind the 2004 Anti-gay Marriage Amendments
The Institute reports who paid for the campaigns promoting the 2004 anti-gay marriage amendments, concluding a majority came from conservative Christian organizations and organized religion.
Past and present proposed amendments to the United States Constitution regarding marriage
A comprehensive article which legally places arguments from both sides of the marriage debate within the historical context of past attempts to amend the U.S. Constitution with regard to marriage.
Will Providing Marriage Rights to Same-Sex Couples Undermine Heterosexual Marriage? Evidence from Scandinavia and the Netherlands
Since the November 2003 court ruling allowing same-sex couples to marry in Massachusetts, a new debate on expanding the right to marry has exploded across the United States. While the debate involves many issues, one particularly controversial question is whether heterosexual people would change their marriage behavior if same-sex couples were given the same marital rights and obligations. The report finds that overall, there is no evidence that giving partnership rights to same-sex couples had any impact on heterosexual marriage in Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands.
[TOP]
NEWS:
Read news about anti-gay attack campaigns across the country.
[TOP]
MULTIMEDIA:
VIDEO: Public Policy Lecture Series: "Should State Legislatures Approve Same-sex Marriage?"
From C-SPAN, Evan Wolfson debates parenting and marriage equality with David Blankenhorn of the Institute for American Values. Evan draws on the leading experts (American Academy of Pediatrics, Family Law Quarterly) who say ending discrimination in marriage would help families and hurt no one. This debate was held on March 14, 2007 at Pace Law School.
Streaming video from Pace Law School
Download video
Evan's opening remarks on YouTube
New Jersey's Chief Opponent of Marriage Equality Says Letting Same-Sex Couples Marry Would Not Affect His Marriage
February 20, 2008
New Jersey’s chief opponent of marriage equality, John Tomicki of the New Jersey Coalition to Preserve and Protect Marriage, stated yesterday that marriage equality for same-sex couples would not affect his marriage. His sweeping, quite puzzled response, “Why would it?” demolishes the argument that ending discrimination in marriage would destroy the institution.
State Representative Angie Paccione answers the marriage equality question in 2006 debate for US Congress in Colorado against the author of the anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment.
Evan Wolfson debates Rabbi Levin
Fox News looks to Evan Wolfson to provide a compassionate, factual reaction to the news of Massachussetts marriage decision.
[TOP]
Evan Wolfson directly addresses anti-gay and anti-family leaders in various debates. Listen and see his foolproof arguments draw support from every audience he debates in front of.
Once again, America is heading into an Election Day with another round of ballot-measure attacks on gay people. While a shifting mood in the electorate may give our cause a boost—and as the public begins to wise up to Karl Rove's gay-scapegoat-distraction plan—we are still likely to lose most, if not all, of the ballot measures aimed against us this year. We need to be ready to explain that loss to ourselves, our media and the public so the right-wing cannot spin these defeats into a false claim that our cause undermines candidates or other concerns we share.
Here are some of the leading themes in the right-wing's anti-gay attack campaigns and the truth behind the claims.
Evidence from Scandinavia and the Netherlands
Since the November 2003 court ruling allowing same-sex couples to marry in Massachusetts, a new debate on expanding the right to marry has exploded across the United States. While the debate involves many issues, one particularly controversial question is whether heterosexual people would change their marriage behavior if same-sex couples were given the same marital rights and obligations. The report finds that overall, there is no evidence that giving partnership rights to same-sex couples had any impact on heterosexual marriage in Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands.
