National Organization for Marriage is, perhaps, the last organization on the face of the planet that should complain about an opponent’s lies. NOM’s campaigns, after all, are built around two lies:
- That NOM is a secular organization with a secular purpose and;
- That gay people are a threat to children.
Neither of those things is true. NOM is affiliated with the extremist Catholic group Opus Dei and the organization is a functional proxy for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. The notion that gays are a threat to children is belied by more than seven decades of statistics compiled by the FBI.
In this case, NOM is also incorrect. Shocking, I know. According to NOM:
New ads in North Carolina are claiming NC’s Marriage Amendment will
somehow interfere with domestic violence prosecutions for unmarried
women. They know this is a lie. . . . our opponents know they cannot win this vote on the main question: “should marriage remain a union of husband and wife?”
According to the Coalition to Protect North Carolina Families:
Our existing domestic violence protections extend to single as well as married women – but that protection may conflict with Amendment One’s limited definition of what constitutes a family, leaving many unmarried women and children at risk.
In Ohio, the passage of a similar amendment meant relationships other than marriage were no longer recognized under domestic violence statutes. Ohio’s choice to enshrine a similar amendment into their constitution meant that domestic violence statutes protecting unmarried women were unenforceable until the state’s Supreme Court unraveled the legal mess some three years later.
In the meantime, dozens of batterers were released from jail, and cases were thrown out of court simply because abusers were not married to their victims. This put unmarried women and their children in danger.
“Ohio voters who approved a constitutional amendment…probably didn’t envision the measure being successfully used as a defense in domestic violence cases.”
– Cleveland Plan Dealer
Oh, and NOM cannot continue to get away with redefining the question which remains; Should the government ban gays from marrying and why?