Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Freedom to Marry leaves MD, NC off the invite list; moneybomb next week

Marriage equality

By Scottie Thomaston

Pam Spaulding received the latest press release from Freedom To Marry announcing their “Win More States” fund, an effort to raise money for marriage equality, and noticed that FTM decided to leave North Carolina out of the new campaign entirely, offering no help to defeat Amendment 1 on May 8. This is of course despite the fact that the Democratic National Convention will be held in Charlotte, North Carolina this year, and the president himself has come out strongly against Amendment 1 in very specific language, with a statement from a spokesman saying that, “”While the president does not weigh in on every single ballot measure in every state, the record is clear that the president has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-sex couples,”[…]”That’s what the North Carolina ballot initiative would do — it would single out and discriminate against committed gay and lesbian couples — and that’s why the president does not support it.”

There will be a money bomb/blogswarm next week to make more people aware of the campaign to defeat Amendment 1, as Pam says:

At some point soon it will be necessary for me to blog about just who has given to help us win here – and notably who is absent from that list. Organizations and individuals who worked for equality in other states, but refuse to put any $kin in the game here.

Money bomb blogswarm next week

But right now, I’m moving on to the positive — the Blend is going to be part of a blogswarm next week to 1) raise awareness about the progress being made here in NC, 2) show why a campaign on the air to educate NC residents about the harms of A1 is key to getting our base of voters out to win, and 3) how you can help.

Courage Campaign and Prop 8 Trial Tracker will be joining the money bomb/blogswarm on Monday.


  • 1. Sagesse  |  March 22, 2012 at 10:54 am


  • 2. Juli  |  March 22, 2012 at 11:07 am

    Freedom to Marry also did not include Maryland, where they will be facing a ballot initiative to reverse marriage equality recently passed in the state legislature. What's up with that?

  • 3. Str8Grandmother  |  March 22, 2012 at 12:56 pm

    New Hampshire is safe for now. When there is only so much money to go around, weighing the pros and cons, I can't figure on why you would put money IN New Jersey and NOT Maryland. It doesn't make any sense to me.

  • 4. MrTipper  |  March 23, 2012 at 5:32 pm

    Completely agree with both of you. Come on Freedom to Marry. I'm from Maryland and as soon as marriage equality passed here. I donated to this organization first, confident that it would help here. I'm very disappointed.

  • 5. Bob  |  March 22, 2012 at 11:42 am

    the time has come,,,, a speech about equality,,, to the United Nations

  • 6. Str8Grandmother  |  March 22, 2012 at 11:47 am

    This is from the press release
    "New York – Today Freedom to Marry announced the Win More States Fund to raise at least $3 million dollars, every penny of which will be spent directly on the work of winning in five 2012 marriage battleground states:
    Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Washington.

    Take the money you would have spent in New Hampshire and New Jersey and give it where the battles are being fought right now, Maine, Maryland, Washington, Minnesota and North Carolina. Pam Spaulding has a point.

  • 7. Nyx  |  March 22, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    Acknowledging those who actively help is fine and dandy, and just makes good business sense. But, I feel one needs to be very careful how you criticize those you feel are not giving enough. Bullying is so NOM-esque.

  • 8. Seth from Maryland  |  March 22, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    could they least give us a reason why they left us off in Maryland and in NC ? at first when i read this im not even going to lie, i was really mad ,but im going to wait to see reason being why they are not helping us before i start criticizeing the Org, but i bet this is going to make alot people in NC and Maryland feel like the Freedom to Marry ORG does not care about them

  • 9. Gabriel  |  March 22, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    This is bizarre and a little disappointing. I live in NC and, since it is a battle in the bible belt, it seems to be a big chance to beat the opposition in their backyard. I hope they either reconsider, or we ultimately don't need them, but I fear that we need all the help we can get (as do a lot of places). I don't want my state's constitution to explicitly call me and my fiance second-class without a fight. A victory in a state like ours is another big step towards getting the Doma Repeal that could help me keep her here with me permanently. It is a shame that the M on her passport makes me incapable of marrying the girl I love.

  • 10. Jamie  |  March 22, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    I don't think so. The polls have the amendment winning by with some 65% of the vote. I think it's better to have a lawsuit ready. The amendment is so broadly worded as it eliminates existing domestic partnerships and civil unions that have been created by a few forward minded NC cities. It's impossible to educate people on the ACTUAL effects of this when all they think they are voting for is marriage to be limited to straight people. Sorry, but it is best to accept the reality.

  • 11. Ed Blogswarm  |  March 23, 2012 at 9:51 am

    What are a money blog and a blogswarm? Try not to use new jargon without explaining it. – Ed.

  • 12. Straight Dave  |  March 23, 2012 at 11:38 am

    When in doubt, I go straight to Google.

    OT: Maybe I missed something, but what's happening with the 9th Circuit en banc rehearing? My vaguely-informed belief was that there was a 21 day time limit for any judge to speak up and say let's take another look at this. If none of them opened their mouth, it was effectively a denial due to lack of interest. I also thought the 21 days started once the briefs were filed, which I thought was around the end of Feb. There's a fair amount of assuming on my part here, but it feels like we should be very near the end of at least the first step.

    Anybody got a more precise view, or has there been an announcement that I missed?

  • 13. Kathleen  |  March 23, 2012 at 12:07 pm

    No announcement. My vaguely-informed belief is that they have 5 weeks from the time Plaintiffs filed their response to the petition for en banc review, which was early March. If that's the case, then we should have an answer early next month. But I'm not entirely confident on the timeline because it seems to me the rules allow for some procedures that don't necessarily have a specific time limit.

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!