The "Commitment Campaign" -- spearheaded by the centrist think tank Third Way -- is intended to promote the idea that same-sex couples want to marry “so that they can make a lifetime commitment," and deepen support for same-sex marriage among moderates and Independents.

Advocates have long made the case that legalizing marriage for gays and lesbians is a matter of equality, but those who frame the issue that way might be reinforcing a belief among many Americans in the middle on the issue that gays and lesbians want to marry for different reasons than straight couples, according to polling by Third Way and Grove Insight.

When asked why "couples like you" might want to marry, 58% said to "publicly acknowledge their love and commitment to each other." When asked why gays and lesbians may want to marry, the respondents split between "love and commitment" and "rights and benefits."

USA Today

The Commitment Campaign said it plans to "work with policymakers and advocates to persuade the middle that gay couples want to marry so that they can make a lifetime commitment."

Third Way President Jon Cowan remarked, “The Commitment Campaign will be a signature project of Third Way over the coming years. We feel strongly that allowing all committed couples to make a promise of fidelity to each other for life is something that Americans should embrace, and we hope to play a significant role in moving our country in that direction.”

The campaign indicated that recent passage of same-sex marriage in New York state potentially signifies a tipping point on the issue.

Several states -- including Maryland, Minnesota and North Carolina -- are likely to consider legislation or ballot initiatives on gay marriage in 2012.

The campaign already has the support of several high profile Democrats and Republicans, including Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee (I), former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman (R) and Ken Mehlman, former chairman of the Republican National Committee.

But the following prayer by the group simply has to take the proverbial cake:

Homosexual Adoption -- Building upon Congress' passage of a pro-homosexual federal hate crimes law, the overturn of the law against homosexuality in the military, and the legalization of homosexual marriage in her home state, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) has introduced the Every Child Deserves A Family Act.

The Act would end all federal funding for adoption agencies that refuse to place children in LGBT "families." It will punish public and private agencies that act on their view that traditionally married couples are the best candidates to adopt. It will trounce on adoption agencies in the 31 states that have passed marriage amendments. It will put some Christian groups that take federal funds out of business altogether.

Moreover, it will subject foster and adoptive children to the homosexual indoctrination and behavior of LGBT "parents."

• May God intervene and stir Americans to resist and stop this effort to advance the radical homosexual agenda and literally to possess our nation's children. May God open our eyes! (Gen 1:26-28; 2:21-24; Lev 18:22-30; Dt 26:7-8; Pr 28:4; Lk 17:1-2; Acts 5:29; Eph 5:31-6:4)

Bear in mind that FRC never even bothered to ask God that children in need of adoption be placed in good homes. The organization didn't even push the phony talking point of "all children need a mother and a father."

It's all about keeping children away from "The GAYS."

There is no other way to put it. That's some coldhearted shit.

And it underscores something vital which very few have ever mentioned. In all of the years in which FRC has attacked same-sex households or gay adoption, the organization has never pushed, suggested, or even slightly initiated any type of  plan encouraging folks in what it claims to be "perfect family units," i.e. heterosexual mother/father households into adopting children.

Again, it's all about keeping children away from "The GAYS."

To FRC, it's all about "The GAYS." Children are merely collateral damage in its attempts to stamp out LGBTQ equality.

And now through virtue of the organization's prayer, God has become collateral damage.

What do you all think? Should this be considered as the 17th reason why the Family Research Council is a hate group?

About the Author:

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is set on Monday to introduce the legislation, known as the Every Child Deserves a Family Act, according to her office. It would be first time the measure has been introduced in the Senate.

Michael Key, Washington Blade

Kirsten Gillibrand

The bill would restrict federal funds for states if they have laws or practices allowing for discrimination in adoption on the basis of marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity.

In a statement, Gillibrand hailed her own state of New York for what she said was removing barriers in allowing LGBT parents to adopt and said other states should follow that example.

“New York is a leader on ensuring that any family can adopt children and sets a great example for the rest of the country,” Gillibrand said. “By removing all barriers for LGBT families to serve as foster parents, New York State has increased its foster parent pool by 128,000 prospective parents. This legislation would open thousands of new foster and adoptive homes to children ensuring they are raised in loving families.”

Gillibrand’s office didn’t immediately respond to a request to comment on the number of original co-sponsors for the bill or the committee to which the legislation would be referred. The bill will likely be sent to the Senate Finance Committee.

The Washington Blade previously reported in March that Gillibrand intended to introduce the adoption anti-discrimination bill. She didn’t formally announce her intentions until Friday.

According to Gillibrand’s office, most states permit single LGBT parents to adopt, but many don’t allow LGBT couples to do so. Five states prohibit same-sex couples outright from adopting: Utah, Mississippi, Louisiana, North Carolina and Michigan. Additionally, six states ban same-sex parents from adopting their partner’s children.

More than two dozen states have no laws one way or other on adoption for prospective LGBT foster and adoptive parents. According to Gillibrand’s office, the lack of non-discrimination policies in these states leaves potential LGBT parents vulnerable to agencies and case workers’ biases.

Patrick Leahy

Earlier this year, Leahy joined with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and others to introduce the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would repeal DOMA and restore the rights of all lawfully married couples, including same-sex couples, to receive the benefits of marriage under federal law.

The hearing will mark the first ever hearing on the issue of repealing DOMA since its enactment nearly 15 years ago.

The hearing will be entitled “S.598, The Respect for Marriage Act: Assessing the Impact of DOMA on American Families,” and is expected to be held in the coming weeks. The hearing will be webcast live online.

The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits the federal government from recognizing legally married same-sex couples.

DOMA, enacted in 1996, prevents any of the over 1,100 federal rights, benefits and responsibilities of marriage from being afforded to legally married same-sex couples.

Those benefits include Social Security survivor benefits, federal employee health benefits for spouses, protections against spouses losing their homes in cases of severe medical emergencies, the right to sponsor a foreign born partner for immigration, the guarantee of family and medical leave and the ability to file joint tax returns, among many others.

Watch:

The video features U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Mark Udall (D-Colo.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The “It Gets Better Project,” which has since compiled more than 10,000 online videos, was launched by Seattle-based activist and author Dan Savage and his husband Terry Miller, in response to the increasing number of teen suicides of kids who were bullied for their perceived sexual orientation.

VIA FREEDOM TO MARRY

Rep. John Conyers at House announcement

Congressional Democrats on Wednesday went on the offensive, introducing bills in both the House and Senate aimed at repealing the "Defense of Marriage Act."

The push to repeal the DOMA comes on the heels of the Feb. 23 announcement by the Obama administration that the Justice Department would no longer defend the law in court, and an effort by House GOP leadership to intervene and defend the "unconstitutional" law.

The marriage equality measures, both entitled the "Respect for Marriage Act," are spearheaded in the Senate by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.).

In the U.S. House, Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) John Conyers (D-Mich.) teamed with the chamber's four openly gay lawmakers -- Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jared Polis (D-Colo.), and David Cicilline (D-R.I.) -- and more than 100 co-sponsors. But given that Republicans control the House, the bill faces steep opposition.

"The time for dumping DOMA is long overdue, and rather than prolonging litigation in the courts, Congress should act to repeal this ugly law," Nadler said during Wednesday's announcement.

"When Congress passed DOMA in 1996, it was not possible for a gay or lesbian couple to marry anywhere in the world. Today, tens of thousands of gay and lesbian couples are married. Far from harming the institution of marriage, these couples have embraced this time-honored tradition and the serious legal duties of civil marriage. 'The Respect for Marriage Act' will send this shameful law into the history books where it belongs," Nadler said.

Baldwin said that DOMA now stands as "a symbol of bigotry and should be repealed."

DOMA prohibits the federal government from granting married same-sex couples things like Social Security survivor benefits, health insurance for federal employees’ spouses, joint tax filing, family and medical leave and other critical protections.

On July 8, 2010, in U.S. District Court in Boston, Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act violated the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

In a new poll released Tuesday by the HRC reveals that a majority of American voters oppose the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as efforts by the House Republican leadership to intervene in court cases defending the law,

Gillibrand, in a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), said Congress should focus its attention on job creation.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

"The appointment of special counsel and pursuit of this case is a drain on resources, time, and energy and is not in America’s economic and social interests," Gillibrand wrote.

On Feb. 23, the Obama administration announced that at least one part of DOMA -- Section 3 -- will not be able to pass constitutional muster, and that the Justice Department will not defend that part of the law in two pending cases in the federal court.

In an interview this past weekend, Boehner told the Christian Broadcasting Network that the House GOPs were “researching all the options available to us.”

Full text of Gillibrand's letter:

The Honorable John Boehner
Speaker of the House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Mr. Speaker,

I am writing to bring to your attention a matter of profound importance regarding the posture the Administration has taken in the forthcoming cases, Windsor v. United States and Pedersen v. Office of Personnel Management.

These cases, as you are aware, have been brought in federal courts in the Second Circuit, where there is no controlling case law regarding what standard of review should be applied to challenges to sexual orientation discrimination, including discrimination in federal benefits and privileges related to marriage.

In a letter to you last week, the Attorney General advised that the Administration has concluded that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional and therefore will cease to defend the statute in pending litigation. It is in the best interests of taxpayers and the constitution for you to refrain from appointing special counsel to defend this law. A decision to appoint special counsel would be an unnecessary cost to taxpayers, and would detract from our shared goal of cutting wasteful spending and creating jobs.

The executive branch’s responsibility to defend federal laws is not absolute, particularly in instances such as the present case, where the federal law is in direct conflict with the confines of the Constitution. At this critical economic juncture in our nation’s history, it is imperative that we as legislators do not devote resources to defending an antiquated and unconstitutional law.

Instead, we must focus our attention on creating jobs and increasing America’s competitiveness in an increasingly competitive global market. The appointment of special counsel and pursuit of this case is a drain on resources, time, and energy and is not in America’s economic and social interests.

As you are aware, Article IV of the United States Constitution requires the President to enforce federal law, including the Constitution. This authority requires that every law is to be carried out so far as it is consistent with the Constitution, and no further.

There is ample, well documented evidence of the long history of the executive branch’s refusal to defend laws that it finds to be unconstitutional. This record includes instances such as Thomas Jefferson’s refusal to enforce the Sedition Act and more recently, when then-Deputy Solicitor General John Roberts refused to defend federal statutes that required minority preferences in broadcast licensing in Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission.

Roberts, appearing on behalf of the United States as amicus curiae, and the Department of Justice not only did not defend the federal statutes, but also urged the Court to declare these statutes unconstitutional. They argued that insofar as the federal statutes required the FCC to continue its preference policies, they were unconstitutional. Roberts further urged the court to reject the deference to Congress and to apply strict scrutiny to federal affirmative action programs.

At that time, Congress did not appoint special counsel to defend this law in the White House’s stead, but instead deferred to the President’s constitutional authority. Congress should do the same in this case.

I urge you to consider this position as you prepare a formal response to the aforementioned cases. Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter. I look forward to hearing from you.

On July 8, 2010, in U.S. District Court in Boston, Judge Joseph L. Tauro ruled that Section 3 of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act violated the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

In a video released Friday, Lady Gaga calls on the Senate to repeal the discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, as well as her fans to get calling their legislators with the same message.

Gaga singles out Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), in the video, demanding they withdraw the divisive policy.

"14,000 Americans have been discharged from the armed forces, refused the right to serve their country and sent home regardless of honorable service or how valuable they may have been to their units," Gaga says in the video.

She details why she feels DADT is a critical issue, and relates the stories of discharged soldiers that have been ousted under the ban:

In the video, Gaga asked viewers to contact their senators and lobby for the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy -- and then proceeded to call the offices of both New York Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand on camera.

Unfortunately, nobody in Schumer’s office picked up the phone, and Gillibrand’s voicemail was full, but reportedly, Gaga connected with both Senators later.

Gillibrand posted, via Twitter: @ladygaga "Thx for calling. I couldn't agree more and am helping lead the fight to repeal DADT."

And to both Schumer and Gillibrand, Gaga posted, via Twitter: "Thankyou for responding, it means so much that you support us on this issue. Let's get this passed. Talk monday?"

The Senate is expected to take up the Defense Authorization Bill this week, the same bill that includes language authorizing the repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said last week he would schedule a vote on the bill.

A spokesperson for McCain said last week that the Arizona senator intends to support a filibuster of the bill.

In her video, Gaga blasted McCain for what she called his “shameless filibuster,” and called upon her fans to contact their Senator prior to Tuesday's vote in the Senate. [More information here.]

Last week, Gaga attended the MTV Video Music Awards, chaperoned by four gay and lesbian soldiers who had been discharged under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy (pictured, above left).

Gates (left) and Mullen

In a letter sent Friday to Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Gates and Mullen said they "strongly oppose" repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy this year.

From the letter obtained by ThinkProgress:

"I believe in the strongest possible terms that the Department must, prior to any legislative action, be allowed the opportunity to conduct a thorough, objective, and systematic assessment of the impact of such a policy change; develop an attentive comprehensive implementation plan, and provide the President and the Congress with the results of this effort in order to ensure that this step is taken in the most informed and effective matter. [...]

Therefore, I strongly oppose any legislation that seeks to change this policy prior to the completion of this vital assessment process."

The White House issued a statement Friday supporting Gates' position and praising him for having already scaled back the ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Last month, Gates announced that the military would change the way the policy is enforced, imposing higher restrictions on who can begin discharge procedures against a servicemember, among other changes.

"The president's commitment to repealing 'don't ask, don't tell' is unequivocal. This is not a question of if, but how," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said in the statement.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York), a fierce advocate of repealing DADT repeal, issued a statement Friday disagreeing with Mullen and Gates:

“I respectfully disagree with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen. Congress should not sit on their hands," said Gillibrand.

“Now is the time for Congress to show strong leadership and repeal this disastrous policy. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is wrong for our national security and inconsistent with the moral foundation upon which our country was founded," she added.

House Speaker, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-California) also said in a statement that she looked forward to the review’s report, but that “in the meantime, the Administration should immediately place a moratorium on dismissals under this policy until the review has been completed and Congress has acted.”

The 2011 defense authorization bill is about to be considered by Skelton's committee, and there could be a push to add legislation to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" to that bill.

Read a copy of the letter here.

Speaking at the Stonewall Democratic Club of New York, Ford was interrupted numerous times by protesters who waved signs emblazoned "Liar" and shouted that he is "anti-gay."

Ford had voted twice for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, but in recent interviews he has gone on the record in support of same-sex marriage.

Ford said all he can do is explain he was wrong in the past and has changed his mind.

Asked about his position on the landmark gay rights ruling, Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 Supreme Court decision that decriminalized sodomy, Ford responded "Can you tell me what that decision is? I'm sorry," which prompted more jeers from the crowd.

Responded Ford: “I'm not dumb, I just don't know the decision."

One of few hushed moments of the evening came when Lt. Dan Choi -- the openly Army National Guard who came out last March -- rose to press Ford on gay marriage and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," noting pointedly that he fought in Iraq to secure rights "for your family that mine is not afforded."

"I'm for repeal of the policy. Never been for it," Ford said of the policy which bans gays in the military.

Ford is expected to challenge Gillibrand in this fall's Democratic primary. He moved to New York after losing the 2006 U.S. Senate race in Tennessee.

Gillibrand, a gay rights supporter who once referred to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as an "outdated measure that violates the civil rights of some of our bravest," was appointed to the Senate by Gov. David Paterson to fill the Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton after President Obama named her U.S. Secretary of State.

Though he twice voted in favor of a constitutional ban on ban gay marriage, Ford now states: "My support for fairness and equality existed long before I moved to New York."

Appearing on NBC's Today show this morning, Matt Lauer asked Ford, who has long backed civil unions, whether his new found support of same-sex marriage is a change in position:

"Maybe in the language. But I'm a believer that benefits should flow to same-sex partners and if indeed the fiction of the language, the title, should be changed, much like Chuck Schumer who changed his mind on it and Bill Clinton's evolved, I'm of the opinion now that nothing is wrong with that."

Meanwhile, a resolute President Obama is backing Gillibrand over Ford, the White House said Monday.

“Look, I think, the White House is quite happy with the leadership and the representation of Sen. Gillibrand in New York. And as many are in the (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee), we’re supporting her re-election,” spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Ford moved to New York three years ago, and currently works for Bank of America Merrill Lynch. He served in the U.S. House of Representatives representing Tennessee's 9th congressional district from 1997 to 2007.

In 2004, Ford was one of only 36 House Democrats to vote for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage; in 2006, he did so again, one of only 34 Democrats to do so.

Ford did not seek re-election to his House seat in 2006 when he unsuccessfully sought the Senate seat vacated by retiring Bill Frist.

Gillibrand was appointed to the Senate last year by Democratic Gov. David Paterson to fill the seat Hillary Clinton vacated when she became Secretary of State.