Jennifer Roback Morse

Jennifer Roback Morse: Leaving 'The Gay Lifestyle' Takes More Courage Than Coming Out

Jennifer Roback Morse, the head of the Ruth Institute, an organization formerly affiliated with the National Organization for Marriage, was not pleased that President Obama discussed gay rights in his State of the Union address last week, saying that while Obama talked about the courage it takes for a young person to come out to his or her parents, that “does not require as much courage” as choosing to “walk away from the gay lifestyle.”

Obama “talked about the courage required for a young guy to come out to his parents,” she said in an interview with the “Issues, Etc.” podcast on Thursday, “completely omitting the fact that right now coming out does not require as much courage as is required by a person who says, ‘You know, I feel same-sex attraction, but what I want to do is not act on it, what I want to do is live up to my church’s teachings, what I want to do is walk away from the gay lifestyle that I’ve been living, that’s what I want to do.’ Now, that person, that takes a lot of courage to talk like that in today’s world, but Obama didn’t mention any of those people.”

The president’s mention of parents changing their previous beliefs to embrace gay children, she added, was “tacitly putting every adult in America, every Christian in America, every Lutheran, every serious Jewish person, at war between their religious beliefs and their love for their children.”

“Well, our religion teaches that if you love somebody, you have to live in the truth with respect to them and you have to help present them the truth,” she said. “You aren’t doing anybody any favors by accommodating their desires even if their desires are not necessarily good for them.”

Morse was also outraged that the president invited Jim Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in the Supreme Court case that struck down same-sex marriage bans nationwide last year, to the State of the Union. Morse appeared to be unfamiliar with Obergefell’s story — he and his partner of 20 years got married in a plane on an airport tarmac in Maryland shortly before his partner died of ALS — suggesting that Obergefell’s marriage wouldn’t last.

“Well, he’s trying to say, obviously he’s trying to treat Obergefell as a hero, as a Rosa Parks type figure or something like that,” she said of the president. “I would have been more impressed if he could have invited the Goodridges [the plaintiffs in the landmark 2003 Massachusetts marriage equality ruling] … but the Goodridges are no longer married to one another. So it will be interesting to see if Mr. Obergefell remains married to his true love there for whom we redefined marriage for the entire country.”

World Congress of Families In Denial Over Promoting Homophobia Globally

This is the second in a series of posts about the upcoming World Congress of Families in Salt Lake City, Utah. Read our introduction to the World Congress of Families here.

The World Congress of Families has been stung by intense criticism over its promotion of anti-gay bias and policies around the world, and has mounted a public relations campaign portraying itself as interested in civil discourse and uninterested in slamming gay people. If only it were true.

WCF Executive Director Janet Shaw Crouse has said the group’s support for traditional notions of family “does not mean disrespect for anyone else.” Crouse says, “We do not and will not engage in ‘gay-bashing’ or ‘hate’ language." In its 2014 “Call for Civic Dialogue” WCF said:

In its history, the WCF has never taken a position for or against anti-sodomy laws, nor has it attempted to roll back the rights gained by these individuals and organizations…. The WCF never has and never will advocate for any policy that brings harm to innocent individuals….

These assertions are grossly disingenuous and deceptive. WCF depends on, and celebrates, its association with what it calls “exemplary” anti-gay groups like the Family Research Council, American Family Association, Alliance Defending Freedom, and many others who aggressively resist the advance of LGBT equality in the U.S. and overseas -- and promote policies that most definitely bring harm to innocent individuals. For example, WCF and its allies played a significant role in organizing the stridently anti-gay “pro-family” movement in Russia. And not taking a position on laws that subject LGBT people to long jail terms and worse is hardly something to brag about.  

WCF’s “civil dialogue” claim is laughable on its face, especially given that the group is providing a speaking platform to Rafael Cruz, who has no policy expertise to share but has gained folk-hero status on the Religious Right with outlandishly inflammatory attacks on LGBT people and other political opponents. Cruz, father to presidential candidate Ted Cruz, called it “appalling” that a gay woman could win elected office, said that Satan controls the U.S. government and that the devil was responsible for the with Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling. He has repeatedly lied about religious freedom, claiming that the government will force churches to hire homosexual pastors and perform homosexual marriages. Cruz has suggested that President Obama is intent on seizing Americans’ guns because, like Stalin and Mao, Obama is pursuing a totalitarian government – and that the American left is out to do away with the entire Bill of Rights.

Sadly, Cruz is not an outlier. WCF and the speakers it provides with a platform have a long record of resisting protections for the rights of LGBT people. Last year WCF initiated a letter signed by 120 Religious Right figures from around the world in “vigorous protest” of the U.S. Embassy’s participation in a gay pride celebration in the Czech Republic. It refers to marriage equality as a “pseudo-right” that debases human freedom and dignity. The letter concludes, “We can not imagine a worse form of cultural imperialism than Washington trying to force approval of the ‘gay’ agenda on societies with traditional values.”

More to the point, WCF’s own Africa regional director, Theresa Okafor, who is being honored at the event, supported a harsh anti-gay law in Nigeria that not only provides for long jail sentences for gay sex, but also bans gay people from meeting in groups. Okafor has suggested that pro-equality groups from the west are allied with the violent Islamist Boko Haram in a conspiracy to silence Christians.

WCF Executive Director Crouse has her own track record. She has said children being raised by gay couples are being “used as guinea pigs.” She has praised Russia’s anti-gay right, saying approvingly, “I wouldn’t bet on the Russians capitulating to western LGBTIQ fascists without a fight.” At a 2013 Howard Center press conference, Crouse said American gay-rights activists are “turning into thugs who are destroying freedom of speech, destroying religious liberty.” She praised anti-gay activists in France, Spain, Trinidad & Tobago, and Nigeria. And while Crouse portrays American gays as enemies of free speech, she enthusiastically backed the prosecution and jailing of Pussy Riot activists over their anti-Putin protest in a Moscow cathedral.

Among other anti-gay speakers who will be given a platform at WCF:

  • Peter Sprigg represents the stridently anti-gay Family Research Council, whose leader Tony Perkins once defended Uganda’s notorious “kill the gays” bill as an effort to uphold morality. Sprigg, who once said he would like to “export” homosexuals from the U.S., complained this year about Randy Berry, Special Envoy for the Human Rights of LGBT Persons, for traveling to Uganda and Jamaica. Sprigg criticized the Obama administration for trying to “force this American-style homosexual agenda down the throats of other countries” like Uganda, “which is one of the countries that has been most bitterly attacked by homosexual activists around the world.”
  • Robert Knight, a Religious Right pundit and former FRC staffer, has argued that judges who rule in favor of marriage equality should be impeached.
  • Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage has not only pushed for anti-equality legislation in the U.S., he has supported anti-gay efforts globally and encouraged legislators in Russia to pass legislation banning adoption by gay couples.
  • Errol Naidoo received training from the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C before founding the Family Policy Institute in South Africa in response to the legalization of marriage equality, which he had lobbied against. He blames abortion and “the homosexual agenda” for creating a “culture of death” that is “slowly killing off the human family in Western civilization.”
  • Glenn Stanton, a spokesman for Focus on the Family, has called marriage equality a “pernicious lie of Satan” and said that “quite literally there is more evidence for Bigfoot than there is that homosexuality is just who we are.”
  • Jennifer Roback Morse, president of the Ruth Institute, formerly affiliated with the National Organization for Marriage, says the “sexual revolution” is a “totalitarian” movement” and “a pagan ideology” that Christians should refuse to compromise with. She says “the only reason we’re dealing with gay marriage now is because we never faced up to the harms that have already been inflicted by feminism.”
  • Mark Regnerus: His New Family Structures Study, funded by the anti-gay Witherspoon Institute, has been widely discredited, but continues to be cited by right-wing as if it provided scientific evidence for harm caused by gay parenting. It was used extensively as justification for passage of anti-gay laws in Russia.
  • Frank Schubert is a political communications strategist notorious as the mastermind of the strategy to ground the campaign for California’s Prop 8 in fear-mongering about gay people and couples being a threat to children. Schubert was paid handsomely to take that destructive strategy to other states.

 

Anti-Gay Activist: Conservatives Were Tricked Into Supporting Contraception Access, Just Like Gay Marriage

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, president and founder of the Ruth Institute, a former National Organization for Marriage affiliate, joined Patrick Coffin of “Catholic Answers Live” on June 26th to discuss the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.

Morse agreed with a caller who said he could envision in the future “a judge issuing a court order to a priest that they are to marry a homosexual couple within the church.”

After joking with Coffin that President Obama promised Christians that this would not happen, Morse warned that this situation is just “another one of the dominoes that is likely to fall.”

“And I want to just point out,” Morse continued, “this is the whole pattern of the Sexual Revolution.” She recalled how Christians were tricked 50 years ago into agreeing to widespread contraceptive access when proponents argued “that contraceptives will only be used by married couples who need to space their births because of serious health reasons.”

However, it “never occurred” to contraceptive proponents, she said, that eventually “we’d be giving condoms to fourth graders.”

Marriage equality, she said, fits into this same pattern of progressives coming “up with one little thing that seems so harmless” and telling conservatives that they’re “so mean to not give us what we want.”

Morse: 'Radical Sexual Revolutionaries' Using Divorce And Gay Marriage To Expand 'Power Of The State'

The Ruth Institute’s Jennifer Roback Morse joined Phyllis Schlafly on “Eagle Forum Live” last week for a special Valentine’s Day episode on how “radical sexual revolutionaries” are destroying marriage and the family.

Morse told Schlafly that the “goal all along” of the “radical feminists” and “radical sexual revolutionaries
was to advocate for liberalized divorce laws in order “to break down that dividing line between public and private and just scoot that family court right into your living room, right into the backseat of your minivan, right into your bedroom and taking jurisdiction over the life of the family.”

“This is a gross expansion of the power of the state,” she said. “And gay marriage will only accelerate that, because gay marriage now will create a whole series of situations where family courts will be deciding who actually counts as a parent in the first place.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 8/19/14

Jennifer Roback Morse: 'Thank God For The Men On The Supreme Court' Who Are 'Sticking Up' For Women

In a Christian Post column this weekend, the Ruth Institute’s Jennifer Roback Morse thanks God that the men on the Supreme Court are “sticking up for ‘everywoman’ against the Elite Women,” represented by the women on the Supreme Court who have allowed feminism to help them through their careers.

Morse argues that because Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan are childless, they don’t “understand and respect the lives and aspirations” of women who prioritize children over their careers, while Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a “lifelong radical feminist ideologue.”

Let me tell you about a friend of mine named Katie. She is a brilliant attorney, who works part-time for a non-profit public interest legal organization. Katie has nine children, whom she homeschools. She lives out in the country in coastal California. By any reasonable reckoning, Katie, is "having it all:" big family, country living in one of the most beautiful places on earth, and meaningful, intellectually challenging work.

However, it is safe to say that Katie is highly unlikely to ever be appointed to the Supreme Court. She has other concerns. She does not have the single-minded focus on her legal career that would allow her to be a serious contender.

I too, have had a wonderful advantaged life: meaningful work, good family life. But I never chaired an economics department. I never sat on any prestigious commissions. I wasn't given any political appointment as my childless or male peers have done.

Which brings me back to the subject at hand: whose interests do the women on the Supreme Court actually represent?

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a lifelong radical feminist ideologue. She came of age in the short window of time when women could still get married, have kids, go to law school, and have a career after child-bearing. Her two children were born when she was 22 and 32. Thanks to radical feminism, highly educated women have a much more difficult time doing these things. They can go to law school and have a career alright. But getting married and having children sometime before menopause, not so much.

Justice Ginsburg had the lifelong support of her husband in her career aspirations. Thanks to no-fault divorce, women today cannot count on a lifetime of mutual support with their husbands. Justice Ginsburg has been safely insulated from the negative fallout of the sexual revolution which she and her radical feminist colleagues did so much to champion.

The other two women on the Supreme Court, Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, are childless. It is highly unlikely that the two of them understand and respect the lives and aspirations of women like my friend Katie and me. And for less educated women, family is everything and "career" is a job to put food on the table. Elite women know nothing of "everywoman," the people who have endured the sexual revolution, and who do not have high status jobs as compensation.

Women like Katie and I are willing to let ourselves see the harm that the Sexual Revolution had done to the poor. Our lives do not depend on defending the Sexual Revolution. By contrast, for many Elite Women, the sexual revolution has made possible their lives as they know them. They literally cannot imagine what their lives would be like without contraception, with abortion as a back-up plan.

As I say, Katie and I will never occupy the seats of power that are available to childless women. We have many achievements to our credit, but Elite Women will run the show. We have good lives: I do not regret for one moment, the choices I have made. But there is no getting around it: childless women have an advantage over mothers in the competition for power and influence.

All I can say is: thank God for the men on the Supreme Court. At least someone is sticking up for "everywoman" against the Elite Women.

Jennifer Roback Morse Compares 'Sexual Revolution' To Nazism, Says It’s Bringing Back Slavery

Jennifer Roback Morse, head of the Ruth Institute — which was formerly affiliated with the National Organization for Marriage — urged conservative law students earlier this month to resist the “pagan ideology” of the “sexual revolution” like those who resisted Nazism.

In a lecture to the Alliance Defending Freedom’s Blackstone Legal Fellowship, Morse explained that while Christianity ended slavery, the sexual revolution is now bringing it back.

“All of these issues — divorce and remarriage, abortion and infanticide, slavery, the buying and selling of human beings — all of these things, the Christian religion put a stop to. But they’re all on their way back because of the sexual revolution,” she said. “The sexual revolution is bringing back all of these points.”

“We, in fact, are on the right side of history,” she said.

Later in the speech, Morse urged the students in the audience to emulate Maximilian Kolbe and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s stands against Nazism in resisting the “pagan ideology” of the “sexual revolution.”

Morse: Professional Women 'Victimized' By 'Totalitarian' Sexual Revolution

Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute – a former wing the National Organization for Marriage dedicated to “making marriage cool” – is preparing for a conference this month that will bring together “victims” of the sexual revolution. She discussed the event in an interview with the National Catholic Register yesterday, in which she claimed that the sexual revolution is a “totalitarian” movement pushed by “hipsters” and “radical feminists” that victimizes professional women who build their lives “around the lies.”

As an example of this “totalitarianism,” Morse points to the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate, which she claims is a government effort to “ control people’s behavior and even people’s thoughts.” By requiring that insurance plans cover contraception, Morse argues, the government is” stifling dissent by essentially saying: ‘This society will be built around contraception, and there will be no dissent from that.’”

Which groups have been pushing this sexual revolution?

A mix of people have promoted it: population controllers (who think there are too many poor people); hipsters (who just want to be libertines); radical feminists who think babies are keeping women from being “equal.” All these groups have one thing in common: They’re controlled by elites, people who want to re-create the world in their own image.

The sexual revolution promised freedom and fun. Yet you say it was — and is — a totalitarian movement. Why?

Because its goal — to separate sex from reproduction and both from marriage — is impossible. When men and women have sex, babies have a way of appearing. So the government has to step in and control people’s behavior and even people’s thoughts about what’s possible, desirable and realistic. The HHS mandate is just one example of the government stifling dissent by essentially saying: “This society will be built around contraception, and there will be no dissent from that.” That’s one example of totalitarianism coming straight from the government and literally shutting down people who disagree.

You call another group of sexual-revolution victims, who bought into the sexual revolution only to discover its promises of fun and freedom are false, “the heartbroken career women.”

These women are also all around us, but we simply don’t see them. [Culture says] the entry fee into the professions for women is that you chemically neuter yourself during your peak childbearing years in your 20s — and if you have an “accident,” you get an abortion.

By the time a woman figures out, “If I have no children, that’s going to be terrible for me,” she’s 35. The in vitro fertilization industry is making huge profits off people’s infertility problems, which often happen because women put off having kids for so long they can’t do it naturally anymore.

And yet when that woman is a lawyer, college professor, TV news anchor or some other professional, she’s going to dig in her heels and defend the sexual revolution, because her life is literally built around it. We want to help this type of woman “connect the dots” and see that she has been victimized because she built her life around the lies.

Morse: 'Deadly,' 'Totalitarian' Feminism Wants To Make Everyone Androgynous

Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute, which was until recently affiliated with the National Organization for Marriage, joined Phyllis Schlafly on Eagle Forum Live this weekend to discuss her new book of marriage advice.

Of course, the two turned immediately to bashing feminism, which Morse praised Schlafly for exposing as a “deadly” and “totalitarian” movement that made “men compete with women instead of competing with each other for the sake of women.”

Later in the program, Schlafly asked Morse about a “kooky” new law in California that requires schools to respect the gender identities of transgender students.

“In the end they want to get rid of male and female,” Morse said. “In the end they want everyone to be androgynous.”

She added that this showed that feminists and the gay rights movement harbor a “deep resentment of the human body.”

Morse also linked the fight against gay rights to the fight against the women’s movement, lamenting the cultural “wounds” from the push for equality: “There are so many people out there who have been wounded by the sexual revolution and no one has ever taken the slightest responsibility for that, none. And the only reason we’re dealing with gay marriage now is because we never faced up to the harms that have already been inflicted by feminism.”

Correction: A previous version of this post incorrectly stated that the Ruth Institute is affiliated with the National Organization for Marriage. The two groups formally broke ties in November, 2013.

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious