WASHINGTON, D.C., March 26, 2013 ( – Thousands of Americans from all religions, races, and political parties gathered around the nation as the Supreme Court heard the first of two cases concerning the definition of marriage, with two boisterous and sometimes clashing crowds meeting outside the Supreme Court. (see Media Reseach video report here

The March for Marriage traced the streets of D.C., with throngs holding signs that said, “Kids do best with a mom and a dad.” At times, police stood between them and the rowdy supporters of marriage redefinition, who flanked them and shouted at them on either side of the street while holding handmade signs that read, “Go home homophobes, you're all drunk!”


As a large group met in the nation's capital, an untold number of others held rallies in San Diego, Salt Lake City, and elsewhere.

The two dueling rallies in Washington could scarcely have contrasted any more. At the same time as the March for Marriage, supporters of redefining marriage gathered nearby and heard from speakers including former Episcopal bishop Vicky Gene Robinson, the leadership of the National Council of La Raza, and neoconservative writer David Frum.

Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco led his contingent and prayed for marriage in the streets of D.C. On the other side, a man named Qween wore a hot pink tutu, rainbow skirt, mesh shirt, and devil's horns while dancing in circles to Cher.

The march culminated in a series of speeches. Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer made news by promising, “If you bail out on this issue, I will leave the party, and I will take as many people with me as I possibly can!”

Others pledged to work within the party. Bob Vander Plaats, the president and CEO of the Iowa-based Family Leader, said, “In Iowa, we start off the presidential process. We will launch a candidate who” supports “marriage as God created it.”

Democrats were represented, as Ruben Diaz – the New York Senator who faced death threats for opposing the state's same-sex “marriage” law – told the crowd: “I'm a Democrat. I'm black. I'm Puerto Rican. With kinky hair…I'm against abortion. I'm against same-sex 'marriage.' And I won the last election with 89 percent of the vote!”

The speakers were as diverse as America in every way.

Several of the speakers defied the stereotype that young people support redefining marriage in toto. Eric Teetsel, executive director of the Manhattan Declaration, began his speech by asking “Hey, anybody under 30 here?” He was met with a chorus of rousing cheers. He said he launched the group Marriage Generation to connect millenials who shared traditional values.

A 22-year-old woman opened by saying, “I'm here to say my generation is not all on one side of the marriage” debate. “The truth is my generation knows better than any generation before us how” life without both parents can leave children “devastated.”

Rev. Bill Owens challenged the proponents' use of the civil rights movement. “Every morning I wake up, I look in the mirror, and I see a black man. And there is absolutely nothing I can do to change my skin color,” he said. He said black families “have been on assault from all sides – abortion, single-parent households, poverty, and a failing educational system.” Changing the definition of marriage “would devastate all our families.”

“Perhaps you are not old enough to be with me in the civil rights movement in the late '50s and early '60s, but I'm marching again – but this time I'm marching to defend marriage between a man and a woman,” Owens said.

Not all homosexuals support homosexual nuptials.

Doug Mainwaring, the co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots said, “Same-sex 'marriage' will not redefine marriage; it will undefine it and unravel it, and in so doing will undefine children. This is not progressive legislation; this is regressive.”

“As a gay man I can say categorically it is not homophobic to oppose same-sex marriage,” he stated. “In fact, it is very wise to maintain marriage as it has always been.”

He and many others had a simple message for the Supreme Court, one it appears justices are heeding: Let the national conversation continue.

Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.

“To the Supreme Court, legislators, and jurists across the country, slow this train down. Ignore the media's relentless, manufactured urgency to institute same-sex 'marriage,'” he said.

“Let the democratic debate continue,” agreed Frank Schubert, the campaign manager for Proposition 8, which is at the heart of today's arguments. “Let the people speak. And the let the considered decision of over seven million California voters speak and be honored.”

Jennifer Roback-Morse, the founder of The Ruth Institute, said, “We're here with a simple message for the Supreme Court: Do not redefine marriage. Do not do to marriage what you did to life. We need to continue the discussion.”

And contrary to one of the social liberal's favorite tropes, she said, “Forty years from now, it will be clear to everyone that marriage is the right side of history.”

If the Supreme Court redefines marriage and deprives children of a mother or father, she said, “40 years from now the young people of that generation will have one simple question for our generation: What were you thinking? … Did you really think I would never need a mom? … The biological connection that was so important to you, did you think it would never be important to me? What were you thinking?”

Vander Plaats warned the nation about the troubles Iowa has faced since marriage was redefined by judicial decree. “There is still a credibility gap with our Supreme Court, because they took the powers” that belong to the people upon themselves. Vander Plaats said that constitutes “oligarchy, and we must resist it at all fronts. This is what our Founders fled.”

“I do not believe it would be wise for the Supreme Court to add to our fragility by adding an unneeded constitutional crisis,” he said.

Others reminded the nation about the state's original purpose in involving itself in marriage.

“The state's sole interest in marriage is kids – period. That's the reason the institution exists,” Mainwaring said. “We should tremble in fear at the notion of undoing it.”

“Marriage is not about personal intimacy. It is a public good,” Teetsel stated. “Marriage is not about what adults want. It is about what children need.” He asked the nation to commit itself to reviving “a culture of marriage.”

Brian Brown ended by saying, “We're going to be back again next year!”

Dr. Morse vowed “the marriage movement is here to stay,” calling it “the conscience of America.”