Last week’s SCOTUS hearings on challenges to California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) reignited the debate on marriage in America. Although the coverage was heavily slanted in favor of “marriage equality,” proponents of marriage should not get discouraged.

41 states recognize marriage as between one man and one woman. The will of the people, as exhibited by states rights, should be rightfully respected-especially in California’s case.

Last week, 10,000 people-white, black, Hispanic, Asian, young, and/or old-descended to Washington, D.C., for the first March for Marriage. Despite what our detractors say, the march’s participants and millions of Americans still hold the institution of marriage to be true.

That being said, we at Counter Cultured are happy to lend our support to a new project- Marriage Generation.

Marriage Generation seeks to preserve and revive a culture of marriage among millennials:

Here are the five guiding principles of Marriage Generation: 

Like Marriage Generation on Facebook and follow them on Twitter @MarriageGen.  

Last Tuesday, I had the opportunity to attend the March for Marriage in Washington, D.C. The march attracted a diverse crowd of 10,000 people. In my vlog, I discuss my experience at the march. I also encourage people, especially young people, to stand up for marriage, despite the amount of hate that will come there way. 

Check out some pictures I took and video clips I recorded during this historic event. I hope this becomes the "March for Life" of the marriage movement! 

Here's a great video featuring clips from the speeches at the rally:

Check out some of the speeches I recorded from the rally! 

There was also a performance by Brandon Camphor & OneWay at the rally!

Thankfully, this is not Mr. Strobhar's only instance of standing up for marriage. He actively advocates for its protection as the founder of Corporate Morality Action Center, which encourages corporations to uphold  a code of ethics. This organization especially focuses on informing people about corporations that actively promote morally relativist causes, such as gay marriage, abortion, and pornography.

Mr. Strobhar should be commended, not ostracized, for standing up for an important societal institution. Marriage is unfortunately attacked and made less significant every day by our nation's government, media, Left-leaning churches, TV shows, and public schools. Nowadays, people like Mr. Strobhar are unfortunately few in number, since our culture encourages people to sacrifice their values to attain popularity,  money, and fame.

We at Counter Cultured stand strongly with Mr. Strobhar. We are devastated to see that Starbucks is pursuing a political agenda that only draws away more customers and further divides Americans.

It is time to actively boycott Starbucks again. Sign the "Dump Starbucks" petition, tell Starbucks to forgo its political agenda, and buy coffee from small businesses or corporations that do not use YOUR money to fund morally relativist causes. Starbucks will again suffer financially for openly discouraging Americans from buying its coffee.

Nonsense only stops when money is lost. Maybe Starbucks will decide to forgo its political agenda and stick to business by facing another boycott from the American people. 

Dan Savage, an anti-bullying activist, has once again been caught red-handed bullying people who do not subscribe to his agenda. This week, he crossposted my vlog, "Why Did It Become Hateful to Support Marriage?", to his wonderful, sexually explicit, and tolerant blog called Slog. 

He not only charmingly called me a "dingbat," but also did not understand the point of my video: to stop the hateful rhetoric thrown at people who want to restore a culture of marriage. 

He also gave me more compliments in another Slog post, which featured some of my tweets. 

Yesterday, he and I had this lovely conversation on Twitter, where he spelled out his own hypocrisy.

Often times, gay marriage advocates nonsensically call people who do not want marriage to be redefined and made less significant "bigots" and "homophobes." In fact, these advocates are actually intolerant for not tolerating other people's views when it comes to the gay marriage debate. 

They highly resort to name calling and emotionally charged arguments instead of making fact-based claims. They also are quick to judge others with fallacious statements (i.e. "You hate gay people"). And if you do not hold their views, too bad. You better get rid of your "anti-marriage" views or else suffer the consequences. I thought we lived in a society where we have freedom of speech and thought? Guess not.

Here are a few examples of what I'm talking about from Twitter: 

Here is more tolerant commentary from the comments section of my vlog on YouTube:

Dan Savage and his followers thrive off of hate-filled rhetoric. They actively use smear tactics to silence those who refuse to accept their agenda. It's ironic that someone who actively fights against bullying bullies others in his spare time. It's sad that he does not tolerate views that differ from his own, like a good, tolerable Liberal. Dan, if you really practice what you preach, stand up for ALL PEOPLE who get bullied and do not bully people just because they disagree with your views. 

Dan Savage sees young people like myself as a threat to his agenda, because it bugs him that we do not fit his narrative. Dan, we're not giving up and we're not shutting up, no matter how hard you try to silence us. Frankly, it gets worse, not better, when you and your followers spew misogynistic, anti-Christian, hateful, and petty rhetoric.  

Anna Maria Hoffman explains why it's ridiculous that people should be labeled with words like "hateful," "homophobic," "heteronormative," and "bigot" for wanting to restore a culture of marriage in society. 

On Wednesday, Floyd Lee Corkins II, who was responsible for the  Family Research Council shooting on August 15, 2012, plead guilty to three charges, which included committing an act of terrorism. 

While interviewed by the FBI, Corkins admitted that he wanted to "kill as many as possible and smear the Chick-Fil-A sandwiches in victims' faces, and kill the guard."

I was one of those people who could have been his victim. I was on the 6th floor of the FRC building working on my pro-life internship assignments. I could have lost my life. My dear friend Rosa and everyone else in the building, including my boss Jeanne Monahan, now president of March for Life, could have lost their lives. 

That fateful day has only reminded me of how precious life truly is and how important it is to live every day as if it is your last. I thank God every day that our building manager, Leo Johnson, prevented Corkins from carrying out his intended act of violence. Leo's courage and strength helped prevent what could have been a heartbreaking tragedy. Leo is a real hero that I will continue to thank for the rest of my life.  

It saddens me and brings tears to my eyes that a person like Corkins would resort to violence out of political disagreement, especially on the topic of gay marriage. It breaks my heart that Southern Poverty Law Center facilitated his intent to commit such a horrific act of violence by labeling FRC as a "hate group."

FRC is far from hateful. Its staff members are the most delightful, friendly, sweet, loving, caring, and Christ-like people you will ever meet. As a pro-life intern there this past summer, FRC became a home away from home for me. It is a safe haven in the middle of our nation's morally corrupt capital. My fellow interns have become some of my best friends. And I was incredibly blessed to have Jeanne Monahan as my mentor, who truly helped me to grow as a pro-life advocate. 

It is time to stop Southern Poverty Law Center labeling FRC, and other organizations that just want to make society a better place, as "hate groups." I only pray that people will learn from this shooting that  wrongful labels and violence are not ways to solve political disagreements. Let's stop the hate to prevent acts of violence like this shooting from occurring again.

One of the proudest moments for a young mom or dad is hearing their baby utter what usually are its first words – “mama” or “dada.”  It’s a universal human experience – and while the words might sound a bit different depending on the language or culture, the meaning is just as consistent as the roles of mother and father have been.

But now, with the ascent of marriage redefiners comes the unfortunate fallout—necessitated by the change of definition— and that is the elimination of the words “mother” and “father.”   It’s happening just about everywhere where same-sex “marriage” has been legalized, but it’s more plainly obvious in France.  There, lawmakers seeking to adopt “gay marriage” also have stated their intent to prohibit the use of the words “mother” and “father” (well, actually “mère” and “père”) in all legal documents. 

The fact is, social science (and for that matter, common sense) has overwhelmingly shown the benefits of, and the distinctive roles that, mothers and fathers have in the lives of their children.  The Family Research Council website contains information and links making that case. 

However, as we see in the case of those promoting “gay marriage” in France, the redefinition of marriage has an impact far beyond the simple “allowing two people who love each other to marry – whatever their sex may be.”   As proponents of natural marriage have consistently argued, redefining marriage also means redefining the family unit, redefining parenthood and ultimately gravely impacting the well-being of children and society as a whole. Children deserve a mother and a father, and society should promote that goal.

A French commission established several years ago by Parliament concluded in 2006 after about a year of research that prohibiting gay marriage was in France’s best interest in order to “affirm and protect children’s rights and the primacy of those rights over adults’ aspirations.” 
The committee acknowledged that while French families are becoming more varied, homosexual marriages should be prohibited for the sake of children’s well-being. That commission fully understood that you cannot redefine marriage without impacting children, whatever politicians or special interests might tell us. 

Cardinal Philippe Barbarin, Archbishop of Lyon, states that “gay marriage would herald a complete breakdown in society.”  He’s right.  The elimination of the words “mother” and “father” in legal documents is symbolic of the pending decline of the vital roles of husband and wife, mother and father that those words symbolize.  Words have meaning – and when we are prohibited from using them, the particular thing they represent will be diminished and eventually destroyed as well.

Marriage and family is the cornerstone of society. Fathers and mothers have distinct and necessary roles in raising children.  Strong families mean strong communities, and strong communities mean a strong country.

Not long after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court imposed same-sex “marriage” on that Commonwealth in 2004, state-issued birth certificates were changed.  Originally listing the name of “mother” and “father,” the dawn of “gay marriage” made those distinct positions archaic or dated.  In their place are “Parent A” and “Parent B.”  I wonder what sort of reeducation will be needed to make babies say that as their first words.