Comments on: Tony Perkins’ Strange Understanding Of Democracy

By: Timothy (TRiG)

Timothy (TRiG) — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 13:29:53 +0000

I think the USA, like most countries, does have democracy, Attmay. But it doesn’t have direct democracy. And a good thing too.

A representative republic is a form of democracy in which there are various balances so that laws are less likely to be brought in on a whim.

TRiG.

By: Attmay

Attmay — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 21:47:44 +0000

Destroy democracy? How can we destroy what we, living in a representative republic, do not have (thank God)?

By: Emily K

Emily K — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:47:20 +0000

Two weeks ago I couldn’t afford to buy toilet paper because i chose to spend my money on food instead.

So smack down two myths – that of a wealthy gay, and that of a wealthy Jew.

By: Jason D

Jason D — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:31:44 +0000

Mustang, I’m unemployed, and before being laid off twice in the past year, I wasn’t wealthy by any means.

By: Mustang Bobby

Mustang Bobby — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:54:02 +0000

“Same-sex ‘marriage’ is a movement driven by wealthy homosexual activists…

More right-wing nonsense. Where the hell are all these rich gay men? All the ones I meet make less than I do, and I’m not rich by any measurement.

By: scotte

scotte — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:06:11 +0000

I think Perkins view is really quite simple – democracy consists of everyone else agreeing with him. Most of us got past that world view at age four or five, evidently Mr. Perkins missed that stage of development.
I wonder if the Democratic majority in Congress will have the courage to let DC keep to its own decisions (what was that line about “democracy” and “will of the people” again?).

By: Jason D

Jason D — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:40:04 +0000

It’s intriguing how Populist the RR has suddenly become. I have a feeling that they won’t accept marriage equality even if it was voted in by people.

They will continue to push the “will of the people” idea because we have yet to see marriage equality win when put to a popular vote — which shouldn’t surprise anyone. Looking at the history of civil rights, the public at large doesn’t really lead the way. Usually it is the courts and legislature first, and the people, upon seeing how the sky did not fall, basically accept reality. There are still those who believe blacks shouldn’t be free, or voting, and think this country would be better off if we never gave women the right to vote or own property.

By: Scott

Scott — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:49:40 +0000

Hey, the poor guys just had their “activist judges” argument destroyed by Vermont, so he needs a fall back position. His brain would explode if he had to actually consider it a actual civil rights issue. Religious Right types like Perkins always need an enemy, so he’s created one out of whole cloth, because in his limited worldview, “normal” people wouldn’t be for this. As common sense about this spreads, watch for the arguments from Perkins to head off the deep end even more.

By: Devon

Devon — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:30:28 +0000

They realized they couldn’t use their standard talking points of “imposition” and courts going against the will of the people.

Naturally, it’s still hard to remove the propaganda programming, but that it took such groups as the AFA, the FRC, Focus on the Family, CWA, and others so many hours to produce their public statements compared to other gay marriage announcements, they’re realizing they’ll have to change some of the rhetoric. Even if it all is still backwards to the notion of democracy and the purpose of the courts.

By: Joel

Joel — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:17:56 +0000

It is so intriguing to understand their attempt at reason and logic, or maybe under which variation of faith do they figure ““Same-sex ‘marriage’ is a movement driven by wealthy homosexual activists and a liberal elite determined to destroy not only the institution of marriage, but democracy as well”” out.