Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Tony Perkins Reacts

Jim Burroway

November 7th, 2012

It looks like they had a conference call to coordinate their responses:

This was supposed to be the morning when Americans got up and shook off the nightmare of the last four years. Instead, they awakened to a new one: a profound drubbing of the Republican Party that is supposed to be the guardian of the conservative vision our nation so desperately needs. On every level–presidential, congressional, social–it was a bruising day for our movement that no amount of spin can improve…

Among the more demoralizing losses yesterday were the outcomes in Maryland, Minnesota, Washington, and Maine, where natural marriage lost for the first time in America by popular vote. It was a significant moment for the radical Left, which was helped to victory by the most pro-gay President in American history. But contrary to what the Left will say, the narrow margin for victory in these four states offers plenty of evidence that a solid majority of Americans still opposes same-sex “marriage.” Despite being outspent 8-to-1 in some of the most liberal states in the country, we witnessed record-setting petition efforts that crossed every racial, party, and socioeconomic divide. And while homosexuals may be celebrating an end to our movement’s perfect record, they still have a long way to go to match the 32 states where Americans voted overwhelmingly to protect the union of a man and woman. And that includes North Carolina, where President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex “marriage” likely cost him the state’s electoral votes.

In a glimmer of good news on the marriage front, the support for marriage in these four states actually out-polled Mitt Romney, who won 48% of the popular vote. In the weeks and months ahead, we’re confident that as voters see and experience the consequences of redefining marriage, many will reconsider their support. How can I be so certain? Forty years after Roe v. Wade, the nation is more pro-life, and the abortion issue is far from settled. As with same-sex “marriage,” the Left can make it legal, but they can never make it right.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Secret Advocate
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

This reminds me of the Wicked Witch of the West wailing, “My world! My world! My wonderful world!”, as she melts away.

John Appiah-Duffell
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

FRC (and the rest of the Straight Citizens’ Councils) can try all they want to spin this, but Tony Perkins has merely reminded everybody of two things here: (1) the American people are voting in favor of civil rights in greater numbers, and (2) they are donating more money than every to the cause of LGBT rights.

Ben In Oakland
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

Tony, Dear, you really were upset, weren’t you?

“But contrary to what the Left will say, the narrow margin for victory in these four states offers plenty of evidence that a solid majority of Americans still opposes same-sex “marriage.” Despite being outspent 8-to-1 in some of the most liberal states in the country, we witnessed record-setting petition efforts that crossed every racial, party, and socioeconomic divide.”

Yes, tony, a freudian slip. Because despite all of that record breaking activism, YOU STILL LOST. Despite a close threat to the Obama presidency, YOU STILL LOST. Despite the Schubershit you’ve slung so successfully the past 12 years, YOU STILL LOST.

Bose in St. Peter MN
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

So, in Perkins’ perfect world, the anti-gay response to marriage equality will mirror the anti-abortion efforts of late? Let’s think about what that might include…

* pre-marital psych exams of same-sex couples?
* mandatory, false, warnings about shortened life expectancies?
* waiting periods and ex-gay therapy?
* never-ending protests at churches and wedding chapels?
* giving people and businesses the right to turn away gays?
* harassing and boycotting gay wedding venues?
* require licensing of wedding venues such that only one or two are open in many states?
* stalking engaged and newly married same-sex couples?
* criminalizing adults offering moral support to LGBT youth?
* require written parental approval before any teen comes out?
* banning second-parent adoptions?
* strangers intervening to protest individual foster/adoptive parents?

No, Tony, this is not how this is going to work. Twenty years from now, and probably much sooner, you won’t have the respect, audience or funding you do now if you’re still trying to chip away at the basic civil rights of LGBT people.

JohnAGJ
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

Tony, Tony, Tony. Really wallowing in it, aintcha? I almost feel bad for you… almost. Naaaaah, who am I kidding? I’m indulging in all the schadenfruede you’ve handed us, dude! If you truly believe this tripe in your statement than you are far more delusional than I thought. I know you can’t see this, but what the heck? I’ll spell it out for you:

1. Your 32 state win is largely from 6-8 years ago. A lot has changed since then in the culture. Many people who supported you previously are tired of this issue for different reasons. Some have reassesed their stance on the matter, some may personally oppose SSM but don’t believe the government should ban it, some really don’t care one way or the other and only supported you as part of the failing coalition to give the Republicans victory at the polls, etc. Sure, we’ll have some losses and setbacks in the days to come. We expect them. Yet the trend is now clear and your movement’s days are numbered. You see, we don’t care if you believe we are immoral and are going to hell. Heck, you and I and everyone else on this planet are slated for eternal damnation according to the tenets of one religion or another. That’s something all of us, including you, have learned to accept and dismiss. It’s when you push your religious views on those you deem hell-bound through force of law that problems arise – which is something you yourself as a supposed “limited government” type should appreciate.

2. There is a big difference between abortion and same-sex marriage which only an idiot would ignore: the former involves the taking of an innocent human life for opponents while the latter is only “two dudes” settling down together, as your charming colleague Maggie would put it. Most folks who oppose both can see the difference, but somehow you cannot. So no, abortion will remain controversial (but still legal) while SSM opposition will slowly fade away.

As will you, bud.

Timothy Kincaid
November 7th, 2012 | LINK

You see, we don’t care if you believe we are immoral and are going to hell. Heck, you and I and everyone else on this planet are slated for eternal damnation according to the tenets of one religion or another. That’s something all of us, including you, have learned to accept and dismiss. It’s when you push your religious views on those you deem hell-bound through force of law that problems arise – which is something you yourself as a supposed “limited government” type should appreciate.

Just because it needs to be repeated.

Nathaniel
November 8th, 2012 | LINK

1. In spite of the fact that he is lying about their record, doesn’t his ’32 straight victories’ include Maine, which has now reversed that decision? We are already on our way to undoing their hateful damage.

2. He is using the religious right’s standard abuse of language when talking about abortion. One does not have to be anti-choice to be pro-life, and no poll I have seen as accurately phrased the question to keep from confusing the anti-choice with those who are pro-choice but also pro-life. To suggest, then, the marriage equality is going to head in the same direction is to showcase his own ignorance of what is truly going on with respect to abortion rights.

Bill T.
November 8th, 2012 | LINK

I give Tony a lot of credit for being able to say such nonsense for so long before he needed to change his diapers. In the end, however, he still had his whambulance waiting for him.

Lord_Byron
November 8th, 2012 | LINK

I’m getting such a feeling of schadenfreude from seeing all these social conservatives wail and gnash their teeth.

Hunter
November 9th, 2012 | LINK

Perkins lies to frequently that it seems to have become reflex. Let’s see: “traditional” marriage outpolled Romney, who got 48% of the vote:

Maine: 53-47 for SSM

Maryland: 52-48 for SSM

Washington: 53-47 for SSM

Minnesota: 51-48 against marriage amendment.

So, no, “traditional” marriage didn’t do better than Romney.

And these were the same margins that passed Prop 8 and repealed SSM in Maine, which at the time were “decisive victories.” Funny thing about that.

Timothy Kincaid
November 9th, 2012 | LINK

Hunter,

They spin it differently. People voted more for marriage restriction than Mitt Romney in those states.

Brian Brown thinks that says something about marriage restrictions. I think it says something about Mitt. Even the hetereosexual supremists didn’t all vote for him.

Mark F.
November 10th, 2012 | LINK

Tim,

President Obama had more support than same sex marriage in all of the 4 states, so some Obama voters were also heterosexual supremicists.

Patricia Kayden
November 12th, 2012 | LINK

What are the consequences of “redefining marriage”? The only one I can think of is that gays will be allowed to be married like straights. My Canadian family has yet to tell me of any negative consequences of same sex marriages up there. Probably because they don’t exist.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.