Connect with us

Karen Handel in 2010: Gay Relationships ‘Are Not What God Intended’ (Video)

Published

on

‘Why Is Marriage Between One Man and One Woman? Are You Serious?’ Asks Karen Handel

Former Georgia Republican Secretary of State Karen Handel has made no secret of her feelings against LGBT people, same-sex relationships, same-sex marriage, and same-sex couples adopting children. Handel today faces Democrat Jon Ossoff in Georgia’s special election to fill an open congressional seat. The odds, and the stakes, couldn’t be higher. 

This past weekend Handel was confronted by a conservative voter who explained that she worries for her LGBT daughter who some day, when she grows up, may want to adopt or have children and raise a family. Handel chose to make her feelings known in a reserved manner, citing her “faith” as the reason she ca’t support an LGBT person adopting and raising a family, despite the mother’s pleas.

But in 2010, Handel, then running for governor, gave an interview to local Georgia reporter Doug Richards of Atlanta’s NBC affiliate 11 Alive. When the conversation turned to LGBT people, Handel was only too happy to give voice to her opposition of same-sex marriage, and even same-sex relationships.

At one point Handel was asked why she believes marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Her response was not surprising, but no less offensive: she laughed.

ThinkProgress posted the interview in 2010, and in 2012, on the heels of Handel’s near-destruction of breast cancer non-profit Komen for the Cure, NCRM reported on her remarks. Now, as voters go to the polls, the interview is back in the news, and increasingly has been making its way around social media the past few weeks. 

Here are a few clips. When watching, listen not only to Handel’s words, but the contempt for LGBT people she barely attempts to hide.

Handel: “Why is marriage between one man and one woman? Are you serious?” she asks, laughing.

Handel: “I don’t want to see any taxpayer funding going toward benefits etcetera for a couple that is not married. In our state and for me, marriage is for one man and one woman.”

Handel: “Yes,” when asked if she is against civil unions for gay people:

Handel: “Marriage is between a man and a woman. I do not think that gay relationships are – they are not what God intended.”

To those who might complain these clips and quotes are taken out of context, below is the full 5-minute video, which ends with Handel expressing her upset over the reporter’s questions. The final question:

Q:  I guess I want to know why you think gay parents aren’t as legitimate as heterosexual parents. 

A:  Because I don’t. 

Also below is the transcript of the video. The video begins with Handel discussing why she chose to speak with the Log Cabin Republicans.

Handel:  (The Log Cabin Republican check is) certainly not a membership.  And I don’t think going to an event constitutes membership, nor does it constitute agreeing with everything they have to say either. 

Richards:  Why did you do that? 

A:  Well, when you’re out campaigning — remember, I was campaigning for Fulton County Commission — so I think it was important for me to speak to all the various Republican groups.  Let’s remember a lot of Republicans have spoken to the Log Cabin organization, from, I think (Senator Johnny) Isakson has spoken, Sonny Perdue has spoken.  It was part of going out and trying to run a comprehensive campaign.  And the key, I think, was to make sure that I was doing the outreach with folks.  And it was better to not have folks be adversarial against me, and so that was the whole point of it. 

Q:  You said there were issues where you may have agreed and disagreed on.  What were the issues you agreed with them on? 

A:  From taxes and cutting the spending at Fulton County and candidly, the organization was a good ally on those types of fiscal issues. 

Q:  You have said that you are — you’re against gay marriage, right? 

A:  Mm hm.  Absolutely.  Marriage is between one man and one woman.  And I’ve been very very clear about that.  And the record is clear about any of the other issues like domestic partner benefits or anything like that.  In fact in Fulton, I voted no on domestic partner benefits. 

Q:  Are you against civil unions for gays? 

A:  Yes.  I think that’s not an issue that has come forward in Georgia.  We have the constitutional amendment against gay marriage, and I don’t want to see any taxpayer funding going toward benefits etcetera for a couple that is not married.  In our state and for me, marriage is for one man and one woman. 

Q:  Why is that? 

A:  Why is marriage between one man and one woman?  (Laughs).  Are you serious? 

Q:  Yes.  Well why — do you view committed gay relationships as being less legitimate than committed heterosexual relationships? 

A:  As a Christian, I view relationships and marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Q:  But what about the legitimacy of the relationship?  Do you have any gay friends?  Do you know gay couples? 

A:  Of course I do.  Are we going to spend our whole day talking on this issue? 

Q:  I want to know how you feel about this. 

A:  I’ve been very clear.  And you know, as a Christian, marriage is between a man and a woman.  I do not think that gay relationships are — they are not what God intended.  And that’s just my viewpoint on it.  Others might disagree with that.  But I would also hope that if you look at what is happening in our state, we’ve got issues we need to be focused on in Georgia.  We have a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.  And it’s something that I supported wholeheartedly.  We have that, and let’s get dealing with the other issues that we also need to deal with in Georgia.  And the press can help with that.  (Laughs). 

Q:  Frequently, folks in the legislature kind of threaten to — there are always rumblings in the legislature that they may outlaw gay adoptions.  You’re against gay adoption. 

A:  I am against gay adoption.  But remember — I mean, if there is legislation on  that, certainly I will follow that and look at it.  But in the end, ultimately courts are going to be the ones to have to make the decision on that and it’s always in the best interests of the child.  Do I think that gay parents is in the best interest of the child?  No.  But we do have our court system that deals with many and most of those issues. 

Q:  Would you favor outlawing gay adoptions? 

A:  Yeah, I would consider that, absolutely. 

Q:  Do you know any gay couples with children? 

A:  Not that I’m aware of. 

Q:  So you think gay couples are less qualified to function as parents than straight couples? 

A:  I think that for a child to be in a household — in a family in a household with a situation where the parents are not married, as in one man and one woman, is not the best household for a child. 

Q:  Is it better or worse than a single parent household? 

A:  Doug, I’m really trying to be straightforward with you but I’m not going to debate all the nuances.  I’ve made it abundantly clear that I think that marriage is between a man and a woman.  And that’s what I believe, and I don’t know what more you would like me to add to that. 

Q:  I guess I want to know why you think gay parents aren’t as legitimate as heterosexual parents. 

A:  Because I don’t. 

Q:  (Pause)  Well, I realize that. 

A:  Well, Doug, we’re not going to spend the whole day discussing this issue.  And you know, it ‘s really kind of disappointing — we invited you on this (leg of the bus trip). 

Q:  I know. 

A:  So we’re going to need to move on.

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

Image via Facebook 

RELATED:

WATCH: Karen Handel Cites Her Faith to Tell Mom of LGBTQ Child She’s Against Gay People Adopting, Having Families

‘I Do Not Support a Livable Wage’: Watch Karen Handel Throw Her Congressional Race Against Jon Ossoff Off a Cliff

Failed Former Susan G. Komen VP Talks About Planned Parenthood ‘Bullying’

 

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Trump Is Promising Mass White House Pardons: Report

Published

2 days ago

on

April 10, 2026

By

President Donald Trump is promising mass pardons to White House staff, and has done so repeatedly, the Wall Street Journal reports.

“I’ll pardon everyone who has come within 200 feet of the Oval,” Trump said in a recent meeting, to laughs, the Journal reported, citing people familiar.

“That radius,” the Journal added, “appears to be expanding as the president repeats the line. Another person who met with Trump earlier this year said the president quipped about pardoning anyone who had come within 10 feet.”

Trump at one point said he would hold a news conference to announce the mass pardons.

“The president has repeatedly raised the specter of pardons with White House aides and other administration officials, particularly when staff have suggested they could face prosecution or congressional investigations over decisions, people familiar with the comments said,” the Journal reported.

The Journal did not state if the pardons would be blanket pardons, but reported that those familiar with his remarks “said they weren’t aware of specific pardons being offered to specific people for specific acts.”

READ MORE: White House Fires Back After President’s Doctor Is Asked to Test Trump’s Mental Fitness

The report also noted that Trump has often seriously pursued actions he initially had joked about.

“It seems like he previewed many times his intent to use the pardon power to bail out those who carry out his agenda faithfully,” Liz Oyer, a former Trump Justice Department pardon attorney told the Journal. She also “said the offers could spur Cabinet officials and administration officials to behave more aggressively.”

While Trump did not pardon White House or other officials in conjunction with the events of January 6, 2021, on his first day back in office he did issue sweeping pardons to roughly 1,500 of those who were at the Capitol that day and later arrested.

READ MORE: ‘Only Reason They Are Alive’: Trump Again Threatens Iran in Unhinged Truth Social Post

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

White House Fires Back After President’s Doctor Is Asked to Test Trump’s Mental Fitness

Published

2 days ago

on

April 10, 2026

By

The White House is fighting back after a prominent House Democrat demanded that the Physician to the President test Donald Trump’s mental fitness, citing the president’s recent remarks.

“At a time when our country is at war—especially when the war was initiated by the President without congressional declaration or consent—the American people must be able to trust that the Commander-in-Chief has the mental capacity to discharge the essential duties of his office,” Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin wrote to the President’s Physician, Captain Sean P. Barbabella, D.O., in a letter published by Punchbowl News.

“I therefore request that you conduct a comprehensive cognitive assessment of President Donald Trump, provide those results to Congress, and make yourself available to brief Congress on your findings.”

Congressman Raskin noted that experts “have repeatedly warned that the President has been exhibiting signs consistent with dementia and cognitive decline.”

“And, in recent days, the country has watched President Trump’s public statements and outbursts turn increasingly incoherent, volatile, profane, deranged, and threatening. His apparently deteriorating condition has caused tremendous alarm across the nation (and political spectrum) about the President’s cognitive function and continuing mental fitness for the office of President, and prompted concerns about the President’s well-being.”

Raskin noted that during the Biden presidency, Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer called President Biden’s mental acuity “one of the greatest scandals in our nation’s history,” and subpoenaed the White House Physician.

He also noted that during that time, Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan declared that a president who is not cognitively fit, “isn’t fit for office.”

Raskin offered some examples, including Trump’s recent message to Iran, which the Congressman described as combining “vulgarity and profanity, unprecedented threats of mass civilian destruction, and a sarcastic invocation of Islam on Easter morning—a bizarre display that shocked tens of millions of Americans and astonished observers across the political spectrum.”

Trump had written: “Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it!!! Open the F——’ Strait, you crazy b——, or you’ll be living in Hell – JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah.”

The New York Times had described Trump’s remarks as a “blistering threat” that “would have stood out on any day, much less on what most Christians consider the holiest day of the year.”

Raskin is insisting that Dr. Barbabella conduct “a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment of the President, including a formal cognitive screening instrument, and publicly release the results.”

Also, it asks him to provide “a detailed report on the President’s current mental and physical health status, including any medications he is currently taking and their potential,” and make himself available for a briefing under oath.

The White House wasted no time in responding, telling Courthouse News’ Benjamin S. Weiss: “Lightweight Jamie Raskin is a stupid person’s idea of a smart person.”

“President Trump’s sharpness, unmatched energy, and historic accessibility stand in stark contrast to what we saw during the past four years when Democrats like Raskin intentionally covered up Joe Biden’s serious mental and physical decline from the American people,” the White House added.

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘Only Reason They Are Alive’: Trump Again Threatens Iran in Unhinged Truth Social Post

Published

2 days ago

on

April 10, 2026

By

Ahead of diplomatic talks starting Saturday, President Donald Trump once again threatened Iran with violence as critics charge his tenuous cease-fire has fallen apart.

“As Vice President JD Vance was heading to Pakistan on Friday for peace talks with Iran, a senior Iranian official laid out new conditions for the negotiations, adding even more uncertainty about the durability of the cease-fire and whether the two sides could reach a long-term deal,” The New York Times reports, noting that President Trump “warned Tehran not to overplay its hand.”

“The Iranians don’t seem to realize they have no cards, other than a short term extortion of the World by using International Waterways,” the President wrote on Truth Social.

“The only reason they are alive today is to negotiate!” he declared.

His remarks seemed to echo his highly-criticized comments earlier this week:

“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.”

On April 1, Trump wrote, “we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!”

Some ridiculed the president.

“Completely controlling the Strait of Hormuz and charging ships a $2 million toll to pass through seem to be a couple of pretty good cards,” noted attorney Adam Cohen.

Reason’s Matthew Petti added, “You might say that Iran’s only cards are…a strait flush.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.