Connect with us

CNN Takes Down Tony Perkins: ‘Why Do Homosexuals Bother You So Much?’

Published

on

Tony Perkins Learns He Cannot Lie About Gay People On TV Anymore

Tony Perkins Thursday learned that credible journalists will no longer allow him to lie about gay people, same-sex marriage, or the LGBT community on national TV anymore. Two weeks to the day of Perkins’ horrible, no good, very bad day, during which MSNBC’s Chris Matthews finally played hardball on “Hardball” with Perkins — asking him tough questions and holding his feet to the fire on same-sex marriage and gay rights — with Congressman Barney Frank doing some of the heavy lifting, two weeks to the day when CNN’s Soledad O’Brien took Tony Perkins apart, CNN’s Brooke Baldwin very elegantly annihilated Perkins today.

Perkins is the head of the certified anti-gay hate group Family Research Council.

Below is the video and complete transcript of yesterday’s Tony Perkins interview with Brooke Baldwin, via CNN. We’ve highlighted to important sections, but encourage you to watch and listen to the entire video.

Before you do, a few notes to keep in mind, from GLAAD:

Here are a few of the key questions, along with Perkins’ answers.

  • Baldwin asked Perkins if he had ever been to the home of a married same-sex couple. He had not.
  • She asked how he would explain to a married gay couple that they should not have the protections of marriage. He did not answer.
  • Baldwin asked Perkins why gay people bother him so much. He said they don’t … but he did so very uncomfortably, and it was evident he was not telling the whole truth.
  • When he implied that his was the majority position, she corrected him, citing the latest polls showing only 39% of Americans believing marriage equality should be illegal, opposed to 53% who say it should be legal.
  • And when he told her it was a policy issue, she corrected him, and told him it was a human issue.

Perkins, as he always does, gave his line about “social science” showing “kids do best with a mother and a father.” This is absolute garbage. The studies he is citing compared kids raised by a mother and a father to kids from single parent homes. Every single mainstream study that has ever been conducted, comparing kids raised by two gay parents to kids raised by two straight parents, has found absolutely no difference.

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/apps/cvp/3.0/swf/cnn_416x234_embed.swf?context=embed&videoId=bestoftv/2012/05/24/exp-tony-perkins.cnn

BALDWIN: Tony Perkins is the president of the Family Research Council.

Tony, nice to have you on.

TONY PERKINS, PRESIDENT, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: Good afternoon, Brooke.

BALDWIN: You heard the president right there. You’re speaking at the top of the hour. Give me a little preview of what you’ll be saying at 3:00 Eastern.

PERKINS: Well, I’m actually joining a large group of pastors from various ethnic and denominational backgrounds who have come to Washington, who are saying that, look, the president has gone one bridge too far. A lot of these African-American pastors saying, look, marriage is very clearly described in the Bible. The president has basically drawn a line in the sand and said, hey, are you going to cross it? And these pastors are going to cross it.

I can tell you this. Based on the polling data, and when you see 32 states that have voted to defend traditional marriage, none voting to redefine it, voters are not going to follow the president down the same-sex marriage aisle. In fact, I don’t think they’re going to hold their piece. I think they’re going to start speaking out. The president is doing too much in trying to redefine our culture by redefining marriage.

BALDWIN: Well, Tony, I know you point to those polls. I do want to show you another poll as well. This is when it comes to opposition of same-sex marriage. It’s actually, if you see the numbers, I don’t know if you have a monitor there on The Hill, it’s a new low here. This is a “Washington Post”/ABC News poll. So you say the question is, should same-sex marriage be legal or illegal? The majority there, 53 percent, say legal. Most people in the country don’t agree with you. 

PERKINS: Well, it’s on — how you ask the question. You look at the various polls out there. And the real poll that matters is when the voters vote on whether or not marriage should be defined as a union of a man and a woman. And again, 30 states have been trying that definition into their constitution with an average vote of 67 percent. It’s not a close issue when it gets to the states.

BALDWIN: OK, well let’s then move away from numbers. And I just want to play a little sound. This is from Secretary of State Colin Powell, Republican, spoke with Wolf Blitz on CNN here. Take a listen to what he said. They talked about this, marriage equality.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEN COLIN POWELL (RET.), FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: In terms of a legal matter, of creating a contract between two people that’s called marriage and allowing them to live together with the protection of law, it seems to me is the way we should be moving in this country. And so I support the president’s decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BALDWIN: This is a man, you know the history as well as I do in the ’90s, led, you know, the adoption of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Now he’s saying no problem with gay marriage. My question to you, Tony Perkins, why are Colin Powell and Dick Cheney, why are they wrong?

PERKINS: Well, I think if it were to stop at say the marriage alter, just two people who loved each other, and I think if that were all that we were talking about here, more Americans might agree with Colin Powell. But what we’re talking about here are the — is the curriculum in our public schools and what our children are going to be taught. We’re already seeing that happening. We’re seeing the issue of religious liberty. A clear conflict and a contradiction with what many people believe in the – 

BALDWIN: Well, why are we talking about — forgive me for interrupting. Why are we talking about curriculum in the school when really this is just about — this is about —

PERKINS: Well, because (INAUDIBLE) —

BALDWIN: Love and the law and the ability to get married or not and having those rights recognized.

PERKINS: Well, no, no, no, no. Listen, Brooke, that’s not it. We’ve already seen in places such as Massachusetts that’s legalized same-sex marriage, all of a sudden in the elementary schools it’s taught that homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual and parents are not able to opt their children out of that teaching. We’ve seen religious institutions that have lost their tax exemption because they refuse to allow their facility to be used for same-sex unions. So this is much more than just whether or not two people love each other.

BALDWIN: Of course.

PERKINS: This is about who we are as a nation.

BALDWIN: It’s about rights. I understand.

PERKINS: No, it’s about religious freedom. It’s about parental rights. It’s about public accommodation. There’s a lot more here than just two people who might have an affinity for one another. 

BALDWIN: You bring up Massachusetts, and we all know, Massachusetts, it was the first state to legalize same sex marriage. That was back in 2004. And the divorce rate actually in that state has only fallen since then. 

PERKINS: Well, absolutely. And what you’re also seeing is the marriage rates are falling, because as we in our public policy devalue marriage, which we began really in 1969 with no fault divorce, we have devalued the institution and, of course, we have 40 years now of social science research that says this public policy change was a disaster. This could very well be the death nail of marriage.

And, of course, the real losers here are children. We found that children who grow up with a mom and a dad are much better economically, they’re better emotionally, they’re better in their educational pursuits. So why would we adopt policy that would move us away from the gold standard? We need to promote that which is good for our children and society as a whole, not just one or two people here and there.

BALDWIN: Would you rather have children then grow up without parents? And also, how is a same-sex relationship, how is that less valued? 

PERKINS: Well, Brooke, I mean that’s a good question. It’s not just the issue of two caregivers. If it were just two caregivers, three would be even better. It’s an issue of a mom and a dad and the fundamental role. And this is not — this is not political hyperbole. This is the social science that shows that children need the developmental aspects of both a mom and a dad. And now while we — obviously we don’t get to that in every situation, we should strive for that and our policy should undergird that and promote it. This moves us away from that. And so that’s why you see pastors from different ethnic backgrounds, denominational backgrounds saying, we’re not going to be silent on this issue.

BALDWIN: Not all, but some. And everyone has the right to opine. But my question is, I guess more on a personal level to you, have you ever been to the home of a married same-sex couple, Tony? 

PERKINS: I have not been to the home of a same-sex married couple, no.

BALDWIN: If you were ever to do so and you’re sitting across from them over dinner, how would you convince them that their life together — either two men, two women — hurts straight couples? What do you tell them?

PERKINS: Well, first, Brooke, we don’t make public policy based on what’s good for me and my family or you and your family or one couple.

BALDWIN: I’m just asking on a personal level. I’m just asking, personal level.

PERKINS: No, but I’m — but we’re engaged here in a discussion about public policy and what’s best for the nation, not anecdotes or what one couple likes or how this —

BALDWIN: But this issue is — it is personal.

PERKINS: I mean, look, I’m sure — look —

BALDWIN: It is personal as well.

PERKINS: But that’s not how we make public policy. Certainly there are some same-sex couple that are probably great parents, but that’s not what the overwhelming amount of social science shows us. And we’ve got some great single moms that are doing a great jobs. And we applaud them and encourage them. But we still know the best environment for a child is with a mom and a dad. And our policy should encourage —

BALDWIN: But shouldn’t public policy in part be dictated by evolving cultures, evolving demographics, reflecting that?

PERKINS: But we’re not evolving to a better standard when we look at children growing up without those critical role models. And, again, we’ve got 40 years of public policy or the research that’s come from the public policy that shows that we’ve not been moving in a better direction by moving away from that standard of marriage being at the center of the family of a mom and a dad. We’ve actually incurred tremendous costs as a society, both emotionally and financially.

BALDWIN: OK. I know — I know you don’t want to answer the personal questions, but I’m going to try again, Tony. I’m going to try again. And this is really just it for me today. Why do you — you’ve never been to a home of a same-sex couple. Why do homosexuals bother you so much? I mean would it be fair to characterize —

PERKINS: They don’t bother me. They don’t bother me.

BALDWIN: They don’t bother you?

PERKINS: No.

BALDWIN: Not at all.

PERKINS: I’m not going to — I’m not going to be silent while they try to redefine marriage in this country, change policy, what my children are taught in schools and what religious organizations can do. I’m not going to be silent nor are millions of other Christians across this country. It doesn’t mean that we have a dislike for homosexuals.

BALDWIN: But if they don’t bother you, then why shouldn’t they have the same right to get married?

PERKINS: They don’t have a right to redefine marriage for the rest of us. They don’t have a right to take away any religious freedom. They don’t have a right to step between me and what my child is taught. That’s what’s happening. That’s why people are getting involved. And that’s why this issue will not be resolved, whether the president says it should be or not. There are many, many Americans, as we’ve seen in every time — every time this has gone through the ballot box, Americans understand, the definition of a marriage is what it has been for 5,000 years, it’s the union of a man and a woman.

BALDWIN: Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council. We’ll look for you at the top of the hour there on Capitol Hill with this group preaching what you just explained to us.

PERKINS: All right. OK, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Tony, thanks.

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

‘Undisguised Corruption’: Critics Slam Trump for ‘Selling the White House’ to Big Oil

Published

1 hour ago

on

May 9, 2024

By

Donald Trump is promising CEOs of oil and gas conglomerates he will dismantle the climate protections President Joe Biden has installed, and he will green light their policy wishlists including gutting support for electric vehicles if they donate $1 billion for his presidential campaign, according to reporting from Politico and The Washington Post.

“You all are wealthy enough, he said, that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House,” reports The Post, describing Trump’s conversation “with some of the country’s top oil executives at his Mar-a-Lago Club last month.”

“At the dinner, he vowed to immediately reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental rules and policies and stop new ones from being enacted, according to people with knowledge of the meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation,” The Post added. “Giving $1 billion would be a ‘deal,’ Trump said, because of the taxation and regulation they would avoid thanks to him, according to the people.”

Meanwhile, Politico is reporting the “U.S. oil industry is drawing up ready-to-sign executive orders for Donald Trump aimed at pushing natural gas exports, cutting drilling costs and increasing offshore oil leases in case he wins a second term, according to energy executives with direct knowledge of the work.”

READ MORE: ‘Rejection of Trump’: 1 in 5 Indiana GOP Voters Just Cast Their Ballot for Nikki Haley

“The effort stems from the industry’s skepticism that the Trump campaign will be able to focus on energy issues as Election Day draws closer — and worries that the former president is too distracted to prepare a quick reversal of the Biden administration’s green policies. Oil executives also worry that a second Trump administration won’t attract staff skillful enough to roll back President Joe Biden’s regulations or craft new ones favoring the industry, these people added.”

But Trump is promising Big Oil that “on Day 1” of his second term, if he wins the White House in November, they will get at least some of their wishes fulfilled.

“You’ve been waiting on a permit for five years; you’ll get it on Day 1,” Trump told the energy company executives, according to The Post. “At the dinner, Trump also promised that he would scrap Biden’s ‘mandate’ on electric vehicles — mischaracterizing ambitious rules that the Environmental Protection Agency recently finalized, according to people who attended. The rules require automakers to reduce emissions from car tailpipes, but they don’t mandate a particular technology such as EVs. Trump called them ‘ridiculous’ in the meeting with donors.”

The oil industry “got a great return on their investment during Trump’s first term, and Trump is making it crystal clear that they’re in for an even bigger payout if he’s reelected,” Alex Witt, a senior adviser for oil and gas with Climate Power, told The Post.

“With Trump, Witt said, ‘everything has a price.'”

Politico reveals how special interests, including but not limited to Big Oil, see a second Trump administration as an opportunity to literally write their own policies, in part because they don’t believe an incoming Trump administration will attract experts.

“We’re going to have to write exactly what we want, actually spoon feeding the administration. There’s 27-page drafts moving around Washington,” one energy company lawyer said. “Supportive industries are going to have to prop up a second Trump administration with expertise.”

READ MORE: ‘Ghoulish and Repugnant’: Congressman Slammed for ‘Joke’ About JFK Assassination and RFK Jr.

In an interview with Politico, Matthew Davis, vice president of federal policy at the League of Conservation Voters and a former EPA scientist, “said it’s a fairly widespread norm for outside groups to write policy proposals and white papers to inform an incoming administration’s policies. But an industry writing exact language for an incoming president to sign is ‘beyond the pale.'”

“It is not shocking, but perhaps a little bold and gross that the oil industry is writing text for executive orders,” Davis said.

Biden campaign spokesperson James Singer via social media commented, “Donald Trump is selling out Americans and our planets future to big oil. They get huge tax breaks while screwing over consumers and making record profits.”

Critics with backgrounds in government, law, the environment, and communications appeared stunned at the reporting from Politico and The Washington Post.

“Just straight up, undisguised corruption,” Aaron Fritschner, deputy chief of staff for U.S. Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA), remarked, pointing to both articles.

“Trump is putting the power of the presidency up for sale to his rich buddies,” attorney Charles DeLoach remarked.

“The Republican Party is more than just funded by the fossil fuel industry to do its bidding. Increasingly it looks like the fossil fuel industry in the US IS the Republican Party – the most shocking global example of total political capture by the industry,” commented Ed Matthew, Campaigns Director at the independent climate think tank E3G.

“Donald Trump told top oil executives to raise $1 billion for his reelection and said he would immediately reverse environmental rules issued by President Biden. That’s a perfect example of our corrupt system and why campaign finance reform is needed now,” commented Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) President Noah Bookbinder.

Political commentator and former Obama spokesperson Tommy Vietor, pointing to The Post’s report, called it “one of the most overtly corrupt fundraising pitches I have ever heard and underscores the stakes in this election.”

“You won’t read a more important story today,” Philadelphia Inquirer national opinion columnist Will Bunch remarked on The Post’s report. “Trump is willing to literally destroy the planet for $1 billion.”

Strategist and communications director Josh Schwerin, who has worked for Democrats and Democratic groups, remarked: “Quid pro quo. Pay to play. Bribery. You decide the label, the result is the same. Trump is selling the White House to the highest bidders, in this case it’s oil CEOs.”

Climate Power, which calls itself a “strategic communications organization focused on winning the politics of climate,” responded to The Post’s report: “While Joe Biden has take more than 300 climate, conservation, public health, and clean energy actions, Donald Trump is selling our climate future for $1 billion. It’s not just climate champion vs. climate arsonist—it’s decency vs. evil.”

End Climate Silence’s founding director Dr. Genevieve Guenther, an expert in climate communication and fossil-fuel disinformation, remarked, “it’s nauseating on so many different levels, but I have to stay: remember the climate stakes of this election. Biden means we have a chance. Trump means full-bore fossil-fuel development and an incinerated adulthood for the kids in our homes today.”

Richard Stengel, the MSNBC political analyst, former U.S. Undersecretary of State, former TIME Magazine managing editor, and former chief executive of the National Constitution Center seemed to sum up The Post’s report on Trump: “He is the swamp.”

READ MORE: Johnson Demands All Trump Prosecutions Cease, Vows to Use Congress ‘In Every Possible Way’

 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Ghoulish and Repugnant’: Congressman Slammed for ‘Joke’ About JFK Assassination and RFK Jr.

Published

20 hours ago

on

May 8, 2024

By

Less than one week after being pummeled for praising college students mocking a Black woman by making monkey sounds, a sitting U.S. Congressman is once again being criticized, this time for “joking” about the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, amid news about presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

U.S. Rep. Mike Collins, Republican of Georgia, last week posted a video on the social media site X, which appeared to show college students at the University of Mississippi, “Old Miss,” taunting a Black woman protestor by making money sounds, a longtime racist trope. They also called her “Lizzo,” and chanted, “lock her up.”

Congressman Collins commented on the video, writing: “Ole Miss taking care of business.”

Outrage was strong, coming from social media users and even the White House. The NAACP called for Collins to be investigated by the House Ethics Committee.

“Which part is your favorite, Mike?” asked Fred Wellman, the former executive director of The Lincoln Project. “Is it the white kid acting like a monkey at the black woman or the white security guy acting like she’s a threat? I’m trying to figure out which flavor of racism has you all excited the most?”

READ MORE: Johnson Goes After Nearly Non-Existent Non-Citizen Voting

Collins finally issued a statement on his remarks, but neither apologized nor removed his post, as Popular Information reported.

On Wednesday, the Georgia GOP lawmaker, responded to news that RFK Jr., as The Washington Post reported, had “contracted a parasitic worm that got into his brain years ago and ate a portion of it before dying.”

“You either die a Kennedy with a hole in the brain or live long enough to become a Kennedy with a hole in the brain,” Collins posted to his official government account on X.

Former U.S. Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), now running for the U.S. Senate, scolded Collins: “TIL [Today I Learned] this is an actual congressman, not a parody account. I’d seen some of the posts and honestly thought it was trying to portray an exaggerated version of an awful congressman.”

READ MORE: ‘Scratch Off the Georgia Trial’: Second Trump Case Likely Delayed Past Election Experts Say

David Simon, the well-known author, journalist, screenwriter, and producer, observed, “There is a vast universe in which we can joke robustly about RFK Jr. asserting a brainworm problem without ever going anywhere near the sick, soulless void where this gutter trash wants to enjoy a laugh.”

Retired Naval Intelligence Officer Travis Akers said, “This is the most disgraceful post I have ever seen from a sitting member of Congress. Absolutely ghoulish and repugnant.”`

Author and well-known political commentator Charlie Sykes wrote simply, “You, sir, are really a sick fuq.”

Journalist Ron Fournier wrote: “Cruelty is the brand.”

Political strategist and mass shooting survivor Parker Krex responded, “Gun violence is never, and should never, be a punchline. Embarrassing.”

READ MORE: ‘Rejection of Trump’: 1 in 5 Indiana GOP Voters Just Cast Their Ballot for Nikki Haley
 

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Johnson Goes After Nearly Non-Existent Non-Citizen Voting

Published

23 hours ago

on

May 8, 2024

By

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson is promoting new legislation to make it illegal for non-U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections, despite an existing law that does just that.

After his joint press conference last month with ex-president Donald Trump on “election integrity,” the embattled Speaker is teaming up with former top Trump official Stephen Miller, the architect of the previous administration’s family separation policy that led to thousands of immigrant children being ripped apart from their parents and siblings. Other Trump orbit guests present included Cleta Mitchell, Ken Cuccinelli, and Hogan Gidley (full video below).

Johnson, now fending off a small but loud faction of his conference threatening to oust him, on Wednesday held a press event on the steps of the U.S. Capitol to promote his Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act.

READ MORE: ‘Scratch Off the Georgia Trial’: Second Trump Case Likely Delayed Past Election Experts Say

“We all know, intuitively, that a lot of illegals are voting in federal elections. But it’s not been something that’s easily provable. We don’t have that number,” Johnson falsely told reporters.

Commenting on Johnson’s remarks that  “intuitively” we know that “a lot of illegals are voting,” Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, wrote: “It’s already very, very illegal. Many systems in place. Punishment including jail or deportation. That Cleta Mitchell, a conspirator (on ‘find 11,000 votes’ call) & Stephen Miller stood there says it all. It’s the Big Lie in legislative form.”

The Associated Press last month also reported on non-citizen voting.

“There isn’t any indication that noncitizens vote in significant numbers in federal elections or that they will in the future. It’s already a crime for them to do so. And we know it’s not a danger because various states have examined their rolls and found very few noncitizen voters.”

Calling “cases of noncitizens casting ballots…extremely rare,” the AP added: “Those who have looked into these cases say they often involve legal immigrants who mistakenly believe they have the right to vote.”

READ MORE: ‘Rejection of Trump’: 1 in 5 Indiana GOP Voters Just Cast Their Ballot for Nikki Haley

Johnson, standing in front of a “small handful of Republicans,” said his legislation “will prevent” undocumented immigrants from voting, “and if someone tries to do it, it will now be unlawful,” he added, despite a decades-old law that already makes it illegal.

“If a nefarious actor wants to intervene in our elections all they have to do is check a box on a form and sign their name, that’s it, that’s all that’s required,” Johnson continued, while not disclosing known facts.

“It’s a federal crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections,” the Brennan Center for Justice reported last month. “It’s also a crime under every state’s laws. In fact, under federal law, you could face up to five years in prison simply for registering to vote. It’s also a deportable offense for noncitizens to register or vote. And sure, people make bad decisions and commit crimes all the time. But this one is different: by committing the crime, you create a government record of your having committed it. In fact, it’s the creation of the government record — the registration form or the ballot cast — that is the crime. So, you’ve not only exposed yourself to prison time and deportation, you’ve put yourself on the government’s radar, and you’ve handed the government the evidence it needs to put you in prison or deport you. All so you could cast one vote. Who would do such a thing?”

Johnson went on to falsely claim that “Joe Biden has welcomed millions and millions of illegal aliens – we think the number, I believe the number is probably close to at this point 16 million illegals who have come into this country since Joe Biden walked into the Oval Office.”

Claiming there are “sophisticated criminal syndicates and agents of adversarial governments, here, in our borders, and even on humanitarian parole,” Johnson said: “And that means the millions that have been paroled can simply go to their local welfare office or the DMV, and register to vote here.”

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, the policy director for the American Immigration Council, noted, “multiple state governments have engaged in large-scale efforts in recent years to find evidence of noncitizen voting, and in every single case haven’t been able to find more than a tiny handful of cases, usually a few dozen or less, spread out over years.”

Watch the full video of Speaker Johnson’s event below and clips above, or all at this link.

READ MORE: ‘This Isn’t Justice’: Legal Experts Blast Cannon for Postponing Trump Case Indefinitely

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.