Marriage Equality

Anti-Gay Archbishop Under Investigation For Sexual Misconduct

John Nienstedt, the Catholic archbishop who championed the failed effort to ban same-sex marriage in Minnesota, is facing a church investigation over allegations of inappropriate sexual relationships with other men, including priests and seminary students.

“I believe that the investigators have received about ten sworn statements alleging sexual impropriety on the part of the archbishop dating from his time as a priest in the Archdiocese of Detroit, as Bishop of New Ulm, and while coadjutor and archbishop of St. Paul and Minneapolis,” church whistleblower Jennifer Haselberger told the magazine Commonweal, adding that Nienstedt “also stands accused of retaliating against those who refused his advances or otherwise questioned his conduct.”

Haselberger previously revealed that Neinstedt was failing to properly investigate instances of alleged sexual abuse by priests, including one priest who may have had an “unprofessional relationship” with Neinstedt.

Nienstedt vigorously denied the allegations, and stressed in his statements that none of the claims of sexual misconduct “involve minors.” Last year, he was investigated by local law enforcement for allegedly touching a boy’s buttocks during a confirmation ceremony, but was not charged.

Under Neinstedt, the archdiocese of Minneapolis and St. Paul joined with fellow Minnesota dioceses to deliver hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-gay groups, together becoming the largest donor to the unsuccessful campaign pushing a state marriage amendment.

Neinstedt warned Catholics that “there ought not be open dissension” on the issue of marriage equality and urged them to pray against gay rights. According to the Minnesota LGBT site The Column, the archdiocese also “sent out more than 400,000 DVDs that urged voters to vote for candidates that supported putting a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the ballot in 2012.”

During the campaign to ban marriage equality, Neinstedt said Satan is behind gay rights and called homosexuality a “grave evil.”

He has criticized the film Brokeback Mountain as an attack on Jesus Christ that would bring down society and described homosexuality as the “result of psychological trauma” that “must be understood in the context of other human disorders: envy, malice, greed, etc.”

Kevin Swanson Attacks 'Satanic,' 'Antichrist' Presbyterians For Approving Marriage Equality

“Generations Radio” host Kevin Swanson lambasted the Presbyterian Church (USA) last week for voting to allow same-sex marriages to take place in their churches, which Swanson said means the denomination has teamed up with the Antichrist.

“The Presbyterian Church of the United States of America, a purported Christian church, a church that had something of a Christian heritage, but of course now rotten to the very core, has adopted the Neronic agenda and effectively joined the ranks of the Antichrist,” he said, referring to the Roman emperor Nero.

Swanson went on to accuse the church of “marrying dogs” and deciding to become the “Nero Association of America.”

He also worried that the Presbyterian Church in America, a more conservative denomination, may be next in line to adopt the Satanic attack of marriage equality: “I think it’s time to stop watching the PCUSA, I think it is time to start watching the PCA and the Southern Baptists because they’re next, so to speak, that’s where the battleground is moving. If you were Satan you’d go, ‘PCUSA is in the bag, now let’s go pay attention to the PCA and see if we can gain a little ground down here.’”

Lamenting that the United States is becoming an “apostate” nation, Swanson hailed Uganda’s extreme anti-gay laws.

“Praise be to God. He’s got something happening and if he’s going to abandon the West to their homosexuality, their imploding birth rates and their drying up and dying, then that’s the way it goes,” he said. “In Uganda, these guys are standing strong.”

Self-Aware Bobby Jindal Is Tired Of 'Candidates Who Tell Us One Thing Then Go Do Another'

In an interview earlier this month with the Iowa blog Caffienated Thoughts, noted paragon of consistency Bobby Jindal lamented about “candidates who tell us one thing then go do another” on judicial nominations.

Jindal was discussing recent court decisions in favor of marriage equality, which he suggested could be grounds for recalling judges. In 2012, Jindal joined the failed effort to recall an Iowa Supreme Court justice who had joined the court’s unanimous marriage equality ruling.

The Louisiana governor spent the first half of the interview deriding the Common Core education standards — which he previously backed — as a “federal takeover of education."

Ben Carson Explains How Gay Marriage Is A Marxist Plot To Impose The 'New World Order'

In his keynote speech at the National Organization for Marriage’s March for Marriage gala last week, Dr. Ben Carson explained how Marxists are using LGBT rights to destroy American unity and impose the "New World Order."

Carson said he knows about this plot from reading right-wing conspiracy theorist W. Cleon Skousen’s book “The Naked Communist.”

Earlier in the speech, Carson told the audience that gay-rights opponents are the real victims of “injustice” because they just want to be “left alone.”

“When we talk about liberty and justice for all, doesn’t that mean that people can be left alone, that no-one else gets to change definitions on them and change life for them?” he asked.

“They have no right to say to me that I must change the way I think in order to accommodate what they believe,” he said. “That’s where the injustice comes from, and we have to understand that.”

William Owens: 'We Must Be Willing To Die' In Fight Against 'Abnormal' LGBT Rights

Before addressing last week’s March for Marriage, where he called for a new anti-gay “civil rights movement,” Rev. William Owens appeared on “The Capitol Hill Show” with Tea Party News Network host Tim Constantine to promote the rally.

Owens told Constantine that allowing gay people to marry takes away his rights, without of course saying which rights he is losing exactly. He is suffering so greatly, in fact, that he called for “another civil rights movement to reclaim our rights” with people who are “willing to die” to oppose LGBT equality.

Constantine: When I talk to people around the country, I always hear support for traditional marriage and yet the gay movement continues to march on, some in the legislature, mostly in the courts. Have we gone to a place where we can’t turn back or can common sense prevail once again?

Owens: We can turn back but it’s going to take another civil rights movement to reclaim our rights. We must be willing to suffer, we must be willing to die, we must be willing to go to jail, that’s what it is going to take to turn around what these idiots have put in motion.

During a vicious rant against the “abnormal” transgender community, Owens railed against President Obama as “the most immoral president” in all of American history.

It’s a terribly slippery slope and marriage is just a small part of it. They plan to turn this whole society as if we have no gender. They are supporting any form of abnormal life with human beings. In the state of California today, boys can go to girls’ restrooms and girls can go to boys’ restrooms. This transgender thing, a teacher will be able to come to school dressed as a man one day and as a woman the next. It’s terrible that this president has started this country on an immoral course. I’ve said it then and I’ll say it again, he is the most immoral president we have ever had.

Owens also complained that Obama is acting like “he’s Almighty God” by supporting LGBT rights, including such wrongdoings as allowing “gays in the White House.”

The disgraceful thing about gay people adopting children: Two men, one pretending to be a woman; two women, one pretending to be a man. It’s absolutely disgraceful. When you do the studies, when you look at families, children need a female mother and a male father. I have two babies, I’ve got one one-year-old and one two-years-old, and those children know the difference in their mother and their dad. It’s just deplorable with this president, and I put it at the feet of the president, because he’s the one giving all of these orders as if he’s Almighty God, kingdom high, to embrace the community of gay parades, gays in the White House, he has endorsed it and has taken our course on a terribly slippery slope on the morals of this country.

Pat Robertson Sidesteps Question About Polygamy In The Bible By Ranting Against Gay Rights

Today on “The 700 Club,” Pat Robertson fielded a question from a viewer who asked: “In the Old Testament men had many wives and it seems like it didn’t go against God. Where does it say in the Bible that man should have only one wife?”

Robertson responded that the viewer should consider moving to Utah or Saudi Arabia, and then insisted that the Bible condemns polygamy. However, he admitted that “somehow” many biblical figures, such as Solomon, were polygamists. Rather than explain the inconsistency, he joked that Solomon must have “taken a lot of vitamins, that poor old man,” and launched into a diatribe against gay rights.

“I said when they make these rulings that they are making about homosexuality, when they are making these rulings about other sexual practices, it won’t be long before they cancel the laws for bigamy,” he said. “It was said by Rick Santorum in the United States Senate, surely enough those laws will come down and surely enough they will. Everything goes.”

Renew America Pundit Warns Gay Marriage Will Turn Us Into Marxist Slaves

Donald Hank of Renew America responded to the decision of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to allow pastors to officiate same-sex weddings by accusing Presbyterians of “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” and supporting “social Marxism.”

“This is social Marxism and we are slaves to it in the US,” he writes. “Isn’t it time to throw off the chains? It's all up to the people.”

He adds that gay marriage “is like saying a dog is a cat” and will allow for “our culture and hence our sovereignty to be destroyed.”

Hank insists that gay marriage is wrong simply because people “deep down” feel is wrong, citing the assassination of the Roman Emperor Elagabalus, whom historians have said was either gay or transgender: “In Elagabulus' case, he was eventually assassinated. The people’s will was done.”

Now, if a Presbyterian "pastor" performs a "gay" wedding, then under the above-cited rule, he is tacitly averring that the Holy Spirit called him to perform it. Since the definition of marriage throughout the Bible refers only to a union between a man and a woman, this pastor is actually averring that the Holy Spirit called him to perform a "marriage" that is counter to Biblical principles. This can clearly be construed as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.



The only reason people bend over and grab their ankles for these activists is fear. They use raw power of intimidation to force the legal system to apply a definition that does not exist. So-called same sex "marriage" has been legally accepted in several countries and states and yet, the main requisite for this change in law was never met, namely, a legal change in the definition of marriage. And changing this definition after millennia is like saying a dog is a cat. Homosexual activists can – and do – force the hands of crooked judges and lawyers and politicians all they want to go along with this pretense that marriage has always applied to both heterosexual and homosexual unions.

However, deep down inside people resent being told that, for example, a cat is a dog. Deep down they'd be saying "if it barks it's not a damn cat!" And they'd be mad, rightfully so! And let's stop pretending this is only about religion. For Christians and Orthodox Jews (and also for Muslims), it may be mostly about religion. But for everyone, religious or not, it is about language: words and their definitions. The only way you could legitimately change the definition of marriage so as to include same sex unions would be to prove that human physiology changed recently to something that it never was in those thousands of years when only people of opposite sexes could marry each other. But you can't prove that because nothing like that happened. Granted, there were crazies like Roman Emperor Elagabulus, who are said to have "married" another man, but their actions of this kind were condemned by the grassroots. In Elagabulus' case, he was eventually assassinated. The people's will was done.

Thus, human nature did not change to usher in the "gay" marriage craze. Something else changed, and that is, a revolution that overturned all traditions and common sense through social engineering. And this brings us to the issue of sovereignty. A sovereign country has a right to defend its traditions and be what it always has been. In this point, Russia is actually superior to the West. Westerners have let down their guard, allowing the far left, posing in civil rights garb, to sell out our culture. We pretend it is an individual rights issue but it is a sovereignty issue. By inventing a right to "marry" someone of the same sex we have allowed our culture and hence our sovereignty to be destroyed. And yet sovereignty is in many ways more important than individual rights, because nowadays, rights are faddish and redefined regularly by activists antagonistic to culture, so they can no longer be defined. Yet sovereignty is something we all sense, as in my analogy with the cat-dog confusion. We sense it inherently but are afraid to say so. This is social Marxism and we are slaves to it in the US.

Isn't it time to throw off the chains? It's all up to the people. We define – and redefine – words through the way we use them. Language is power. We must stop giving away our power.

Anti-Gay Activists Call For 'Civil Disobedience' In Wake Of Marriage Equality Rulings

Denunciations of today’s court rulings striking down marriage equality bans in Indiana and Utah are beginning to trickle in from anti-gay activists, with the two cases representing additional defeats for an already struggling movement.

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council — ignoring the fact that one of the Tenth Circuit Court judges who ruled in favor of marriage equality was recommended by Sen. Jim Inhofe and appointed by George W. Bushblamed the rulings on the Obama administration and leftists who have been “packing the federal courts with liberal jurists” in order to realize “a radical social agenda.”

Perkins also said that he will represent the “indignant Americans who are tired of seeing the foundations of a free and just society destroyed by a handful of black-robed tyrants.”

While disturbing, today's rulings come as no surprise given the rising disdain for the rule of law promoted by the Obama administration. These latest rulings are not just about redefining marriage but they are a further attempt by the courts to untether our public policies from the democratic process, as well as the anthropological record.

While judges can, by judicial fiat, declare same-sex 'marriage' legal, they will never be able to make it right. The courts, for all their power, can't overturn natural law. What they can do is incite a movement of indignant Americans, who are tired of seeing the foundations of a free and just society destroyed by a handful of black-robed tyrants. The Left has long believed packing the federal courts with liberal jurists is the means of fulfilling a radical social agenda, as the American people refuse to endorse that agenda at the polls or through their elected representatives.

As we saw with Roe v. Wade in 1973 – despite the Left's earnest hopes, the courts do not have the final say. The American people will have the final word as they experience the consequences of marriage redefinition and the ways in which it fundamentally alters America's moral, cultural and political landscape.

Jeff Allen, an Indiana-based pastor and senior editor of BarbWire, called for “elected leaders and Christians [to] defiantly rise up and engage in civil disobedience” to stop this “national tragedy” and “the death of democracy.”

“Each victory for the homosexual activists represents another nail in America’s coffin,” he wrote, adding that “these decisions require that reason be jettisoned in favor of unrestrained deviancy.”

Federal courts in Indiana and Utah on Wednesday blatantly overthrew the will of the people and subversively imposed same-sex “marriage” on the citizens of both states. The judicial oligarchy (tyranny of the few) continues flexing the muscle of its apparently unchecked power. The death of democracy is undeniably upon us. Each victory for the homosexual activists represents another nail in America’s coffin.

According to WLFI.com, a ruling from an elitist U.S. District Judge in Indiana wrongly declared that the prohibition was unconstitutional because it violated guarantees of equal protection and due process.



Separately, a rogue appeals court ruled 2-1 that Utah’s traditional marriage amendment was unconstitutional as well, saying that the gender of the two persons cannot be considered as a reason to deny a marriage license. And that’s just it — these decisions require that reason be jettisoned in favor of unrestrained deviancy.



The light of morality and freedom is being brutishly snuffed out right before our very eyes. It’s a national tragedy unfolding at an accelerating pace.

And this is not a good harbinger of things to come — unless our elected leaders and Christians defiantly rise up and engage in civil disobedience.

National Organization for Marriage’s Brian Brown unsurprisingly accused the judges of “activism” and “sophistry.”

Today's split decision of a panel of judges in the 10th Circuit is not surprising given that this Circuit refused to even order a stay of the district court decision when it came down during the Christmas holidays. While we strongly disagree with the two judges in the majority, we are encouraged by the strong defense of marriage articulated by Justice Paul Kelly in his dissent, and especially his defense of the sovereign right of the people of Utah to decide this issue for themselves. This principled recognition by a federal judge considering the marriage issue underscores that the people of a state are entitled to respect and deference in their desire to promote marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Indeed, the US Supreme Court decided in the Windsor case that the federal government must respect the right of states to define marriage. The majority in the Utah case engage in sophistry to attempt to argue their way around the Supreme Court's ruling that it is up to the states to define marriage. As Justice Kelly noted in his dissent, ‘If the States are the laboratories of democracy, requiring every state to recognize same-gender unions—contrary to the views of its electorate and representatives—turns the notion of a limited national government on its head.'



The elected representatives of the people of Indiana have decided, for good and proper reasons, to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. It is judicial activism for a single judge to substitute his own views on marriage for the considered opinion of the people's representatives. This is just the latest example of activism from the federal bench, but we fully expect this decision to eventually be reversed when the US Supreme Court upholds the right of states to define marriage as a man and a woman. In the meantime, it is imperative that the state legislature move forward a state constitutional amendment preserving marriage so that the people always remain in control of the definition of marriage in Indiana.

Tenth Circuit Court Rips Apart Right-Wing's Bogus 'Religious Freedom' Case Against Gay Marriage

Today, the Tenth Circuit Court upheld a lower court’s decision striking down Utah’s ban on same-sex marriage. In its decision [PDF], the court dismantled several arguments from the state’s attorneys about the supposedly negative impacts of same-sex marriage on children and opposite-sex couples.

But one argument that jumped out was the state’s claim that a prohibition on same-sex unions is needed to safeguard “religious freedom,” a claim that is gaining popularity among Religious Right activists who are finding less and less success with outright bigotry.

The court pointed out that the increasingly widespread argument doesn’t hold up to scrutiny:

Appellants’ fourth and final justification for Amendment 3, “accommodating religious freedom and reducing the potential for civic strife,” fails for reasons independent of the foregoing. Appellants contend that a prohibition on same-sex marriage “is essential to preserving social harmony in the State” and that allowing same-sex couples to marry “would create the potential for religion-related strife.”

Even assuming that appellants are correct in predicting that some substantial degree of discord will follow state recognition of same-sex marriage, the Supreme Court has repeated held that public opposition cannot provide cover for a violation of fundamental rights.



Appellants acknowledge that a state may not “invoke concerns about religious freedom or religion-related social strife as a basis for denying rights otherwise guaranteed by the Constitution.” But they argue that the social and religious strife argument qualifies as legitimate because a fundamental right is not at issue in this case. Because we have rejected appellants’ contention on this point, their fourth justification necessarily fails.

We also emphasize, as did the district court, that today’s decision relates solely to civil marriage. See Kitchen, 961 F. Supp. 2d at 1214 (“[T]he court notes that its decision does not mandate any change for religious institutions, which may continue to express their own moral viewpoints and define their own traditions about marriage.”). Plaintiffs must be accorded the same legal status presently granted to married couples, but religious institutions remain as free as they always have been to practice their sacraments and traditions as they see fit.

The court also demolished another favorite claim of the Religious Right: that gay couples do not have a right to marry simply because they historically have not had a right to marry:

As the Court later explained, “[m]arriage is mentioned nowhere in the Bill of Rights and interracial marriage was illegal in most States in the 19th century, but the Court was no doubt correct in finding it to be an aspect of liberty protected against state interference by the substantive component of the Due Process Clause in Loving v. Virginia.”



Appellants’ reliance on the modifier “definitional” does not serve a meaningful function in this context. To claim that marriage, by definition, excludes certain couples is simply to insist that those couples may not marry because they have historically been denied the right to do so. One might just as easily have argued that interracial couples are by definition excluded from the institution of marriage. But “neither history nor tradition could save a law prohibiting miscegenation from constitutional attack.” Lawrence, 539 U.S. at 577-78 (quotation omitted); see also Williams v. Illinois, 399 U.S. 235, 239 (1970) (“[N]either the antiquity of a practice nor the fact of steadfast legislative and judicial adherence to it through the centuries insulates it from constitutional attack . . . .”); In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d 384, 451 (Cal. 2008) (“[E]ven the most familiar and generally accepted of social practices and traditions often mask an unfairness and inequality that frequently is not recognized or appreciated by those not directly harmed by those practices or traditions.”), superseded by constitutional amendment as stated in Strauss v. Horton, 207 P.3d 48, 59 (Cal. 2009).

Ben Carson Unveils Grand Compromise On Marriage: Gay People Can't Get Married

Conservative activist Ben Carson told Newsmax TV host Ed Berliner today that “of course” he can broker a compromise on contentious social issues like marriage equality. Carson’s proposed compromise on marriage? Gay people can do what they want…but they can’t get married.

Arguing (wrongly) that the legal definition of marriage has never changed in America or in thousands of years of world history, Carson said that the idea of same-sex marriage is just as absurd as insisting that “2+2=5.”

In return for not being allowed to get married, Carson explained, gay people “can do what they want to do,” but also shouldn’t accuse people of bigotry. 

Carson offered his grand compromise as an example of the kind of solution included in his new book, “One Nation: What We Can All Do To Save America’s Future.”

He previously suggested that abortion rights foes should run as pro-choice candidates in order to win elections.

Tim Huelskamp Predicts Marriage Equality Will 'Destroy' Marriage And The Family

After delivering a feisty speech at last week’s “March for Marriage” about how “real men” must stop gay marriage from harming women, Rep. Tim Huelskamp chatted with the conservative website CNSNews about gay marriage and adoption rights.

The Kansas Republican agreed with a CNSNews reporter’s suggestion that marriage equality will “destroy the institution of marriage and of [the] family” and warned that it will pave the way for polygamy.

When asked if he also opposes the right of gay couples to adopt children, Huelskamp tried to avoid the question by repeating the myth that the government shut down Catholic Charities and in doing so violated the First Amendment.

In reality, a few Catholic Charities branches have chosen to shut down certain services because they refuse to comply with nondiscrimination policies that are a condition for receiving taxpayer subsidies.

AFA Wants Libraries To Dump 'Sexually Perverse' Gay Children's Book

Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association was, unsurprisingly, upset to learn that some public libraries have been stocking “The Princes and the Treasure,” a children’s book that, in the words of its author Jeffrey Miles, "tells the story of two handsome princes who go on a quest to save a princess, but fall in love with each other, get married, and live happily ever after."

Fischer tells the Christian Post that “this book is a particularly pernicious form of sexually perverse propaganda” that “no responsible library should ever include” in its collection.

He adds that parents have the right not just to prevent their own kids from reading the book but to keep it from other children who might talk to their kids about it: "Christian parents don't want to be concerned only about their own children, they want to keep this kind of warped literature out of the hands of other children as well.”

Bryan Fischer, the director of issue analysis for the American Family Association, a nonprofit Christian organization that supports traditional marriage, told CP on Thursday that "because of the power fairy tales, this book is a particularly pernicious form of sexually perverse propaganda."

"The stories and the images that children store up in their minds from fairy tales have a very powerful imprinting effect on their tender young souls," Fischer said. "And the bottom line is that no responsible library should ever include a book like this on its shelves, and no responsible school should ever use this book as a part of its curriculum."

He continued, "The reality is that no library can stock every book that's ever been published. So libraries choose all the time not to stock certain books. There's nothing wrong with parents asking the library not to stock a book of this nature."

Fischer noted that Christian parents aren't only concerned about what their children are reading, but they're also concerned about the literature that's influencing other children in their communities.

"Christian parents don't want to be concerned only about their own children, they want to keep this kind of warped literature out of the hands of other children as well," he asserted. "And if parents want this book for their children, there's nothing to stop them from going to Amazon and buying it with their own money. But taxpayer dollars should not be spent on tripe like this."

We discussed similar book censorship efforts in our recent report, “Book Wars.”

Via Book Patrol.

NOM's John Eastman Compares Supreme Court's DOMA Decision To Dred Scott

In his speech to the March for Marriage today, National Organization for Marriage chairman John Eastman compared the Supreme Court’s decision striking down a key part of the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act to the infamous Dred Scott decision.

Eastman cited Justice Scalia’s “call to arms” in his dissent to the DOMA decision, paraphrasing it as, “the court should never take away controversial issues away from the voters in this country.”

“The last time the court tried to do that a century and a half ago on the slavery question, Abraham Lincoln refused to comply,” he said.

Ruben Diaz Claims Satan Runs Public Schools

New York state Sen. Ruben Diaz told “March for Marriage” participants today that even if the Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage, they must continue the fight because the American people are behind them.

He pointed to the case of government organized prayer in public schools, which was ruled unconstitutional in the 1962 case Engel v. Vitale. As a result, Diaz maintained, Satan took over the schools, leading to waves of crime and disobedience.

Diaz said this year’s decision in Town of Greece v. Galloway proves that the cause to preserve government-sponsored prayer is not lost, and that anti-gay activists can win as well. He went on to falsely claim that neither voters nor lawmakers have voted to legalize same-sex marriage.

Tim Huelskamp Says 'Real Men' Oppose Marriage Equality, Protect 'Your Woman'

Rep. Tim Huelskamp, the chief sponsor of the Federal Marriage Amendment, had a message for “every man in America” at today’s March for Marriage: “Your woman, your wife, she needs you, it’s time you become a real man and stand up.”

Possibly under the impression that the legalization of same-sex marriage will break up opposite-sex unions, the Kansas Republican congressman emphasized that he loves his wife and believes that men who love their wives must join the fight to stop marriage equality.

“Be a real man of God because this is about you and your wife and your children,” he said.

Tony Perkins Will Have A Lonely Revolution Against Gay Marriage

Operation American Spring. Truckers Ride for the Constitution. Reclaim America Now.

All were right-wing efforts to literally overthrow President Obama. None of them exactly worked.

In 2012, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins similarly warned of an anti-government uprising if the Supreme Court were to strike down bans on same-sex marriage. “I think that could be the straw that broke the camel’s back,” he said, warning that such a ruling would mean “you could have a revolt, a revolution, I think you can see Americans saying ‘enough of this’ and I think it could explode and just break this nation apart.”

In case you thought that was just a one-time gaffe, Perkins maintained a year later that if the government “goes too far” on marriage equality, it would “create revolution” and “literally split this nation in two and create such political and cultural turmoil that I’m not sure we could recover from it.”

That brings us to a poll released today by the Human Rights Campaign and conducted by Alex Lundry, who served as Mitt Romney’s data director in 2012. Respondents to the poll were read Perkins’ “revolution” remarks verbatim. Unsurprisingly, only a tiny handful agreed with him, and even most opponents of marriage equality didn’t buy into his idea of an anti-gay revolution.

Conducting his poll at the beginning of June, Lundry didn’t find much support for that kind of revolt when the quote was read to respondents, with 59 percent overall disagreeing with Perkins. Of people who said they were opposed to gay marriage, 58 percent said they wouldn’t do anything, despite disagreeing and being disappointed in the decision.

“Only one directly mentions the word ‘revolution,’ five voters threaten to leave the country, and a scant fifteen people (3% of opponents) mention any form of protest,” reads a prepared polling memo. “Clearly, there is no real threat of widespread calamity should we extend the freedom to marry to gays and lesbians.”

Support for gay marriage is at 56 percent, with 37 percent opposed, squaring with public polls. Asked to rate the degree of their support, 44 percent said they “strongly” support legalization, with only 28 percent opposed.



Those feelings are reflected in some of the other answers to the survey: 74 percent of people said their lives wouldn’t change with legalized gay marriage, and among those who did foresee a change, many rated it as one that would be for the better.

But we don’t expect Perkins to be deterred. The only poll on the topic that the Family Research Council president appears to believe was sponsored by his organization and only surveyed Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.

End Times Rabbi: 'There Is A Great Shaking Coming'

In a rambling three-part broadcast of James Dobson’s “Family Talk” earlier this month, End Times author and messianic Rabbi Jonathan Cahn outlined America’s impending doom, which he blamed in part on growing support for marriage equality.

Cahn’s book, The Harbinger, contends that there is a wealth of evidence supporting the idea that the destruction of the United States is imminent. The “pattern of our collapse” has already been outlined in the Bible, he says, warning that if American culture continues to “move away from God,” we will suffer the same fate as ancient Israel.

His claim is anchored by two catastrophic events – the terror attacks of September 11 and the economic collapse of 2008 – which he believes are two “warnings” sent by God.

However, Cahn says the country crossed the line in 2012, “when America reached this majority for the redefinition of marriage and the president.” “I believe a great shaking is coming and I believe that God will seek to work through that shaking for revival, it’s either revival or judgment,” Cahn said. “We cannot go down this path and expect the smiles of heaven to remain on this land.”

Cahn drove the point home when he suggested that Americans didn’t learn the lesson of the September 11 attacks and continued to defy God on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage: “As a nation, from 9/11 till now, culturally, morally, we have rapidly gone against the ways of God.”

“We have destroyed marriage essentially, or we are well on the road toward that, and we’re continuing to kill babies,” Dobson said. “And make Christians pay for them,” Cahn replied.

“When you rewrite marriage, when you say we don’t care about what God said, that is defiance of God. This is all part of the big picture. The same thing happened in ancient Israel.”

Randy Thomasson Says Marriage Equality Is 'A Form Of Slavery'

Filling in for right-wing talk show host Janet Mefferd on Friday, Randy Thomasson of Save California warned that marriage equality laws amount to slavery and totalitarianism.

“It’s tyranny, it’s intolerance, it’s attack, it’s a form of slavery even, that you cannot even have freedom, the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, and this is leading away from mere opposition to oppression with coming persecution,” Thomasson said.

Thomasson also interviewed Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera and introduced him by comparing transgender people to people who believe they are actually horses.

Rick Perry, Supporter Of Federal Marriage Amendment, Says Federal Government Should Have No Role In Marriage

Texas Gov. Rick Perry attempted to dodge questions today about his comparison of homosexuality to alcohol abuse, telling CNBC that he will leave the efficacy of ex-gay therapy — recently endorsed by the Texas GOP — “to the psychologists and the doctors.”

Perry also told host Joe Kernan that he “respects” decisions to legalize same-sex marriage in states like New York. “This conversation has always been about states’ rights on this host of issue” and about rebuking “this idea that Washington should be given total and full ability to make these decisions,” he said.

Of course, when he was running for president, Perry supported the federal government intervening on same-sex marriage, endorsing the Federal Marriage Amendment.

But the Texas governor was for the right of states to pass marriage equality laws before he was against it and then for it again.

“Our friends in New York six weeks ago passed a statute that said marriage can be between two people of the same sex. And you know what? That’s New York, and that’s their business, and that’s fine with me,” he said in July of 2011. “If you believe in the 10th Amendment, stay out of their business.”

Now it seems that Perry has reversed himself once again and is going back to his original position…or, maybe he just doesn’t understand how the Federal Marriage Amendment would work.

Regnerus Study Backer Acknowledges That Marriage Equality Creates Family Stability

Updated

Buried in a National Catholic Register report on the biannual meeting of U.S. Catholic bishops this week is the surprising revelation that Brad Wilcox, one of the researchers behind Mark Regnerus’ infamously flawed study of same-sex parenting, admitted to attendees that most social scientists have found “no difference” between “a stable same-sex family and a stable heterosexual family.”

And when a Washington state bishop compared same-sex marriage to cohabitation, Wilcox responded that data suggests “when same-sex marriage is legalized and it is given cultural support, it will be as stable as heterosexual marriage" and that married same-sex couples “are more likely to have stable relationships when the legal regime is more supportive of their relationships.” 

Following his talk, Wilcox took a number of questions from bishops on the floor of the meeting. Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput asked why, if marriage is so valuable for economic success, same-sex marriage is being legalized in so many states.

"Most of the scientists would say that there's no difference ... between a stable same-sex family and a stable heterosexual family," replied Wilcox, noting that those scientists might consider stability the "key factor, not other issues that might relate to a child's well-being."

Yakima, Wash., Bishop Joseph Tyson asked why same-sex marriage is not considered by the studies Wilcox cited to be as dangerous as cohabitation.

"I think that the assumption ... is that when same-sex marriage is legalized and it is given cultural support, it will be as stable as heterosexual marriage," Wilcox replied.

"Is there data to back that?" Tyson asked.

"The data suggest that same-sex couples -- and this is really preliminary -- are more likely to have stable relationships when the legal regime is more supportive of their relationships," Wilcox replied.

This acknowledgment of mainstream social science’s assessment of gay and lesbian parenting is important coming from someone who helped to shape the Regnerus study, the discredited attack on same-sex parenting that is still cited widely by marriage equality opponents. We wrote last year:

Documents obtained by the American Independent this year revealed that the Witherspoon Institute was closely involved in Regnerus’ work through the go-between of W. Bradford Wilcox, a professor at the University of Virginia who at the time ran Witherspoon’s program on family, marriage and democracy, which had recruited Regnerus to conduct the study on LGBT parents. Regnerus in turn hired Wilcox on contract to assist him with data analysis on the study. Along with working with Regnerus on his skewed interpretation of the data, Wilcox urged Regnerus to release the study in time to influence the U.S. Supreme Court in its upcoming marriage equality cases. (Regnerus later signed onto an amicus brief seeking to influence both cases, which extensively cited his own research).

Wilcox’s remark echo the Proposition 8 trial testimony of David Blankenhorn, in which he acknowledged the stability provided by marriage for same-sex couples. Blankenhorn later became a full-fledged marriage equality advocate.

UPDATE: The bishops’ group has posted video of the conference. It’s clear from the video that Wilcox isn’t completely on board with the social science on same-sex marriage, but  does acknowledge the consensus among his colleagues.

Interestingly, Wilcox did not mention same-sex marriage at all until it was brought up in the question-and-answer session.
 

Syndicate content

Marriage Equality Posts Archive

Brian Tashman, Thursday 08/07/2014, 12:35pm
California Religious Right leader Jim Garlow helped spearhead the campaign to pass Proposition 8, and doesn’t seem to be giving up on his effort to ban same-sex marriage in the state even after the anti-gay amendment was overturned by federal courts. While speaking to Bryan Fischer yesterday, Garlow insisted that every same-sex marriage — or as he calls it, “so-called gay marriage” — is still a violation of the law. He said that Proposition 8 “still appears in the [state] Constitution, though it is being violated every single day” by gay couples... MORE
Miranda Blue, Thursday 08/07/2014, 11:37am
On a recent episode of Liberty Counsel’s “Faith and Freedom” radio program, Mat Staver argued that marriage equality can’t be a fundamental right because it’s not “deeply rooted in our history that you have to protect it,” and in fact “homosexuality has always been considered a crime against nature” and “something that’s been criminalized in our culture.” A fundamental right in constitutional law has to either be specifically articulated in an enumeration of the Constitution — so a fundamental right would be... MORE
Miranda Blue, Wednesday 08/06/2014, 12:35pm
Last month, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper announced that he would no longer defend the state’s marriage equality ban  because "there are really no arguments left to be made."  This did not sit well with Mark Creech, executive director of the North Carolina Action League. In a Christian Post column yesterday, Creech attacked Cooper for “wimpishly” capitulating to “tyranny” and yielding to the “despotism” of “judicial totalitarians.” By refusing to resist with every legal means possible, Cooper capitulates... MORE
Miranda Blue, Wednesday 08/06/2014, 11:42am
Televangelist John Hagee dedicated his Sunday sermon this week to asking if America can “survive until 2017,” walking through a number of issues that he feared would impede the country’s survival. The chief among these, he said, are “counterfeit Christians” who are pro-choice or support LGBT rights. “You people who are running around calling yourselves Christians supporting abortion, you are not!” he thundered. “Our greatest problem in this nation is counterfeit Christianity,” he explained later in the sermon, telling gay-affirming pastors... MORE
Miranda Blue, Tuesday 08/05/2014, 5:05pm
Last year, after the Supreme Court struck down the federal component of the Defense of Marriage Act, David Barton claimed that the ruling would force military chaplains to perform same-sex marriages against their will. That fear, of course, was completely unfounded and the Pentagon clarified that DOMA repeal would in no way mean that a military chaplain would have to perform a marriage against his will. But Barton is still claiming that military chaplains are being forced to officiate same-sex weddings that violate their religious beliefs, saying on his “Wallbuilders Live”... MORE
Miranda Blue, Friday 08/01/2014, 9:51am
Conservative activist and potential GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson joined James Dobson on Family Talk Radio yesterday, where the two got to talking about LGBT-affirming pastors. Dobson, joining a long line of anti-LGBT activists who don’t quite understand what bisexuality is, asked what pastors who endorse marriage equality are going to do about bisexual people, who he said “have sex with males and females at the same time.” “That’s called orgies, that’s what it used to be called” he said. Carson, for his part, despaired that pastors who... MORE
Brian Tashman, Wednesday 07/30/2014, 11:40am
While speaking over the weekend on “Eagle Forum Live,” Rick Santorum said that conservatives need to “reclaim” marriage from the left and “the folks who are trying to change the marriage laws to allow same-sex couples.” The former senator and presidential candidate told host Anne Cori, Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly’s daughter, that supporters of marriage equality have “devalued marriage” and “divorced marriage from any meaning beyond a romantic relationship,” while Cori lamented the “celebration of single mothers.... MORE