Oh, Tony. You’re finally being called to account for your vicious hatred for gay people, and it’s lovely.
Tony Perkins, hate group leader extraordinaire, has only two talking points left, and they’re both BS.
1. That “social science” shows that kids need two heterosexual parents. “Social science” shows no such thing. The studies the Religious Right relies on are those which compare married, heterosexual parents to single parents. Indeed, the most recent social science, in study after study, shows that kids of gay couples do just as well as kids of straight couples, with one key difference: they’re less likely to grow up to be bigots like Tony Perkins.
2. That the “majority” of Americans are against marriage equality, due to the fact that “thirty-one states have voted against it.” Indeed, that is true, but they’re about to lose that talking point in November (for one thing), and moreover, all major, credible polls done over the past several months show that marriage equality is now the mainstream position to have in the United States, as clear majorities support it. Brooke Baldwin points out the most recent poll showing 53% supporting equality, and only 39% opposed.
So both of Tony’s remaining talking points are lies.
But the real reason this interview is so amazing is that Brooke Baldwin asks him questions like “why do homosexuals bother you so much?” and “have you ever been to the home of a gay couple?” Tony clearly does not want to answer for his own bizarre, personal hatred of gays and lesbians, which just makes Brooke push harder.
Watch it all.
[h/t Mediaite]
Tony needs a good lay.
He lied in answering her question about the divorce rate in Massachusetts. She pointed out that since same-sex marriage became law in Massachusetts, the divorce rate has gone steadily down. He said, sure, people are not as readily marrying overall. The divorce rate is calculated as a percentage, not as a number. Look at the surveys. They say X% of couples divorced. And even if it were that the percentage of married couples divorcing had stayed the same, with fewer couples marrying, and as a consequence, fewer couples divorcing, that would be a HEALTHY sign that people were taking the commitment of marriage seriously, and not entering into it until they were more sure that it would work for them.
I enjoyed her flabbergasted contempt for his bigotry.
Tony Perkins is a bald-faced liar when he says that “social science” proves that kids do better off with a mother and father in the context of the gay marriage debate! As this article says, the studies in question compare them to single parents.
The man knows he is lying. Christian my a*s!
Nothing happens when I click on the video : (
“Why do homosexuals bother you so much?” i’d like to ask porno Petey that one.
He’s also lying when he says our present definition of marriage has been around for 5000 years. This is blatantly not true from a historical, or even a Biblical viewpoint. “Christian” Tony needs to study his Bible a little harder to find out what kinds of marriage God is presumed to have ordained in the last 5000 years. For a quick reference, he can go to YouTube and type in “Betty Bowers explains traditional marriage to everyone else”
I don’t think she ripped him apart. I think the statement that needs to be addressed to Perkins et.al is “you are not the only one living in America, yet this is how you act. This is America, do you see how you are trying to control other Americans through your discrimination and non-American non-constitutional tactics?”. This will all be over soon but the questions usually tossed at these people are rather mundane and repetitive.
Brooke Baldwin did not destroy PerKKIns – she encouraged him to incite violence against LGBTI Chidlren and our families. Did you not HEAR what she got PerKKKIns to spew http://cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2012/05/24/nr-brooke-marriage-equality.cnn.html
David and OccupyEquality: You both hit the nail on the head.
Why didn’t Brooke pin him down on our Constitutional guarantee of separation of church and state when Perkins was blatantly talking about inserting his religion into our government?
Jerry
Tony Perkins and Paul Cameron, the litany of bald-faced lies from the mouths of liars goes on.
Tony….. you only need to learn 19 words to stop being a liar.
Studies comparing 2 same sex parents with 2 opposite sex parents find no difference in emotional and other outcomes.
Perception is reality. I didn’t feel Brooke won any argument and that poll she cited is meaningless. The sample size was 1100 people. Like Tony said referundum and propositions mean more since it’s actual voting and even a liberal state like California voted no. What bothered me about the interview was her bias
You are wrong NoOne…she won. Looking at it honestly, she did.
As per California, it was about 52 to 48…a decade or so earlier, it was about 60 to 40. The trendline is there, plain to see. Even with money from Catholics and heretics in Utah used to spread lies and bear false witness about Gay people and Gay marriage, it keeps getting closer. And the last California vote was almost 4 years ago. People are getting better educated, and older conservatives are dying off.
No, the polls she quotes ar accurate. Even the last Gallup poll, which shows majority support, show support in the South at 40 %. 41% support was what occured in NC, almost exactly in line with the Gallup poll support listed for that region of the country.
Poor Mr. Perkins can only look back, not forward, with any sense of hope.
And he knows it.
@NoOne — Let me note, 1100 is a very significant poll actually, not meaningless. As long as the questions were properly asked, 1100 respondents should yield a result within a 3% margin of error with a 95% confidence index. In fact, 1100 is the most common number polled in all sorts of polls, and the results very consistently fall within those numbers perfectly, which provides empirical proof that the polling model works.
In the case of this poll what that means is that the minimum actual support for gay marriage nationally is 50% and the maximum is 56%; while the maximum opposition is 42% and the minimum is 36%. However, where the poll fails is in targeting likely voters. Likely voters tend to be older than the national average (in the case of the GOP particularly MUCH older, almost 20 years older on average). These polls clearly show that the mainstream NATIONAL position is now pro gay marriage — that is not the same as saying most voters support it. The voter preferences remain to play out – at least partially based on how younger voters, who favor full equality and marriage equality by absolutely overwhelming numbers – turn out.
If you need verification of my (very brief) explanation of polling and why this poll actually is FULLY trustworthy and has a VERY PROPERLY SIZED sample — please go here:
http://cs.wellesley.edu/~cs199/lectures/25-point-estimation-confidence-intervals.html
Regards,
Reyn
Reyn, you may be wasting your breath.
Anti-gay side knows not the difference between sample and population statistics.
Their arguments consist of wild extrapolations, unwarranted by the sampling methods and unworried by risk of sample bias or confounding factors.
That is why they will lose. They cannot sustain the irrational as we saw in Prop 8 trials.
I’d hardly say destroyed.
Perkins is very slick, somewhat eloquant, and know his arguement.
If Ms. Baldwin had been just that much more prepared, then she could have indeed destroyed him.
As it is, better luck next time.
I think Perkins got the better of Brooke by far. I was particularly disappointed that he got to repeat the lie that children do best with mom and dad several times.
I’ve seen quite a few of these interviews/debates and almost every time where I read our side won I’ve felt it was the other way around.
Well, I think Brooke did a pretty good job considering that, at one time, Perkins wasn’t challenged AT ALL when he was interviewed.
It’s a continual process – as time goes on, I firmly believe he will be challenged more and more on his views.
I agree with @NoOne. Polls should not be considered evidence another point beyond the sample size is that when people are asked a question which is not anonymous they tend to say what they think the asker wants to hear.This has been known that goes beyond the topic of gay marriage.
I stand by traditional marriage not because of religious reasons but for cultural reasons. If society allows the redefinition of marriage then why bar polygamy or relatives from marrying(they do have states which don’t allow 1st cousins to marry despite the evidence that cousin marriages was very common..ask the Queen of England or Einstein…and even states where step-siblings are not allowed to marry) Why not allow legal prostitution nationwide..my point is if adults are barred from these other type of relationships and contracts then why should gay marriage be given an exemption?
Mark, these days polls are pretty accurate and most do a good job of reflecting public attitudes.
You don’t oppose marriage for cultural reasons, you oppose it for religious reasons and you give culture based excuses for your bigotry in a vain effort to sound more objective.
No where there has been marriage equality has there been polygamy or close relatives marrying, that’s just a cheap excuse by people like you to try to deny gays what’s rightfully theirs.
That some people are barred from marrying is not an excuse to ban gay marriages. If it were then it’d make just as much sense to bar heterosexuals from marrying because if adults are barred from these types of marriages why should heterosexual marriage be given an exemption?
Whether or not polygamous or incestuous marriages should be allowed is a seperate issue from the validity of gay marriages. You must come up with reasons related to those types of marriages to justify allowing or banning them. To claim its valid to disallow gay marriages because polygamous marriages are disallowed is the same as claiming its justifiable to deny women the vote because foreigners can’t vote – its utter nonsense, one has nothing to do with the other.
Not every website can cover every story. I saw an article on GoodAsYou that there is a big Family Conference in Madrid Spain, NOM, FRC, AFTAH (Americans for Truth About Homosexuality)
This ticked me off. It is like they are exporting American hatred around the world, just like they did in Uganda.
Maybe we can all take a little quick action. I went on the internet and found what I think is a big gay organization in Madrid. I called and talked to Juan Carlos. He did not know anything about America’s biggest anti gay HATE GROUPS meeting in his city this week-end so I sent him an e-mail with the information and asked him to protest.
This is the conference
Madrid, Palacio de Congresos, mayo 25 a 27 http://www.worldcongress.org/wcfnl/wcfnl.cur.pdf
And here is Juan Carlo’s e-mail
gayinform@cogam.es
I used Google Translate to send him my message http://translate.google.com/?hl=en&tab=wT
If I could ask all of you to send Juan Carlos an e-mail I bet that more e-mails will help. After all just getting one e-mail from one person may not make much of an impression. We still have time to act. Will you kindly take a moment and ask Juan Carlos via e-mail to Protest and send Videos?
Mark, if you support traditional marriage, then I understand you to support the sale of daughters to pre-assigned husbands (who may already have wives) in exchange for farm animals or pieces of silver.
That’s traditional marriage.
If you support marriage based on romantic love, that isn’t Biblical marriage at all.
Mark, you are a liar. You absolutely stand by so-called traditional marriage because of religious reasons (and probably some “yuck factor”), and you are being disingenuous at best to deny it. It is becoming quite common for religious zealots to claim they have “cultural” reasons for opposing same-gender marriage, because religious rationalization on the topic becoming increasingly suspect today as partisan and sectarian. Religious reasons for this prejudice are based on belief in laughably inconsistent “holey books”, and millennia of accreted theology by often self-righteous hypocrites who at their best simply reflected the cultural times they lived in.
Come clean Mark and admit your religious background if you have any personal integrity. I don’t expect much of that from christianists nowadays, I must admit.
“Why not allow legal prostitution nationwide”
DUH why not indeed? Give prostitutes national union protection, bring the trade under the regulation of law, and clean up the industry. Sex workers will then have protections and the stigma they suffer will be somewhat lifted. The religionistas would obviously be opposed to this mainly because they want to control sex, but no doubt they would hide behind the argument that it would be too much big government regulation.
By the very act of allowing Tony Perkins on her show shows that she believes whatever he says has enough merit to warrant discussion. It does not. Ergo, if CNN wanted to “destroy” Tony Perkins and the hate he pushes they would simply stop inviting him on to their programs. He is a regular guest on CNN on many programs, apparently CNN thinks he is a valuable contributor to the “debate” Mr. Perkins is having about gay folks, which is more a demand for abject surrender to his mistaken and malicious views. Want to destroy Perkins, CNN? Don’t invite him back, ever. Or, put him on the air with some gay guys with some chutzpah to really challenge the bum.