Read time: 7 minutes

Tony Perkins: The Supreme Court 'Carjacked The Nation' With Same Sex Marriage Ruling

To no one's surprise, these right-wing hate mongers like the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins aren't taking it very well now that the Supreme Court has ruled against them in the DOMA and Prop 8 cases.

7 years ago by David
Views:

To no one's surprise, these right-wing hate mongers like the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins aren't taking it very well now that the Supreme Court has ruled against them in the DOMA and Prop 8 cases.

Top Conservative Loses It Over Supreme Court’s Marriage Equality Decision: The Justices Have ‘Carjacked The Nation’:

The Supreme Court’s rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8 were “disappointing” decisions that “dragged ‘we the people’ from behind the wheel of this republic and carjacked the nation,” Family Research Council president Tony Perkins said on CBS’ Face The Nation Sunday.

Perkins argued that the Prop 8 case represented a “silver lining” for anti-equality conservatives, since the Court did not “impose same-sex marriage on the entire nation.” Nevertheless, he predicted that the rulings were dangerous decisions that will terrify Americans once they learn the true consequences of marriage equality.

“Americans will begin to see that with same-sex marriage does not come a hope chest, rather a Pandora’s box,” Perkins said. “We’ll see parents who pay taxes to send their kids to school, those schools are going to start teaching those children values that are in contrast with their parents. We’re already seeing bakers and florists and photographers forced to participate in same-sex marriages under the threat of law and in some cases even jail!” Read on...

The horror that states might be allowed to enforce any anti-discrimination laws. At least the bigots have Perkins in their corner to stand up for them.

Full transcript below the fold.

BOB SCHIEFFER: And we're going to get some perspective from the other side of the street now. We go to Baton Rouge and the head of the Family Research Council, Tony Perkins. You were not happy to see this ruling, were you, Mister Perkins?

TONY PERKINS (Family Research Council): Well, Bob, certainly, both these cases were disappointing, although, I have to say on the California case, the Prop 8 case, the-- Mister Olson and Boies they-- they actually wanted to use that case to impose same-sex marriage on the entire nation. They failed in that. The court simply punted it back to California. We still have even without California thirty-seven states that define marriage as a union of a man and a woman. But I will say it's certainly disappointing and-- and many Americans are upset with the activism of this court. Essentially what the court has done is that they have-- they've dragged we the people from behind the wheel of this republic and they've carjacked the nation. And this never ends up good. I think what you're going to see is this leads, as we're already seeing over the weekend in California, lawlessness and this is not good for our republic.

BOB SCHIEFFER: Well, you just heard Mister Olson here, he said, hey, things are changing. There's a new day here. People feel much differently today about all this than they did even a couple of years ago. He would say that you're just behind the times.

TONY PERKINS: Well, you know, just last year another state voted to put marriage as a union of a man and woman in their state constitution. The whole time this has been unfolding in the last ten years we've had over thirty states vote on this. Currently, thirty states have constitutional amendments defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman. Another eight states define it in their statutes. So the real poll that counts here is not-- because, Bob, you know this you can get the results based upon the question you ask. The real poll is what people do when they go to the polls and vote on this and still almost every time they vote for the natural definition of marriage of a man and a woman.

BOB SCHIEFFER: So what do you do next? What-- what is your next move in this? Because, clearly, you think this fight is still to be fought. That it's not over.

TONY PERKINS: Well, I think you're right, Bob, because there was a silver lining in this. As I said, those that were challenging Prop 8 did not go simply to see the court punt. They wanted to see that case used to impose same-sex marriage on the entire nation and they failed in that. That buys a little time, I think because I think Americans will begin to see that with same-sex marriage does not come a hope chest, rather it's a Pandora's Box. What we'll see is the-- the loss of religious freedom, the loss of parental rights. I mean we're going to see parents who pay taxes to send their kids to school, those schools are going to start teaching those children values that are in contrast with the parents. We're already seeing bakers and florists and photographers forced to participate in same-sex marriages under the threat of law and in some cases even jail. I can't think of anything that's more un-American than that. So I think as Americans see that there's a lot more to same-sex marriage than simply two people who love each other that they'll have time to reconsider this and-- and-- and decide whether or not we want to trade fundamental freedoms of speech and religion for the right of two people who love each other, which they can do now. They can live together, but can they redefine marriage in the rest of society with it?

BOB SCHIEFFER: How is it that bakers and florists are being forced to participate in this? I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.

TONY PERKINS: Well, we're seeing in Washington State, Colorado, and some of the other states that have these anti-- anti-discrimination statutes that are being imposed that when a same sex couple comes and says "I want you to take pictures of my wedding or I want you to bake a cake." And they say, look, my religious convictions will not allow me participate in that, they're literally being sued by the government, not the individuals, and they've even been adjudicated in such places as New Mexico. So we're going to see a loss of religious freedom. There is no question about it. It's already happening.

BOB SCHIEFFER: How many-- how many lawsuits have been filed on that? Because I must say this is under my radar. I haven't-- I haven't heard this.

TONY PERKINS: Well, you know, Bob, that's a great point. Because the media's not reporting on this because they realize there's a lot more behind this than the marriage altar. It's literally about altering the landscape of America. There are a number of suits. I mean just a few weeks ago in Colorado one was filed. So this is happening. And it's the reality that people will come to face to face with over time because right now same-sex marriage is limited to twelve jurisdictions. And as more people see that their freedoms, the freedoms of parents to determine what their children are taught, to be able to live your life according to your faith, and all of that's at risk here. I think people will say, wait a minute, that's not-- I gave a nod of affirmation but not to that. And-- and so I-- I do think there's going to be time to rethink this.

BOB SCHIEFFER: What-- what is your next move, though? Will you focus on trying to find some new kind of legislation to propose? What-- what exactly are you going to do from here on?

TONY PERKINS: Well, there's a few things. One, looking from a federal perspective as spoken with a number of member of-- members of Congress and I do think that, again, this activist streak from Justice Kennedy in writing the opinion for the majority on DOMA overstepped a lot of the research that was used to pass DOMA back in the mid-nineties. I mean Professor Arkes-- Hadley Arkes, even Hillary Clinton's own work was cited as reasons for wanting to protect the traditional and natural definition of marriage. That was not talked about. And even more studies have come out. The social science has made clear that the government has a rational basis for defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman. So I think there's some steps federally to look at for federal purposes that the court did not directly approach and then, of course, going back to the states and working to promote both marriage and strengthening those strongholds of those states that have marriage protection amendments in their state constitutions.

BOB SCHIEFFER: All right

TONY PERKINS: I think you are going to see more of a containment strategy going forward.

Can you help us out?

For 16 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit. We work 7 days a week, 16 hours a day for our labor of love, but with rising hosting and associated costs, we need your help! Could you donate $20 for 2020? Please consider a one time or recurring donation of whatever amount you can spare, or consider subscribing for an ad-free experience. It will be greatly appreciated and help us continue our mission of exposing the real FAKE NEWS!

More C&L Coverage

Comments

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.