This is what’s know otherwise as a day of the week ending in “-y.” While speaking on Fox today, Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council (dubbed a “hate group” by the Southern Poverty Law Center), compared same-sex marriage to a story of incest that recently made circles on the Internet.
While reporting on the Friday announcement out of our $COTU$ that they would be addressing whether or not LGBT Americans had a constitutional right to marry, Fox host Shannon Bream pointed out that more than 70% of Americans already live in states and cities where same-sex marriage was legal.
However, the right to marriage had only been legalized in three states; in the rest, it was the result of “lawyers and judges running the country.” He also noted that, “two-thirds of the stats, people live in states where the voters or legislatures have affirmed the natural definition of marriage” and “we’re hopeful that the court will side with the American people, and the majority of voters who have been very clear in the last two decades that marriage is the union of a man and a woman.”
I had to resist putting quotes around “natural,” since I hate that word used in any context outside of a strictly biological one. The unspoken assumption is that being gay is unnatural, which it decidedly is not.
Attorney Ted Olsen, however, replied that the $COTU$ had the duty to “decide when the Constitution trumps the will of the people.” He reminded both Perkins and Breams that not even a half-century ago, interracial marriage was illegal and that Obama’s parents would’ve been charged with a felony in a place like Virginia. It’s hard to imagine that we criminalized it, Olsen noted, and that interracial marriage was banned in 16 states before the Supreme Court overruled the will of the people and struck it down.
Bream noted that “some civil rights leaders” didn’t like the comparison between the fight to end Jim Crow and the fight for marriage equality. “Some civil rights leaders” without defining who “some” happen to be.
Perkins went on to note that “If we take down the states’ rights to define marriage for public policy purposes — I mean, if two people who love each other can get married, I guess Ted’s okay with the story out of New York magazine this week, that an 18-year-old daughter wants to marry her biological father. Are you okay with that?”
Ah, state’s rights. The issue of the Confederacy; Jim Crow given a sleek iPod exterior and marketed to the 21st century.
Olsen fired back:
Are you all the sudden interested in what you read in New York magazine? I mean, it’s very easy to say the sky is going to fall. We’re now talking about something that’s permitted in 36 states — or 37, depending on South Dakota last week — and the District of Columbia. No harm whatsoever has been done to heterosexual marriage as a result
Perkins, however, contested the claim:
That is not true. Religious liberty has been placed on collision course with sexual license because a handful on un-elected judges and lawyers. The American people have a right to speak on this, they have. The court should respect the voice of the people.
And there’s that phrase again! Religious liberty, the 21st century send up for “separate but equal.” Perkins went on to note that the sky is going to fall, because people are changing the definition of marriage (note that, at one time, marriage was defined as a “man and woman of the same race;” like any good troll/liar, Perkins isn’t paying any attention at all to the argument).
Let me share something with you: the only reason there’s a collision course with “sexual license” and “religious liberty” is because people like Perkins have maneuvered “religious liberty” in such a way that people imagine there’s going to be one. What his variant of “religious liberty” is really on a collision course with is the future.
And it’s not going to walk away from that fight.
Watch the video below: