Tony Perkins

Last week, amid the Religious Right freak-out over the Obama administration's rule requiring health insurance plans to cover contraception, the Family Research Council hastily organized a webcast to rally the opposition called "Healthcare Mandate: Violating the Separation of Church and State."

Among the guests was Sen. Orrin Hatch who claimed that the issue was not about contraception but rather about abortion as he asserted that abortion constitutes 95% of what Planned Parenthood does as an organization:

If that sounds familiar, it is probably because Sen. John Kyl made the same claim last year. Kyl's claims was so thoroughly debunked as patently false [in reality, it is about 3%] that his office was reduced to laughably asserting that "his remark was not intended to be a factual statement."

Apparently Hatch missed that entire spectacle, or simply doesn't care, as he freely repeating the falsehood as FRC's Tony Perkins assured him that he was correct.

Bloomberg reported on Monday that Google, joining with the likes of the NRA and Heritage Foundation, will be a primary sponsor of CPAC, the right-wing conference kicking off tomorrow in DC. Google portrayed its sponsorship as just another way for the company to reach campaign professionals, candidates, and tech-savvy young adults:

The company says it will have a presence at both Republican and Democratic events during this year’s election season, including each party’s convention. Google also had a role in the Iowa caucus last month. The CPAC event was attractive because half the attendees are under 25 and heavy users of technology, Google said yesterday in an e-mailed statement.

 

“This event is a great opportunity for us to showcase Google.com/elections and tools like Google+, which we hope will be used by every candidate and campaign,” the Mountain View, California-based company said.

Apple’s electronic personal assistant Siri made headlines back in November for drawing a blank when asked for the location of the nearest abortion clinic. If you thought that was bad, meet Iris, Siri’s evil twin sister (or fundamentalist cousin).

 

Android certainly has a right to include a right-wing personal assistant in its app store, and ChaCha has the right to provide slanted answers, but that surely isn’t what the companies had in mind. This appears to be the work of a single employee with an agenda. ChaCha should take appropriate action to ensure that its service isn’t being used to inappropriately foist the views of certain employees on the public.

 

The Ninth Circuit Court today upheld a lower court ruling which found Proposition 8, which overturned marriage equality in California, unconstitutional. Religious Right activists immediately denounced the ruling and used the decision to attack gays and lesbians, judges, Hollywood and San Francisco.

The National Organization for Marriage president Brian Brown emailed members with a warning that the case will end up with an “all-or-nothing showdown at the United States Supreme Court” and told members that donations are needed to deny “same-sex marriage radicals” a legal victory:

Moments ago, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit handed down a sweeping ruling striking down California’s Proposition 8 and—for the first time ever—finding a "right" to same-sex marriage in the United States Constitution!

This sets up an all-or-nothing showdown at the United States Supreme Court.

…

A Supreme Court victory would preserve the marriage laws of 44 states, denying same-sex marriage radicals in their campaign to force gay marriage on the entire nation in one fell swoop. But if we lose at the Supreme Court, marriage will be jeopardized not just in California, but in all 50 states.

NOM also posted additional statements from Brown and board chairman John Eastman, who called it an “absurd ruling”:

“As sweeping and wrong-headed as this decision is, it nonetheless was as predictable as the outcome of a Harlem Globetrotters exhibition game,” said Brian Brown, NOM’s president. “We have anticipated this outcome since the moment San Francisco Judge Vaughn Walker’s first hearing in the case. Now we have the field cleared to take this issue to the US Supreme Court, where we have every confidence we will prevail.”

…

“Never before has a federal appeals court – or any federal court for that matter – found a right to gay marriage under the US Constitution,” said constitutional scholar John Eastman, who is chairman of NOM. “The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the most overturned circuit in the country, and Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the author of today’s absurd ruling is the most overturned federal judge in America. Today’s ruling is a perfect setup for this case to be taken by the US Supreme Court, where I am confident it will be reversed. This issue is the Roe v Wade of the current generation, and I sincerely doubt the Court has the stomach for preempting the policy judgments of the states on such a contentious matter, knowing the lingering harm it caused by that ruling.”

The Alliance Defense Fund senior counsel Brian Raum dubbed the ruling a “Hollywood-orchestrated attack on marriage”:

No court should presume to redefine marriage. No court should undercut the democratic process by taking the power to preserve marriage out of the hands of the people. Americans overwhelmingly reject the idea of changing the definition of marriage. Sixty-three million Americans in 31 state elections have voted on marriage, and 63 percent voted to preserve marriage as the timeless, universal, unique union between husband and wife.

We are not surprised that this Hollywood-orchestrated attack on marriage–tried in San Francisco–turned out this way. But we are confident that the expressed will of the American people in favor of marriage will be upheld at the Supreme Court. Every pro-marriage American should be pleased that this case can finally go to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ProtectMarriage.com legal team’s arguments align with every other federal appellate and Supreme Court decision on marriage in American history.

Catholics for the Common Good president William May derided the court for failing to “to protect the centrality and integrity of marriage for children and society”:

"It is outrageous that judges continue to disregard the will of 7 million voters who voted to protect the centrality and integrity of marriage for children and society," May said.

Federal District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker presided over a show trial about marriage in which plaintiff's counsel trotted out witness after witness with emotional arguments in a PR attempt to re-argue Proposition 8.

"Failing to disclose that the judge himself was similarly situated as the plaintiffs (in a long-term committed relationship with a same-sex partner), Walker could find no rational reason for the voters to define marriage between a man and a woman and concluded they were bigoted and discriminatory," said May.

"To reach his judgment about the voters and his decision to strike down Prop 8, he created a new definition of marriage as merely the public recognition of a committed relationship for the benefit of adults. However, the voters of California know that marriage is much more than that. It is the reality that unites a man and a woman with each other and any children born from their union. This is what marriage is; that is what it does. It is a reality that can only be recognized by law and never changed."

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council accused the court of “judicial tyranny” and trying to “impose San Francisco values on the entire country”:

"Today's decision was disappointing but not surprising, coming from the most liberal Circuit Court in the country. This Hollywood-funded lawsuit, which seeks to impose San Francisco values on the entire country, may eventually reach the Supreme Court. This is not about constitutional governance but the insistence of a group of activists to force their will on their fellow citizens.

"This ruling substitute's judicial tyranny for the will of the people, who in the majority of states have amended their constitutions, as California did, to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

"However, we remain confident that in the end, the Supreme Court will reject the absurd argument that the authors of our Constitution created or even implied a 'right' to homosexual 'marriage,' and will instead uphold the right of the people to govern themselves.

"Voters in 31 states have voted to uphold the historic and natural definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Twenty-nine, a majority of American states, have actually inserted such a definition into the text of their state constitutions," concluded Perkins.

Focus on the Family analyst Bruce Hausknecht called the ruling “yet another instance of social engineering”:

“Opponents of Prop 8 insist on changing the definition of marriage for everyone, including children who deserve the opportunity to grow up in a home with their own married mother and father," Bruce Hausknecht, judicial analyst at Focus on the Family, said in a statement after the ruling.

“But no judge has the right to redefine marriage," he continued. "Doing so redefines parenthood, and offers yet another instance of social engineering based on the desires of adults rather than the interests of children."

Concerned Women for America CEO Penny Young Nance asserted that the judges “undermined the foundations of the family and liberty”:

Once again, the Ninth Circuit lives up to its reputation as the most overturned court in the country. Only this time, they have reached a new low. They not only showed a complete disregard for the Constitution, but also for those principles and values that gave birth to it, and for "we the people" who are supposed to be the ultimate authority.

Californians voted overwhelmingly to support the traditional definition of marriage that has been the foundation of this great nation. Our experiences have shown us, as science proves, that the best environment for children to develop as productive members of our society is in a home where there is a mother and a father who love them and each other unconditionally. Yet with a stroke of the pen these three judges have undermined the foundations of the family and liberty.

Shame on them.

We know this issue will eventually end up at the U.S. Supreme Court and we hope, for the sake of our country's future, that they will show much more respect for the Constitution, our foundations and the people who give them the right to make these rulings in the first place.

UPDATE: The Capitol Resource Institute blasted the ruling as “a stunning assault on democracy”:

"This is a stunning assault on democracy and California's initiative process," explained Karen England, Executive Director of pro-family group Capitol Resource Institute and a key leader in the passage of Proposition 8. "Well over 50% of California voters approved Proposition 8; today their will was overturned by a panel of arrogant judges who want to impose their political agenda on the rest of us."

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling is not the end of the road for Proposition 8.

"The truth will always prevail and we are confident that the traditional-and true-definition of marriage will be upheld by the Supreme Court," stated England. "The voice of the people must be heard and respected. The future of California and American families depends upon the sanctity of traditional marriage. It's time for the courts to recognize marriages' critical role in society and protect it."

Former NOM head Maggie Gallagher, now with the Culture War Victory Fund, writes on National Review Online that the ruling represents a “breathtaking exercise in ill-natured illogic”:

In a breathtaking exercise in ill-natured illogic, a divided Ninth Circuit ruled 2–1 that because Prop 8 does not take away civil-union benefits for same-sex couples, it’s an unconstitutional exercise in irrational animus towards gay people.

Dishonestly, the court claimed it did not require any heightened scrutiny to reach this result.

Gordon Klingenschmitt said that the “Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves” as a result of the ruling:

The liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals announced today that the Founding Fathers wrote homosexual 'marriage' rights into the U.S. Constitution, and overturned California's Proposition 8 traditional marriage law, which had twice been passed by voters. The Founding Fathers are turning over in their graves, since all of them believed sodomy was a crime, and certainly not a Constitutional right.

Liberty Counsel chairman Mat Staver claimed the ruling “undermines the legitimacy of the judicial system” and represents the “unraveling of the actual judiciary”:

"This is a travesty of justice and it undermines the legitimacy of the judiciary," Staver tells OneNewsNow. "When judges find that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, it's absolutely absurd. This is, I think, an illustration of why the judiciary has lost the confidence of the American people."

"If you look at ideology ... pushed by this particular panel, obviously that's what this panel did: they looked at their own ideological bias, their radical positions -- not the Constitution itself. And when they did that, it undermined their own legitimacy -- and I think this is the unraveling of the actual judiciary. It is the very seeds, as Thomas Jefferson said, of tyranny."

"They're not only saying that the voters don't have the right to amend their own constitution and define marriage, they're also saying that there is a constitutional, guaranteed right to same-sex marriage in the United States Constitution itself. That's absolutely absurd. It is insane to suggest that there is such a right in the United States Constitution."

The Family Leader dubbed the court a “friend of the radical homosexual agenda” and referred to the ruling as a case of bullying:

Today's decision by the liberal 9th Circut Court, while expected, is sad and outrageous on many levels. Not least of which is "we the people" get bullied again by a few "robed masters." It's also evidence that when executives go wobbly on fighting the left's agenda and not appointing ONLY strict constructionist judges, who take the Constitution and due process seriously, we continue to lose these battles. However, the 9th Circuit's opinon is no surprise; they have been a friend of the radical homosexual agenda for years. As for us; we have only begun to and will continue to be in the fight! Join us!

Gary Bauer of American Values chided the “Circus” Court for attempting to “force its radical agenda down our throats” and “threatening religious liberty”:

The Ninth “Circus” Court of Appeals has struck again. Today, a divided three-judge panel overruled the majority of California voters and struck down Proposition 8 — the state’s constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The court’s majority ruled that traditional marriage “fails to advance any rational basis.” So in spite of thousands of years of recorded history, in spite of the values held by every major faith, in spite of basic biology and common sense and in spite of the will of the people, these left-wing judicial ideologues believe that normal marriage is irrational.

Here’s the bottom line: The culture war is real. The left does not intend to allow these issues to be decided by the people in their respective states. It will use the courts to force its radical agenda down our throats.

This is why it is so important for men and women of faith to be informed and active in the public policy debates of our time. These decisions are redefining our cherished values and threatening religious liberty.

In his daily radio bulletin, Family Research Council president Tony Perkins used a series of puns to express his outrage at Starbucks over the company’s support for legislation in Washington state to legalize same-sex marriage. The National Organization for Marriage and Liberty Counsel have also attacked the coffee company for supporting gay rights, and one pastor even said that the decision is proof that “Starbucks Hates God.” Perkins lashed out at Starbucks’ “attack on marriage” and “radical agenda,” warning “if Starbucks wants to focus on politics, then its profits are on dangerous grounds”:

Perkins: There's more than coffee brewing at Starbucks. There's controversy too. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. Starbucks is stirring the pot all right, but with a liberal agenda that's got customers shaking their heads. In the fight over marriage in Washington State, the Seattle company is picking sides. Last week, the chain announced it'll join the attack on marriage and endorse homosexual unions. Spokesman Karen Holmes said, "This important legislation is aligned with Starbucks business practices... It is core to who we are and what we value as a company." Well, it may be at the core of who Starbucks is, but it's not at the core of who America is. Voters overwhelmingly believe in man-woman marriage--and they've passed 30 straight amendments to prove it. If Starbucks thinks people like their radical agenda, I hate to spill the beans. But people can get their caffeine fix anywhere. So if Starbucks wants to focus on politics, then its profits are on dangerous grounds.

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation, following a long campaign from anti-choice group, decided to end its partnership with Planned Parenthood, which received grants to provide breast exams along with mammogram referrals. Planned Parenthood provides an estimated 750,000 breast exams a year and 16% of their services are related to cancer prevention and screening, compared to just 3% for abortion services.

But anti-choice activists wanted Komen to sever ties with Planned Parenthood even if that meant denying women access to healthcare, and won a preliminary victory when they convinced LifeWay, the bookstore of the Southern Baptist Convention, to stop selling Komen’s “Pink Bibles” over their Planned Parenthood ties.

The Religious Right also scored a victory when Komen appointed former Georgia Secretary of State and Republican gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel, who as a candidate pledged to “eliminate” Planned Parenthood funding, Senior Vice President for Public Policy.

The foundation’s less than believable reason for cutting of funding for breast exams at Planned Parenthood was the politically-charged investigation launched by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) into the women’s health group, which is greatly based on the smear campaign by Lila Rose, who recently told WORLD magazine that lying is appropriate as long as it’s for a worthy cause.

Now, anti-choice activists are demanding that Congress, like Komen, defund Planned Parenthood, and even calling on Komen to continue to bend to their demands by dropping its support for stem cell research.

Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics, the group which made the discredited film Maafa 21 that claims legal abortion is a plot to commit black genocide, told the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow that Congress should follow Komen’s lead and defund Planned Parenthood:

"It is fantastic news," says Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics. "You know, we've been putting pressure on Komen for years over this issue because there's a lot of good people who have supported this organization in the past who had no idea that they gave money to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest profiteer on abortion."

Crutcher believes other Komen donors did take notice of the donations to Planned Parenthood.

"Absolutely -- [and] the federal government ought to take notice of it," he adds. "Planned Parenthood ... is a corrupt organization. Not just corrupt morally, but legally corrupt organization. Why should they be getting over a million dollars a day in taxpayer money?"

Family Research Council president Tony Perkins hailed Komen’s decision and called on Congress to do the same:

Susan G. Komen's decision to stop funding the abortion industry is good news for women seeking help dealing with breast cancer. This is also good news for the lives of many unborn babies. Congress should also act accordingly given that Planned Parenthood receives over $487 million annually in state and federal funds. If Susan G. Komen can chose to stop subsidizing the abortion giant, surely Congress can redirect its resources to those helping women, not making a profit off the lives of unborn children.

Lou Engle’s Bound4Life, which pushed LifeWay bookstores to stop selling Komen’s “Pink Bible,” commended Komen but like Perkins, asked the group to go even farther to please the far-right by abandoning their support of stem cell research. The group gloated that while “Komen says these public criticisms are not a factor in their choice to stop funding Planned Parenthood, it’s hard to believe that the pressure didn’t impact the decision:

If you recall, we first broke the Komen Bible story here at Bound4LIFE, as well as the wise and admirable decision by LifeWay to pull that funding and stop press. We have covered the constant funding of the abortion provider for several years, along with many other pro-life agencies. Though Komen says these public criticisms are not a factor in their choice to stop funding Planned Parenthood, it’s hard to believe that the pressure didn’t impact the decision.

While we have not received word that Komen still supports embryonic stem cell research, which is also a pro-life issue, we should be vocal in thanking Komen for this decision. In essence, it eliminates the middle man, allowing women who need real mammograms to call Komen and be directed to a place that actually does them. Komen’s funds haven’t changed—only where they give them.

Let’s rejoice but let’s not stop praying! Today’s announcement isn’t given with permanence. Komen officials state they want to keep a "positive relationship" with Planned Parenthood, so that, along with their support of embryonic stem cell research, means we shouldn’t be running to sign up for a Race for the Cure quite yet, but we should positively reinforce what’s happening and thank Komen for this decision. Every step is a step for LIFE.

Pray for this to be permanent; pray the truth behind the abortion industry is exposed in this congressional investigation—and thank Komen, as well. If the public support is higher for cutting support than not, Komen is unlikely to return to it.

Today on Washington Watch Weekly with Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) laced into President Obama, whom he called the “abortion president,” for appointing “radically pro-abortion” people to the government who are promoting “evil” with an “anti-child, anti-woman mentality.”

Smith: When you have the coercive power of the state in the hands of the abortion president who litmus tests virtually everybody in his administration to ensure that they are radically pro-abortion and very often come right out of the ranks of Planned Parenthood or NARAL or EMILY’s List to hold these positions and then they do their dirty work every day of the week and then they fund non-governmental organizations like Planned Parenthood who then continue promoting this evil, and this anti-child, anti-woman mentality.

Smith went on to tell Perkins that the Obama administration seeks “to remake America as the culture of death” and if he wins re-elections, it “will be significantly worse in terms of extremism in promoting both the abortion issue as well as the homosexual agenda.”

Smith: They are very coercive in this administration, there is nothing benign or ‘come along and let us try to convince you,’ they tell you under power of huge penalties, and that is what ObamaCare is all about, it is riddled with penalties, everyone knows about the one if you don’t buy health insurance you can get fined. But when it comes to the moral issues, they seek to remake America as the culture of death.

…

The second four years, the second term of a Barack Obama will be significantly worse in terms of extremism in promoting both the abortion issue as well as the homosexual agenda.

On Today’s Issues, a despondent Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association discussed the likely passage of a bill in Washington that will legalize same-sex marriage. Citing the stories of “ex-gays,” Perkins argued that gays and lesbians will always have “an emptiness within them” and will never be content with having the right to marry, as “they are operating outside of nature and outside of God’s plan and design.” He went on to say that gay rights advocates ultimately want “the indoctrination of our kids.” Perkins has previously said that gay youth are more likely to commit suicide not as a result of “inacceptance” but because they intuitively know they are “abnormal” and even blamed “the homosexual movement” for suicides.

Watch:

Wildmon: Do you really think though, and I think you spoke to this earlier program, that these people really care about getting married, that they really care? Or are they looking for societal approval of their behavior?

Perkins: I think it’s the latter. We’ve seen that even in the early states that had same-sex marriage, not many actually, there were some certainly but by and large they don’t, you can talk too many in the homosexual community, I mean you can Google it and read the interviews, a lot of them don’t want marriage. Not every person that identifies as a homosexual or a lesbian is an activist trying to redefine the laws. I do think and many of those who have come out of the homosexual lifestyle will tell you this that they are looking for acceptance, there is an emptiness within them, they are looking for that acceptance and they think that if society will redefine the norms of behavior that will make them feel content, and it won’t because they are operating outside of nature and outside of God’s plan and design. It will be something else next; redefining marriage will not be the end of this. We’re already seeing this in California, SB 48, the measure that took effect this month, now all of the “positive” contributions of those in the GBT, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender population have to be taught in the public schools, so it will be the indoctrination of our kids to teach them that homosexuality is normal.

As we reported last week, the American Family Association fiercely condemned Indiana’s bureau of motor vehicles for selling license plates where part of the proceeds will go towards the Indiana Youth Group’s efforts to provide safe spaces for LGBT youth and straight allies. Now, the Family Research Council is attacking Indiana over the move, with president Tony Perkins using his daily radio bulletin to blast the “special edition homosexual youth plate” and “promoting a homosexual recruitment group.” Perkins also seems to be generally disapproving of license plates that reflect people’s “political views,” which is ironic since the FRC commends states for selling “Choose Life” license plates:

Perkins: It looks like homosexuals are taking their message on the road--at least in one Midwestern state. Hello, I'm Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C. People in Indiana have a lot on their plates, including it seems, their political views. For Hoosiers looking for a new way to show their rainbow pride, the BMV is offering a new vehicle for change--the special edition homosexual youth plate. Each one costs an extra $40, with more than half of that going to groups that promote "tolerance" in schools. According to local groups, the LGBT plate is the first of its kind. The Indiana Youth Group had tried before to get the plate approved--and lost. This year, the BMV just caved. For most Hoosiers, the news is pretty disturbing--especially since the state put up roadblocks to the national motto on plates. Now we've gone from blocking "In God We Trust" to promoting a homosexual recruitment group? For a state known as the "Crossroads of America," Indiana just took a major detour on values.