Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Republicans support pro-gender marriage in party platform


Republicans decided to continue supporting gender-integrated marriage at their party convention.

Two longshot efforts to alter the Republican Party’s official position on same-sex marriage failed Tuesday morning. 
The first, proposed by Rhode Island delegate Barbara Fenton, called for ending government-recognized marriage and replacing it with civil unions for both homosexual and heterosexual couples. 
Ms. Fenton, a Roman Catholic, said she was personally opposed to same-sex marriage but “those are my religious beliefs and this country was founded on the separation of church and state”
Whether it is civil or religious, the problem with segregating genders in marriage is that it is inherently anti-gender. Same-sex marriage is founded on the separation of children and gender diverse parents.  You don’t have to be "religious" to agree that gender diversity is beneficial to developing children.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, representing Louisiana explained:

“This would move us away from a party that recognizes the benefits that marriage extends to a society,” Mr. Perkins said. “We recognize nature, we recognize history, that nature is the union of one man and one woman.” 
The committee backed Mr. Perkins’s position, defeating the amendment on a voice vote.

Another amendment, proposed by Pat Kerby from Nevada, would have added support for civil unions for same-sex couples to the platform. He couched his proposal in strategic terms, saying that opposition to recognition of same-sex unions gave “Hollywood and the media” the opportunity to paint the GOP in a negative light. 
“I really really really really don’t want Obama to win this election,” he said. “And I believe this is an issue that will be a tipping point and that we can take this stance and still keep our commitment to the institution of marriage.” 
But others disagreed, pointing to the success of referendums prohibiting same-sex marriage. Mr. Kerby’s amendment also failed on a voice vote.

I really really really really don't want gender-segregated marriage to win in November.   Americans to realize how important gender is to marriage and children.  The tipping point comes when voters understand how important gender is to marriage and children.  Indeed, gender integration is integral to marriage. 

Segregating genders are for public bathrooms and college dorms.  Not for depriving children of a mom and dad.

Defend gender.  Support pro-gender marriage.

4 comments:

  1. This is the same Tony Perkins who advocated for the death penalty for gays in Uganda, president of the same Family Research Council that has advocated for the criminalization of homosexuality, as well as the exportation of homosexuals.

    Defend LIFE. Support marriage equality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you getting your talking points from the SPLC? Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council refute your claims here:

      http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/answering-the-southern-poverty-law-centers-attacks-upon-family-research-council

      Delete
    2. They lied.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6JuKnXJGTc ~Peter Sprigg wanting to export homosexuals

      I already posted about Tony's support of the death penalty in another topic posting the text of the bill and Tony's claim that it's supporting morality.

      Their conflating homosexuality with pedophilia: Although most homosexual activists publicly deny that they want access to boys, many homosexual groups around the world are working aggressively to lower the age of sexual consent. Their cause is being aided by the professional psychiatric and psychological associations, which have moved in recent years toward normalizing pedophilia, much as they did with homosexuality in the early 1970s. ~ 1999 paper from the FRC http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-16/why-not-call-the-family-research-council-a-hate-group-.html

      Criminalize homosexual behavior:

      CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you think we should outlaw gay behavior?
      PETER SPRIGG: Well, I think certainly-
      MATTHEWS: I’m just asking you, should we outlaw gay behavior?
      SPRIGG: I think that the Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which overturned the sodomy laws in this country, was wrongly decided. I think there would be a place for criminal sanctions against homosexual behavior.
      MATTHEWS: So we should outlaw gay behavior.

      http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/matthews-gets-family-research-councils-spr

      Balls in your court, Fran

      Delete
  2. Oh, and Tony claiming the bill upholds moral conduct: http://www.goodasyou.org/good_as_you/2012/08/audio-tony-perkins-claiming-heinous-uganda-bill-upholds-moral-conduct.html

    You know, the bill that says "serial homosexuality" should be punished with the death penalty.

    ReplyDelete