.
June 16th, 2008
08:43 PM ET

The California Supreme Court's attack on marriage

Same-sex wedding cake topper figurines are seen at Cake and Art in West Hollywood, California
Same-sex wedding cake topper figurines are seen at Cake and Art in West Hollywood, California

Tony Perkins
President of Family Research Council

When the clock chimed 5:01 p.m. PST, the California ruling that threatens to undo thousands of years of natural marriage officially took effect, triggering five months of social chaos that could wreak havoc on every state in America.

Homosexual couples hoping to make history will race down the aisle as early as tonight in at least two counties where clerks of court offices have agreed to stay open late and "marry" homosexuals.

Kern and Butte Counties won't be among them–not even tomorrow, when the homosexual wedding march will begin across California in earnest. Thanks to the courage of County Clerks Ann Barnett and Candace Grubbs, the local offices will stop performing wedding ceremonies altogether.

To comply with the law, Kern and Butte Counties will still issue marriage licenses, but they refuse to subject their staff to the Supreme Court's blatant disregard for traditional morality and individual religious rights.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, Ann Barnett says that the decision to stand up to the liberal establishment has not been an easy one for her or her family. Kern's County Clerk has been a target of hate mail, received so many threats at home that she's disconnected her telephone, and been labeled a "religious terrorist" by hostile critics.

While same-sex crusaders trumpet tolerance for their behavior, where is their tolerance for Barnett's beliefs? You won't find it. Even the Kern County Supervisor, Don Maben, is insensitive to her rights as a government employee. "[S]he made a unilateral decision and just shut everyone off."

Sound familiar? It should, since that's exactly what the California Supreme Court did by disenfranchising more than four million voters who defined marriage as the union of a man and woman in 2000. In the end it is not about tolerance at all, it about forced acceptance.

We applaud the brave men and women in California who are risking their jobs and safety to rebuff this coordinated attack on marriage.

The Republican leadership and presidential candidates could stand to learn a thing or two from these local statesmen. We urge them to take this opportunity to weigh in publicly on the importance of marriage and pledge their support for the marriage protection amendment this fall.

Meanwhile, FRC will continue to bring its educational message to the state, where our ads in Sacramento and Orange County are reminding voters what the California court has now done to injure families and undermine the well being of children.

Editor's note: This from the Family Research Council ran over the weekend in the Sacramento Bee and the Orange County Register.

See Campbell Brown's live interview with Tony Perkins tonight at 10p.
The Family Research Council is a Washington think-tank. Tony Perkins is also the author of  Personal Faith, Public Policy.


Filed under: 360° Radar • Gay & Lesbian Issues • Tony Perkins
soundoff (189 Responses)
  1. Jeremy - California

    Tolerance in the United States seems to apply to every lifestyle, viewpoint, or decision....except Christianity.

    Look at the problems that Chaplains are running into in the Military nowadays. They can't even say the name "Jesus Christ" in prayer now without the fear of punishment for violating someone's Equal Opportunity rights. A DENOMINATIONALLY ordained minister can't pray the way he wants to pray among like-minded believers for fear of a lawsuit or punishment! What's the point of a chaplain? Why not just hire counselors instead?

    Do that to a Muslim in the military though...ask them to not pray specifically to Allah in their prayer and watch the lawsuits and backlash that results.

    The word "tolerance" is becoming nothing more than aggression towards anything Christian in America. Might I remind you all that the 10 Commandments are all Judeo-Christian values. Are the things listed there bad ideas? All it takes is compromise on one point before you can justify compromise on every point. Pretty soon we'll be debating what "murder" or "theft" actually means in this country.

    I always hear elderly people talk about how much the world has changed since they were young....I'm 27 and I can't believe how much it's changed since **I** was young. God help us.

    June 17, 2008 at 9:44 am |
  2. TESAP. SAVANNAH, GA

    I believe if two people love each other who are we (society) to tell them that they cannot get married. So-called Christians and others state that God intended for marriage to be between a man and a woman. However, they always neglect to state the fact that God is the judge not man. I really believe that we fear change and fear what we do not know. I am not against gay marriage I am for it, I believe if we start taking care of our lives all of us would be better people. I know that some of us are parents, so how would you feel if your son/daughter is homosexual, and how would you feel if he/she wants to marry the person that they love?

    June 17, 2008 at 8:58 am |
  3. Leo

    Heaven help this nation if the pro-gay "marriage" views presented by many on this board are representative of most Americans. I find it amazing that some try to justify their personal views on the CA court's decision with the argument that God is an all-loving being (which is true), so anything goes. Sorry, but His views and standards haven't changed over the millenia, and what was right or wrong in Christ's or Moses' time is still so now. The social left has successfully built a god in their own image: one who ignores his own moral standards recorded in scripture and who elevates tolerance above any other moral virtue.

    June 17, 2008 at 8:20 am |
  4. Pat

    TO Matt :
    This has NOTHING to do with discrimination and hate towards Gays. You don't know what your talking about. Your reasoning is a cop out.

    You'd like for all who perceive marriage and have perceived marriage for centuries, as a legal, sanctified, blessed, union by God and State as citizens who have ingrained hatred against Gays. Well, your wrong.

    It has nothing to do with Gays. It has everything to do with the sacristy of marriage that has been a wholesome state of our society since time began. It is about the need to dismantle this state of union for no valid reason other than to appease a minority of citizens that could obtain their legal rights without destroying and putting asunder what has been in practice since the begiinning of time. Don't put the onus on us for the mere purpose of leverage to obtain what a minority feel is their right and who are willing to take away the rights of the majority to get their way !

    June 17, 2008 at 8:13 am |
  5. David

    I really think CNN damages its reputation for legitimate journalism by allowing this article. I really hope they pull it. I understand it is an oppinion blog, but it represents CNN because they sponsor it–and the first page of the blog is nothing but inflamatory remarks with no substance.

    June 17, 2008 at 8:00 am |
  6. Pat

    The California Supreme Court is WRONG. This is Outrageous Behaviour by a Court that is supposed to exemplify Justice.And any State that follows their lead has no respect for their citizens.

    They should not have the authority upon themselves to remove the words Husband , Father, Wife, Mother or Spouse from a Legal Document employed and lawful for centuries. Who do they think they are? They should be removed from office and banned from ever holding a Government position again. What part of We The People do they not understand?

    They are out of their jurisdiction and should be sanctioned. The people of California should not stand for their utter disregard of the majority to appease a minority and cast aside a legal document that has been in force for hundreds of years. SHAMEFUL!

    June 17, 2008 at 7:59 am |
  7. Rosie

    When it comes to making personal choices such as having an abortion or not or marrying a same sex person or not, each individual has a right to choose.
    If you are against it, don't do it, it should be as simple as that.
    If according to your beliefs same sex marriage is an abomination, fine, marry someone of the opposite sex. But do not subject others to your standards!
    I happen to be non-religious, I have no faith or church or god whatsoever. That is my choice and my right. Why should I then abide by rules made with no other arguments than biblical ones? I would not dream of forcing christians into gay marriage , why would they prohibit me from engaging in such a marriage?

    I am a straight woman, I live in Amsterdam, the Netherlands and I am married to a man. Gay marriage has done no harm to my marriage, nor has it done any harm to marriages of christian, hindu and muslim couples I know. We all live by our own standards, we respect each others beliefs and we would never try to impose our rules and morals on others.

    Why you christian fundamentalists keep using YOUR religious beliefs to interfere with OTHERS' lives is beyond me, since I always learned in school that all modern democracies have a strict separation between church and state.

    I feel offended as an atheist by this discussion, I have a right to live according to my believes just as much as a christian, within the boundaries of secular law.

    June 17, 2008 at 6:41 am |
  8. John Rothschild

    Should we next be able to marry a chimp or your best friend (your dog)

    Why is it that as the years go by,we all must have more tolerance toward morality issues. I saw 2 guys ( I was going to use the word men) kissing at a park that my child was playing at. It was the most horrible sight and very discusting.If that is your game, please do it in privacy..

    Thank god Adam did not have another man around. He may have chosen the guy instead of Eve. If that had happened, we would not be here in the midst of this debate

    June 17, 2008 at 5:45 am |
  9. walt

    It's a sad state of affairs in California. The judicial system here has always been twisted and often rebuked by the Supreme Court. The court has decided to sanction deviant behavior, plain and simple. There is no need of a religious argument, one only needs to peruse a grade school biology book.

    The whole notion of homosexual marriage is an oxymoron. It is a state that can never be achieved. It can't be consummated. If homosexuals want to have sex, want to love each other, want to live with each other,, etc, etc, so be it. Call it what it is: two homosexuals living together. If the courts want to classify the relationship, fine, call it what it is: two homosexuals living together. Now then, the courts can have something they created and can bestow all the rights and privileges of that 'special' union upon the two co-habitating homosexuals. When one of the two dies or gets sick or wants to end the relationship, the court can happily impose their will on the relationship. But to codify two deviants living together as a marriage is nothing more than the typical twisted logic coming out of san francisco.

    Further, to say that homosexuals have some kind of rights as a group is pure fantasy. The founding fathers didn't address them because at that time those who willingly engaged in sodomy weren't held in the highest regard. But again CA has decriminalized sodomy. Wonder what that says about our legislators?

    It looks to me like the homosexuals want it both ways. They want to endure in deviant relationships and they want to redefine the marriage definition to suit them. It's so blatantly simple. Sodomy is no longer illegal between us consenting homosexuals, we are no longer criminals, we are 'now' equal under terms of the various constitutions.

    Well, to continue on the non-religious aspect of this argument I would simply respond by saying, sorry, no way. Homosexuals do not represent the mores of most in this country. They do represent the degradation of our society. And marriage is as we've known it for centuries, between a man and a woman. If homosexuals want to cuddle, they're free to do so, that is guaranteed by the constitution.

    A religious argument is by far the simplest and easiest to support. God is pretty clear on the whole idea of homosexuals. The good Lord set forth the rules. He didn't hide them, disguise them, or make them difficult to understand, He is a loving God, but break the rules, you pay. He doesn't care for some of the things people do, sodomy, for instance. Not much more to say in this area other than a short word to ministers of the Christian faith who espouse homosexuality, marriage included: You are sorely misguided. and a true blight on the efforts of honest hard working clergy.

    On a political note, all the America haters should be elated by CA's court. Just another step in the right direction. Decadence, moral decay, financial collapse, etc, etc..............the dying throes of another 'great' society. "Change we can believe in" It's already started To those who say they're not concerned about two men getting married, wake up, you should be. Homosexual marriage is visible, tangible evidence of moral decay, what do you condone about that? And if you condone that, what else is lurking?

    Yes, we have a war going in Iraq for some pretty lame reasons, we have some financial problems, we have energy problems, and a host of other problems. But without a sound moral base, high standards, and strong ethic, all the problems don't really matter.

    June 17, 2008 at 4:07 am |
  10. Mark Goodall

    Intentional, misleading disinformation. Tony Perkins, you transparent liar, you have the audacity to say on CNN that it is only a minority of homosexuals who support marriage! Americans!! You decide who creates the public policy for your private lives. Individual Americans, an unbelievably diverse group of people, or a deceitful Mouthpiece for a minority who wants to create their fanciful notion of God's law to govern your life. Human equality and integrity or damnation for those don't buy the fables of Mr. Perkins demented notion of existence. Guess who gets to choose.....

    June 17, 2008 at 3:16 am |
  11. Smoothie1981

    Its always the homophobic republicans that are in the closet, well maybe not the closet, but a bathroom stall at an airport.

    Have fun before your next flight Tony!

    June 17, 2008 at 2:27 am |
  12. mike

    Well written Mr. Perkins.

    Marriage is more than 2 people simply loving each other, be they heterosexual or homosexual. True marriage is the extension of love beyond just the 2 individuals. Heterosexual individuals who marry just to please each other and themselves quickly discover something is missing in the relationship. Most of these self-centered relationships which have been labeled 'marriages' fail. Bringing children into a marriage, be they conceived or adopted by the couple, is the most common, yet not the only way of extending the marriage.

    I have no doubt many gay people would make great parents. However, Nature has made it perfectly clear that a heterosexual union is the preferred method of not only bringing a child into the world but also raising him/her. Yes, people have made the argument that it would be better for a child to be adopted and raised by a gay couple than to be raised in an orphanage or by the State. Although any child lacking of people to call family is a sad tragedy, placing that already scarred child in a gay home risks compounding his/her existing mental and emotional problems.

    As far as gay couples conceiving a child in whatever fashion for the sole purpose of introducing a baby into the family, I'm sorry... but this is wrong. If someone really wants to have a child, he/she should put the needs of the child ahead of his/her own desires to go through life with a particular person. It was intended for every child to have a mother as well as a father. Every newborn deserves this intention, regardless of whether he/she ultimately gets it. A person with a strong desire to eventually have children should focus on preparing to become a good mother or father rather than on acquiring a spouse of whatever gender and believing they deserve the right to have their own children. The couple that honestly contemplates and assesses what is best for a child not yet brought into this world is deserving of having children to call their own.

    My hope is that I did not insult anyone in anything I said. I also hope I did not take my valuable time in writing this editorial just for the sake of being heard. Anyone still reading should realize marriage is more than just a union of 2 people, it is a union that serves others before it serves itself. Those of us who are married and have children do not view gay couples as enemies. We are all members of the human race and we should treat one another with dignity and respect. But we should also be allowed to distinguish between a union and a marriage.

    June 17, 2008 at 2:20 am |
  13. Rich B

    I wish CNN would actually do research when they pit Tony Perkins in a he said, he said format.
    He said that if gays and lesbians are allowed to marry, then it will open the floodgates. He says he is already married and he can't marry someone. I've heard him or someone else say, "I love my mother-in-law. Does that mean I can marry my mother-in-law?" No, you are married. You are not going to marry your mother-in-law. Gays and lesbians do not want to marry their in-laws. Or the dogs as people like Tony Perkins try to make this about.
    Interestingly, on NPR recently, there was a story about Muslims living in the Philadelphia area. Men who are married to more than one wife. These are U.S. citizens. So, if Tony Perkins is saying that there are laws on the books that define marriage as "one man, one woman," why then are the laws not enforced when it comes to men who want more than one wife, say these groups of Muslims in Pennsylvania or the LDS sects such as in Texas, Arizona, Utah? In the wake of the child custody case of the FLDS sect in Texas, CNN reported that it was unlikely that lawmakers would crack down on the polygamists. I am not in favor of polygamy. But there seems to be a double standard here. Gay men and lesbians are not looking to marry multiple partners. They want to marry their one love. Two men married. Two women married. End of sentence. But it seems that the U.S. government and most state governments want to look the other way when marriage laws are broken as long as the scofflaws are heterosexual.
    And if CNN ever did any real investigative reporting, they would check out some of the gay websites like gay.com in the "Married" Room and "SilverDaddies.com" and see how many married men are cheating on their wives with other men. This is what happens in society when men are taught to be ashamed of their feelings for members of the same sex - they go about and have clandestine "discreet" relationships outside their marriages to women.
    And the women who are married to them are vicitms because they are in the dark about their husbands' true nature. This is the kind of damage that the Family Research Council wreaks on our society. God forbid that gay men and lesbians should feel free to love each other and have relationships recognized.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:58 am |
  14. Peter Nehem

    Why is it always "Gloom and Doom"...40 years ago it was Chicken Little all over again......The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling, it will be "social chaos that could wreak havoc on every state in America."...if we allow whites to marry blacks. Now we roll forward to now and we hear the same thing all over again.
    How much time, effort and money has been spent so far on the "marriage protection amendment" ? Just think what we could do if we took all that time, effort and money and put it towards a cause like what C, California! has suggested: "battered wives, abused and neglected children, or families living in poverty" or better yet a way to reduce the 50+% divorce rate!
    I must admit I can not fathom how allowing gays and lesbians to marry is going and I quote,"to injure families and undermine the well being of children"?! But I do know of a word that can and does cause this very thing to happen, it is called DIVORCE. Mr Perkins get you head out of the sand and tackle the real issue of why the family is falling apart, DIVORCE!
    John 13:34-35(NIV) reads "A new command I give you: Love one another, As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." Could you imagine the world where this was followed regardless of your religion?! Spending lots of money towards an amendment isn't "Loving one another" but taking that same amount of money and holding pre-marriage classes or setting up a battered woman's shelter or feeding the poor or buying groceries for a family that can't afford them. These are examples of that.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:44 am |
  15. Bill pam&sally

    What about bi sexuals?
    I think homosexuals and lesbians are being way too prejudice and bigoted.
    They act like we dont exist or that we are confused and are really gay or straight and that we choose to be bisexualout of confusion and ignorance and that it is just not natural.
    Instead of reaching out to bisexuals, who need to marry both a man and woman, they are just thinking of themselves and pretending we dont exist.
    I say take your head out of the sand and reject this decision brothers and sisters until Bi-sexual unions of 3 or more are included.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:40 am |
  16. Gecko-San

    straight couples like my parents have had many years to mess up the "morality of marriage" I don't see how something so abused and tainted can be anymore tangent. A few people marrying the person they want to spend their life with wont hurt anyone. With divorce at an all time high many Americans only grow up with one parent. I will tell you what a child needs THEY NEED ANYONE WHO WILL CARE FOR THEM. THEY NEED ANYONE WHO WILL TAKE CARE OF THEM. THEY NEED SUPPORT TO GET THROUGH THEIR TROUBLE. In my experience having parents of a certain orientation does not help a child it all comes down to the persons themselves and I love my parents but my father was never there and my mother would probably been happier then dwelling on her failed marriages. You Knew how I told happy fathers day to this year My MOTHER that's who. So every rich social conservative that would rather ruin the lives of many to have their warped view of morality is wrong.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:30 am |
  17. Joshua

    I am concerned that you feel that the CA supreme court did something wrong. It is the job of the courts to uphold the constitution and to make sure that laws are not violating it, even if the voters said that it was okay. Also why is it considered corageous to violate the law and discriminate against other people?

    June 17, 2008 at 1:27 am |
  18. Michael P

    I agree with Mr. Perkins, simply because the orginal meaning of marriage is defined for a women for her children to be legitamate. Why do you think generally the women surrenders here maiden name and now the family name comes from the husband as his been a tradition. Now the word has been totally disorded

    As for God's love, it's true God love's all of us, no matter what , he is merciful, but hey, I love my children and if they disobey me by making up their own rules which I know will hurt them, then certainly I will take action, God is no different which is why Jesus was send down to start the church to help guide us.

    Let's put it this way, if we all decided to have a relationship with the same sex, then we will simply erode because there is no reproduction, so it is a concern.

    For those who don't think it would be harmfull, it is harmfull because when same sex couple adopts a child, based upon the example they give to the child is that reproduction is not part of God's plan to continue his creation.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:26 am |
  19. Kevin

    The Constitution BARS unequal treatment of citizens. Period. The courts have simply upheld this law (this is not "judicial activism", it is what the courts are supposed to do: protect individuals from the "tyranny of the majority").

    Your opinions, Mr. Perkins, of it's "morality" or it's potential effect on society are, therefore, irrelevant and, frankly, a little boring to read (especially as a lead story! ).

    The Constitution is a limit on the power of government, NOT on the "self-evident" rights of the people. Rights are not granted by the government or the majority (or by you). Any future law that would seek to limit the rights of citizens is, by definition, unconstitutional and will eventually be struck down.

    The tide has turned, and you are drowning...

    June 17, 2008 at 1:23 am |
  20. Sherri

    When will it be legal to marry our dogs? I really love my dog, and I want him to be by my side for the rest of my life. Any bills on the table in regards to this? If we were to marry the animals we love so dearly, that would be all good, right? It's not about sex at all, correct. I just want to be bound to him forever! He'd look great in a diamond studded collar! Good Grief!

    June 17, 2008 at 1:18 am |
  21. hegrebart

    "thousands of years of natural marriage" - The most frequent form of marriage in thousands of years of history is Polygamy. Even in the Bible, Polygamy is clearly endorsed. King David had six wives. Solomon had 700 wives. Polygamy is practiced all over the world to this day. Monogamy is an attack on "thousands of years of natural marriage" if you really want to look at history, sociology, anthropology, etc.

    What you are really saying is that same sex marriage is an attack on your precious bigotry. Two same sex people getting the right to file their taxes jointly and visit each other in the hospital does not detract from an opposite sex marriage. If it does, the problem is the weakness of your relationship. In fact, same sex marriage may make your marriage stronger. You two can cling to each other in your belief that your rights trump the rights of other taxpayers and revel in your prejudice and intolerance.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:17 am |
  22. Jill

    What is wrong with everyone? I am sure most of these comments are from young adults who have lost a lot of their own morals. Obviously, they must have been too young to remember that the PEOPLE of California voted AGAINST gay marriage. THE PEOPLE!!! Ann Barnett is standing up for the people. This whole gay marriage thing shouldn't even be happening according to the democratic system since it does NOT go against the constitution. A few judges are using their power to make decisions on their own and ignoring the majority. Look in the Bible and you will see what happens when the voice of the people vote for iniquity. According to the Bible, gay and lesbian acts are sinful. If California votes against the amendment in November, we may be in for a rude awakening.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:12 am |
  23. Henry Drummond

    I grew up in an era when states defended "traditional marriage" by passing laws making it a crime to marry outside of your race. The reasons for banning such marriages were that supposedly "race mixing" harmed children, was morally wrong, was banned by the Bible, and would destroy society.

    Gradually social attitudes changed and laws were changed but not without resistance. There were "public servants" who were praised for refusing to perform newly legal interracial marriages by the same people who demanded strict enforcement of the law but only when it suited their purposes. Sound familiar?

    I have found though that reason and reality reaches those whose sense of decency is genuine and whose prejudice is a product of their times.

    The late Senator John Stennis fought an unrelenting battle against the Civil Rights movement in the 1960's and lost. In later years he publicly stated he was glad he lost. "The civil rights movement did more to free the white man than the black man" he declared in his declining years. "It freed my soul".

    June 17, 2008 at 1:10 am |
  24. Kent,Illinois

    David R..............

    You are lost. "The Bible was written by man,and thus is flawed." God is love....................and the power of "Divine Presence". This presence doesn't dwell on the drama of man. Nature is linked into this presence and doesn't know "marriage". Did you ever see a dolphin sign a paper when it chooses it's mate for life?

    Please leave "God" and nature out of your manmade drama and it's dissemination.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:03 am |
  25. Mark

    For all you question why it is wrong for 2 people who love and care for each other to get married, there are qualifications for such. Same sex couples are not part of them.
    Read the Bible. Gen 2: 18-24, I Corinthians 11: 9-13, I Cor 7:2, Romans 7:2. It is not what "the Cristians" say. It is the laws and rules God gave humanity. Is it that homosexauls are atheists or illiterate , or just that like all others whom stray from the scriptures, they see what they want to see in the Bible to justify their whims and desires?

    June 17, 2008 at 1:03 am |
  26. Michael, NC

    I am surprised-but glad that this blog has been allowed to be posted.
    It shows how closed minded many people are. It shows how ignorant people are. It shows how hateful people are.
    How dare anyone try to take the freedoms of ANY citizen away from them. It is too late for you repulsively hateful bashers to take these HOLY sacraments of marriage away from these loving couples.
    You hypocrites who use religion to back your theories are most likely the people who use religion to hide behind your sins and place the blame on the nearest scapegoat. You are the ones who make the lives of homosexual males and females miserable. Wake up.
    To relate homosexual marriage to acts of polygamy and bestiality is absolutely abhorrent and completely irrelevant. Those arguments are demoralizing and downright disgusting, and make me wonder what YOUR personal beliefs are. Fortunately for me, I don't judge you or condemn you for what you may or may not practice. That is the difference between you and me. Wake up.
    For anyone to say that they would support their children if they were gay, but that they would disown them if they got married is a low blow and shows that they would betray their child before backing them when it matters most. Wake up.
    Those of you who think that being gay is a choice are blind and dumb. When you see the hate and disrespect shown towards gays, why the hell would they willingly CHOOSE that lifestyle? Answer that, or else keep your opinions "closeted" and to yourself. Wake up.
    I myself know a gay couple who take care of their niece and nephew on a monthly basis because the children's care givers are the worst excuse for parents I have ever seen. They are lucky to have such a loving couple care for them. There are thousands of children who live in group homes and have nobody to love them or care for them because their parents are worthless. How dare you say that the presence of a gay couple would destroy our children when they could be solving problems as we speak. Wake up.
    Homosexuals pay taxes like you and me. Homosexuals attend your churches, your schools, and support the nation that we all call home, even though they it seems they are being abolished.
    How dare you try to take the rights away from our kin, our family, and our fellow citizens. WAKE UP!

    June 17, 2008 at 1:02 am |
  27. Nick F

    What rubbish! People who fixate on this non-issue while the world is dying are fools. So some dictionaries will be slightly obsolete. Big deal! There is way too much fear and "us and them"-division in this world. No one is free who fears. It is the homophobes that need to be liberated from their self-oppression. Which is to say, they need to grow up.

    June 17, 2008 at 1:01 am |
  28. Sara

    It is a shame when young children are watching the news and reading the newspaper of same sex marriage. I think as adults we forget the thoughts that run through the mind of a young child. Yes children easily adapt to change, however It must create confusion for a young child as for why the other children have a Mom & Dad ? I would think the children with parents of the same sex will grow up not knowing which gender path they should follow. What type of roll models do the children really have?

    This society has lost track of good old fashion family values!!

    June 17, 2008 at 12:55 am |
  29. mike

    Gay folks pay taxes - taxes that support a comprehensive family-law/court system that offers protections that they are precluded from enjoying. It is rediculous to expect citizens to pay for services they cannot claim/enjoy because a certain segment of the populace finds their lifestyle distastful/incompatible with their own. It is time for gay people to stop asking or "tolerance" or "understanding" and simply demand the rights/privledges that THEY HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR!

    The religious right is hanging on to this issue because once it is gone they will have little to sell and make a buck off. My dream is the day when these "churches"/organizations are taxed as PACs. That will shut their traps.

    June 17, 2008 at 12:55 am |
  30. Robert, California

    Mr. Perkins,

    What happens in November when Californian residents vote no on creating a constitutional amendment banning gay marriages? Right now 51% favor gay marriages, and 44% do not. That seems to me that come November, the Proposition will fail. Then what?

    You know we are going to look back on your letter 50 years from now, and historians are going to call you a bigot. Just like today, Historians call Wallace a racist segregationist. What will they say about you 50 years from now?

    June 17, 2008 at 12:53 am |
  31. Karen

    I think it is sad when the majority vote and that vote is over turned by the Supreme Court... I don't think that is constitutional. I think that the sadest part is the fact that the Constitution that worked so well for our country and made it the country what it is, is not being used and followed the way it should be. I wish more judges would take their role more seriuosly than they do. Where is the check and balance of it all?

    June 17, 2008 at 12:53 am |
  32. Jim

    People say "instituted by god" well if anyone has not noticed we "gay" people don't breed or if we do not nearly as much as what's called the normal part of society but we are still here. I would call that natural – we are not going away anytime soon.

    It's a matter of respect. We are people too. My church when I was growing up had in it's bible that we would burn in hell – a god that would do that to me just for being me is not the one I want to fess up to especially when it was Cathloic where the preists all raped the young boys anyway – at least I managed to tell the preist to get his hands off me.

    I have been with my partner for 15 years and am very happy. We are getting married on July 17th flying down from Seattle for the event. We feel it's time to be counted. Just for the record my breeder or as you call him "heterosexual" brother has been married 3 times and is in the middle of another divorce, has 5 children and my sister – bless her, is in the middle of one as well.

    But do you know what? It's 15 years for me and I am getting married now – not divorced. I live very happily, have a nice home and two wonderful children – well cats actually but that as close I am going to get on that one.

    Cheers!

    June 17, 2008 at 12:53 am |
  33. dynmann

    That's the problem. People don't see. People use the usual excuse that if people love each other and want to spend their lives together, it doesn't hurt anyone. That's a fallacious point in itself. Marriage has always been "DEFINED" as 1 man and 1 woman. Any other type of union whether it be 1man and 1 man or 1 female and 1 female is not the definition of marriage and it never will be. No matter what the courts put into law and push these outside agendas down the throat of those who don't care to have it thrown carelessly into the definition, it will never be what the Marriage ceremony itself was created for. 1 man 1 woman in holy matrimony. It's a sacred right that is passed down from generation to generation that will never be broken. If homosexuals want to partner up, go for it. It's a free country. It's when you seek to change the meaning of something that's suppose to be sacred between the opposite sex, that's when you'll get opposition. And opposition will come! Sorry, but gay marriage does hurt the traditional family and the values that make it strong. It will never be marriage no matter what people say and no matter what laws are put into place. You say leave it up to God, in this case, God will have nothing to do with it. He instituted marriage for one man and one woman only and what He has put together, let no man separate. That includes it's meaning. Anything else is merely a counterfeit and shouldn't be recognized as marriage.

    June 17, 2008 at 12:53 am |
  34. Jenny

    Mr. Perkins – thank you for having the courage to write your article. I'm not sure how the gay and lesbian community wants inclusion and acceptance of their views and lifestyle but in the same breath label people who oppose them as intolerant and mean spirited. I do not believe in same sex marriages; not because I hate gay people... but because you need a male and female to pro-create and therefore continue with the human race. I would rather see same sex couples have the same rights as traditional male/female couples but just call it something else. Keep traditional marriage between a man and woman.

    June 17, 2008 at 12:51 am |
  35. Todd W.

    I am so tired of Christian people like those above who feel that they have exclusive rights on "morality." Since when is love immoral? What is so scary about two men or two women falling in love and wanting to commit to each other?

    This country was not founded by Christian conservatives. It was founded by profoundly spiritual people who knew that tyranny came in many forms–religious OR secular. Thank goodness the CA Supreme Court decided to protect the state's good citizens against the most dangerous form of tyranny of the modern age: the tyranny of the majority. Long live the separation between church and state!

    June 17, 2008 at 12:48 am |
  36. Jerry Flood

    It is rather simple. We come from a Christian based government. It encourages children. Same sex mariage will not give this nation more children to carry on the values and virtues of Christians. We also have separation of state and religion but that is not apparent in our tax codes. Put back the mariage penalty in taxes.....

    People should be able to be with who they want. If they do this for tax purposes, they are more crazy than the politicians (and voters) who put us in this situation in the first place.

    Gays should be with gays. Heterosexuals should be with heterosexuals. But we all have to live together in this nation. That means that the government does not have to support mariage, and really, it should not. The government should also not support wanted or unwanted pregnancies. This is an individual decision, not a governmental decision though subsidies.

    The government should provide what the people want in the amount that the people (and companies) can afford. Roads, Ports, National Defense, Local Law Inforcement, education, sanitation, a fair justice system and many more things are what the government should provide.

    Letting gays or heterosexual people to marry is not government territory (and it never should have been that way).

    June 17, 2008 at 12:45 am |
  37. Thomas K., 82 years old, German Immigrant

    For those young Americans (and older Americans) interested in experiencing the suave, sensual, indulgent, and insidious language of bigotry and hate, Mr. Tony Perkins' world view is the embodiment. It disturbs me. It is as though I am reading the reincarnation of Joseph Goebbels. Speak out against him. America stands for freedom and tolerance, not the "beliefs" of bureaucrats to which Mr. Perkins would cynically pander. The foundation of power in the manmade institution of religion is fear, just as it is in the totalitarian state. Both lead to unsilenced pain and horrific moral violation, and lie distant to the realm of true spiritual outreach that is the bliss of humanity's creation and wonderment.

    June 17, 2008 at 12:45 am |
  38. Charles

    Can anyone tell me why Gay people want to get married?
    There will obviously be no naturally born children.
    Your religious beliefs obviously differ from the bible as would then your beliefs about adultery, pre-marital relations, and chastity.
    Is it acceptance?
    Is it healthcare or a tax deduction?
    Is it guilt?
    You want to pay alimony in a separation case?
    Is it to show commitment? (you don't have to get married to be show commitment, any verbal, non-verbal, or written contract can do that. you don't have to be married)

    Two people from the same gender can be great friends, room-mates, or whatever without jumpin' in the sac together. So the only reason I can see for them wanting marriage is so that they feel better about themselves because of the guilt they have for their actions.

    June 17, 2008 at 12:44 am |
  39. Arturo Vigil

    perkins your an idiot.... in the near future you'll be seen as we see those racist people who felt blacks should be segregated and who thought woman have no right voting....

    You must be a Republican.....

    June 17, 2008 at 12:41 am |
1 2 3 4