Tony Perkins Gets Beat Up Over His Defense Of DOMA

It goes without saying that the Christofascist circles are big time unhappy with the way in which the oral arguments in United States v. Windsor seem to have played out.  Ultimately, the arguments of the supporters of DOMA come down to religious belief and nothing else - a fact that Bill O'Reilly in a moment of candor noted (see the image below).  Indeed, Justice Kagan read from a portion of the Congressional Record covering DOMA's enactment where it flat out stated that the objective was to codify moral disapproval of homosexuals.  Despite this literal, documented historic reality, the Christofascists try to fall back to whining that "children deserve a mother and father" while totally ignoring the millions of children already living in homes headed by same sex couples.  In truth, folks like Tony Perkins don't give a flying f*ck about the children of gays.  A piece at Mediate looks at the beat down Tony Perkins received on MSNBC.  Here are highlights:

NBC News reporter Luke Russert engaged in a thorough grilling of Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Wednesday over his defense of the Defense of Marriage Act. On several occasions, Russert put Perkin’s on the defense and challenged the assertions he made to justify DOMA’s constitutionality. The interview became heated and somewhat hostile when Perkins asked how, if love is the only boundary for marriage, America would be able to prohibit polygamy.

He [Perkins] then claimed that studies show that children fare better when they are raised in a two-parent household with parents of the opposite gender. Russert challenged that assertion:

“There are studies also, especially from the American Academy of Pediatrics, which say that a two-person home, even if it is a same-sex couple, is beneficial for children,” Russert contended. 

Crosstalk ensued as Perkins attempted to refute Russet’s contention. He said that the study Russert cited ignores other research into that topic. Russert fired back that the study Perkins’ cites was dismissed because of the wording of some questions and its having been funded by conservative backers.

“What do you fear the most about a couple being together – a same-sex couple being together over 60 years like we saw in the Windsor case – what do you fear so much about them getting the same federal benefits for their marriage as an opposite-sex couple would?” Russert asked.

“I don’t fear anything,” Perkins replied. “Then why do you oppose,” Russert interjected.

It is refreshing to for a change an anchor challenging Perkins' hate, bigotry and fraudulent claims.  We need to see much more of it - enough where Perkins won't even show his racist, homophobic face on television at all.  Here's the image of O'Reilly summing up the argument of Perkins and those like him: