In the first debate between Terry McAuliffe and Ken "Kookinelli" Cuccinelli, Kookinelli again confirmed his anti gay animus and refused to renounce any of his past statements denigrating LGBT Virginians. Meanwhile, his supporters at Liberty Counsel were providing evidence of the anti-gay animus that was the sole motivation behind the passage of Virginia's gay marriage ban by describing gays as being controlled by lust. First these highlights from The Hill on the debate sparring on gay rights:
On gay marriage, Cuccinelli was asked by moderator Judy Woodruff about prior comments that homosexuality was against nature.
“My personal beliefs about the personal challenge of homosexuality haven't changed,” he replied.
McAuliffe said such comments would drive businesses away from Virginia and said he would support changing the Virginia Constitution to allow same-sex marriage. Cuccinelli retorted that the suggestion business would suffer was laughable and offensive.
As noted above, the folks at Virginia based Liberty Counsel are busy providing proof that anti-gay animus is what moved The Family Foundation and Liberty Counsel to back the Marshall-Newman Amendment in 2006. LGBTQ Nation provides details:
Crampton and Barber warned that these sorts of attacks on anti-gay Christians will only increase in the months and years ahead because, as Crampton explained, “the life of the average homosexual is not controlled by reason” but a perverted lust and passion that has “overwhelmed them.” And thus, when you couple that “a lack of self-control” with “the taste of blood,” you have a recipe for further bloodletting.
Barber agreed, declaring that gays “define their entire identity based up aberrant sexual behaviors and sexual temptations and acting on those temptations” and so, as Scripture proclaims, they are eventually consumed by this “lust-filled, sex-centric, perversion-centric lifestyle” and ultimately driven by a “dark soul” to commit this sort of violent behavior:
Let's hope statements like that from 2006 are found and presented at trial in the gay marriage case now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. They definitely suggest that some other than "protecting the sanctity of marriage" was/is involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment