Tuesday, February 11, 2014

Poor Tony: It is so hard to be part of the oppressed white-Christian-heterosexual-male minority

Tony Perkins - Family Research Council
Tony Perkins, President of FRC
A hate group leader with ties to the KKK is apoplectic over equality for gay Americans, his fellow citizens. Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council (a position that paid him over $230,000 in 2012), seems to be most comfortable when he portrays himself as a victim — usually at the hands of “homosexual activists” and their allies.

Once again, Perkins is a casualty of the "politically correct elites." This time it is Eric Holder who is Perkins' tormentor. That is because the AG is perfecting the DOJ's application of the decision, last summer, in United States v. Windsor. In an email yesterday, Perkins writes:

The DOJ, which may as well be a satellite office of the HRC, has been all too happy to run point for homosexual activists, throwing bouquet after taxpayer-funded bouquet to unions that 33 states don't recognize. In this latest adventure in lawlessness, Holder shreds marriage laws on everything from bankruptcy policy, alimony, prison visits, access to the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund, survivorship benefits, and other perks reserved for legal spouses. "...[T]he road ahead will be anything but easy. Always remember that progress is not inevitable and that positive change occurs only through commitment and through struggle." And for the Obama administration, fierce defiance of the rule of law. For Holder, whose career is littered with scandal, this move puts the DOJ on a collision course -- not just with the states, but with the Constitution he was sworn to defend.
Oh my. All that equality for gay people. How dare they be provided with equal protection under the law and due process? I do not know what scandals he is referring to but it is irrelevant. Furthermore, there is no "collision course" with the states. The Court was clear that the states define marriage to the extent that it does not interfere with the constitutional rights of citizens. The constitutional question also seems to have been clearly answered as well; The federal government must recognize the lawful same-sex marriages of US citizens. What part of that seems ambiguous to Mr. Perkins? AG Holder is simply acting on the Court's decision. Nothing less and nothing more. Perkins continues:
There's been a lot of talk from the Obama administration about what homosexuals are "entitled" to -- but not what voters are entitled to... like having their voices and ballots count. As an attorney (and America's most prominent one at that), Eric Holder should understand better than anyone what the U.S. Supreme Court meant when it ruled that the federal government must respect "state sovereign choices about who may be married" and criticized any attempt to "put a thumb on the scales and influence a state's decision as to how to shape its own marriage laws." With this announcement, Holder isn't just putting a thumb on the scales -- he's putting the weight of the entire government on them!
Again, the opinion in Windsor written by Justice Kennedy states that;

“State laws defining and regulating marriage, of course, must respect the constitutional rights of persons, see, e.g., Loving v. Virginia, 388 U. S. 1 (1967).” 

Even Mr. Perkins should realize that a ballot initiative that does not respect the constitutional rights of persons is rendered invalid. In what way would  Perkins require that the Attorney General of the United States not follow what is now the law of the land? Which federal right afforded to married couples should gays not have? My question is rhetorical because Perkins is intent upon suffering self-manufactured injustice. Perhaps doing so keeps the registers "ka-chinging."
Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.