RECENT  POSTS:  » Where art thou, Jeremy? » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


Audio: Reverend Perkins

by Jeremy Hooper

We had tipped you off to the fact that the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, in the run-up to this past weekend's anti-gay rally, was planning to stop by Tony-PerkinsBangor, Maine's Bangor Baptist Church to speak to the congregation of Mike Heath-affiliated pastor Jerry Mick. Yea, well -- Tony made good on that booking. And we can now bring you the audio from that homo-hostile appearance, so you can hear Tony work to disintegrate the ever-flimsy lime between church and state for yourself. Preacher as politician/politician as preacher:

*Source: Quest For Change [Bangor Baptist]

Oh these social conservatives. They never seize the right opportunities to rise to their feet and call out a speaker. Because if ever there was a time for a dissident to get up and holler, that opportunity would seem to belong to the heartfelt Christian who came to church to love with an open humanistic heart, not be told that they should divide via a hurtful civil agenda!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

"Look, I'm not being political here."


Posted by: DN | Sep 15, 2009 7:27:09 PM

lol..Marriage as GOD defined it.. 5000 years of marriage.

As I recall, King David had like 500 wives, and that was (I believe) less than 5000 yrs ago. ALSO: until recently (relatively speaking) women were considered property. SO is that that message Tony wants to share? The word dowry (sp?) comes to mind, weren't men given property to Marry their future wives????

I think I much prefer the idea of marriage as a union between two people that LOVE each other (no dowry required).

just my 2 cents


Posted by: aj | Sep 15, 2009 11:21:58 PM

Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I think the more they keep defining acceptance of glbt freedom as being "against God", the more people will run, screaming and panicked, from their vestibules. People aren't total idiots.

I mean, this guy is a total nut.

Posted by: JeffRob | Sep 16, 2009 11:44:47 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails