RECENT  POSTS:  » 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' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win.  

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

03/16/2011

CO civil unions bill unnecessary, Focus on the Family's predetermined agenda finds

by Jeremy Hooper

One has to laugh when a group like Focus on the Family issues findings like these:

Screen Shot 2011-03-16 At 10.08.26 Pm
[SOURCE]

Because let's get real: By "analysis," they mean "meticulous consultation of the same preconceived script from when Focus on the Family always operates." This organization has never shown even an ounce of willingness to consider something like civil unions. Hell, this is an organization that still puts "ex-gay" therapy front and center. For them, a compromise wouldn't be civil unions -- it'd be letting a gay person "change" yet still watch "Modern Family" on occasion.

Oh, and as for their "justification" of this stance, which they base around the state's current domestic partnership and designated beneficiaries program patchwork? Right, well let's just take an eensy sec and consider what Focus on the Family Action (CitizenLink's old name) said about the ultimately successful notion of advancing benefits back when such was up for legislative debate:


"Coloradans can’t afford this social experiment."
[Right Wing Watch]

All the more reason for the Colorado legislature to pass civil unions. Because if not, then to what logical next step will FotF take their "but we don't need it" justifications when full marriage equality eventually hits the Rocky Mountain landscape?

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails