RECENT  POSTS:  » GLAAD: Q&A with former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider: 'I’ve never met an 'ex-gay' man I thought was not still attracted to men' » Head of Virginia's anti-equality org: 'open season to discriminate against anyone who believes that children deserve a mom and a dad' » Force behind Virginia's marriage ban ably demonstrates animus behind it » NOM to show rest of world its impressive ability to exacerbate loss » Bryan Fischer: Marriage equality supporters are like baseball's legendarily winning team » On NC's Attorney General and the bipartisan hunt for a 'culture war' off ramp » Read: 4th Circuit strikes down Virginia marriage ban » GLAAD: Change is possible: Former 'ex-gay' activist Yvette Schneider 'celebrates the worthiness and equality of all people' » Man who stands in way of Texas equality works to stunt economic windfall as well » Miami-Dade Circuit judge rules state marriage ban unconstitutional; stays ruling  

« 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