RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« 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