MN anti-equality leader says marriage fights poverty; so enjoy the poor house, 'mos
The following snip comes from Tom Prichard, the Minnesota Family Council president who is leading the charge to put a discriminatory same-sex marriage ban into his state's constitution:
Second, it's important to realize the best poverty program isn't a government program, but a marriage. A family with children headed by a married couple dramatically reduces the incidence of poverty. A study of Minnesota data by the Heritage Foundation found that 33.2 percent of single-parent, female-headed families with children were living in poverty, compared with only 3.8 percent of married-couple families with children.
Does this mean the government should now mandate marriage for welfare recipients? No, but recipients should be told the benefits of marriage and not be penalized for being married.
Currently, under many welfare programs, people are eligible for help when single, but once they are married their combined incomes make them ineligible. The consequence is couples living together, unmarried. This is demonstrably less stable and healthy than a marriage relationship, and it usually ends up with the children being raised by one parent.
Best poverty-fighting tool isn't a government program; it's marriage [MPR]
So once again we find one of these self-appointed "marriage warriors" touting the glowing virtues of the very same notion they are denying to same-sex couples. In this case, we have Prichard positioning marriage as the ultimate poverty fighter and family protector -- fights and protections that he is aggressively denying to all of the loving, tax-paying gay citizens with whom he shares a state, constitution, and supposed commitment to American ideals. How can any fair-minded citizen possibly rationalize this?!
Now of course the folks in Prichard's camp have framed gay people's unions as some sort of meteor out to destroy "traditional marriage," so Tom would surely say that his support for hetero ring fingers and antipathy towards gay people's favored metal bands (as in rings, not WhiteSnake) is logically consistent and in no way lacking in compassion. In fact, Prichard himself has accused same-sex marriage dilut[ing] the currency and the value of marriage, likening the push for civil equality too the subprime mortgage crisis. So coupling that with comments like the one where he said gays "live in conflict with how we are made," it's pretty safe to assume that Mr. P. doesn't put gays in the realm of marital possibility. However, if one looks behind the over-the-top spin and unplugs the talking point machine, there is simply no way to both exalt marriage as the civil government institution that most fully protects families while at the same time denigrating that very same institution when it's too genitalia-matched for a certain person's (typically faith-based) liking. There just isn't. The duality is, at best, shortsighted; at worst, wantonly cruel. The fight to deny civil marriage to certain kinds of couples is, at best, misguided; at worst, a pointed threat to certain Americans' quality of life in an era where everyone's bottom line is shaky to begin with.
*Oh, and let's not forget all of the unbelievably eye-opening stuff that Prichard and his MFC staffers have said/written in order to delay and deny marriage equality for same-sex couples. Perhaps more than any other state group, MFC has proven that their fight goes way beyond marriage and right into the arena of generalized animus:
comments powered by Disqus