Brooke Baldwin talks to Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, who argues that children need the development aspects of growing up in a traditional family with a mother and a father.
Tony Perkins needs to address his own issues ie; his need to impose his ideas, religion etc. on everyone. I would like to know where he does his research on "Social Studies". I would also like to know what medical or scientific degrees he has and the name of the medical Doctor or Scientist that is on the paper that he refers to about children and gay parents. You can't make statements unless your research backs it up. It does not sound to me like he has done any research at all. Anytime you refer to the Bible to suit your own agenda then you better be willing to follow it from front to back. There is nothing worse than a hypocrite. A prescription doesn't work if you take only the pills that taste good. There comes a time when you need to take responsibility for your own opinions.
I followed your interview with Tony Perkins this afternoon as I took a break from work to eat lunch. I am not sure what reporting took place during this interview but I was taken back by your line of questioning. I am not sure if CNN shares your view on this issue but it was VERY clear that you had an agenda to grill Mr. Perkins on live television. As a public viewer and voter in this country it is very disconcerting to watch a reporter take a "personal" position on what is a very "polarizing" and debatable topic. When you chose to "personalize" your interview with Mr. Perkins by asking him if he had ever been to a home where two homosexuals lived (and raised a child) your credibility in the interview was lost. I generally watch CNN during the day to catch up on news or maybe watch some of the pundits discuss politics but I am noticing a scary trend as of lately. It appears that CNN, much like that of FOX or MS NBC has chosen to choose sides in the public debate as well. This trend has a slippery slope and will continue to mar the fabric of our social and political lives. When Americans, like myself, get tired of watching a gifted reporter sell out to the mainstream media we will all do whats best for America...we will turn our televisions off and resume control over our political and social lives.
Why is Mr. Perkins quoting from a study that shows the difference between single parent homes and homes with two parents. It has nothing to do with when a child has two Mom's or two Dad's. Mr. Perkins, it is an abomination to lie, and to continue to use that example is definitely misleading and lying.
Thnak you Ms. Baldwin for bringing some credibilty back to the newsroom. By the way CNN your description of this should read:
Brooke Baldwin talks to Tony Perkins, President of the Southern Law Poverty designated hate grout the Family Research Council, who argues
FULL DISCLOSURE shows journalistic integrity.
Brooke, this was a good interview. Your questions were more challenging than you could ask. Let me tell you his entire councils weakness: they can NOT fully support our Constitution, as their bible comes before the Constitution. Even the Oath for a USA soldier requires they put the Constitution before their god(s). So when you question, he will make sure you never get to the area where he has to state the constitution of equality comes second. What do we call people openly trying to break our constitution? As he stated, his Council is trying to set public policy, and yet, he and the council are reverently against the equality of the constitution and would undue if possible. There was a historical time when Christianity ruled above secular law, it was called the Dark Ages and the Inquisition. Thus, I am just suggesting, the meat of his weakness, he can not be the level of citizen as you or more, he does not believe in the USA, but, a theocracy to replace it. I think you touched on it, because he responded that they were trying to make public policy, he did not say he wanted constitution equality for all, you were almost there.
I think we all know why. Sweet dreams, Tony.
Thank you for the interview. You asked all the right questions and came back with the facts. Thanks for making sure that Mr. Perkins looks like what he is a hateful person who is the head of a certified hate group according to the SPLC.
Thanks again for standing up for the truth.
I think Mr. Perkins has a right to voice his opinion and defend traditional marriage. That doesn't mean he is bothered by or hates homosexuals. If you defend gay marriage, I would not ask you, "Why do heterosexuals bother you so much?".
Great in interview – amazing how bullies look surprised when somebody stands up to them.
On the point about Massachusetts, I wanted to rebut something Perkins tried to imply. You were correct to state that the divorce rate has declined since we legalized gay marriage – in fact, the divorce rate in Massachusetts hasn't been this low since before WWII. You read that right: we're old school here. I should add, it started out as one of the lowest in the country, and has just gotten better – we happen to believe in marriage and family here, have done so for a long time.
What I wanted to rebut was Perkins response: "the marriage rate has fallen ever since No Fault Divorce", and ducking the question around why the divorce rate has plummeted ever since we stopped the bigotry. The fact is, marriage has been declining for a long time – or, rather, it's been fluctuating, and being redefined by trends on society, and events around the globe. Consider this quote from a study on marriage in Massachusetts: "The decline in the marriage rate seems to indicate that permanents single life, or at least a postponement of marriage, is becoming more general in Massachusetts" (Publications of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 4, No. 32, Dec., 1895). No, that wasn't a typo. 1895.
Thank you for the amazing intereview. You challenged his false statements more than any other TV interviewer. You can take the arguments apart of these homophobes very easily and you did so more than any other reporter. Their argument is based solely on fear, distortions and prejudice. The zealots don't have a single good argument and you made a great first step toward exposing this fact.
Gay activists don't want equality, they want extra benefits granted them. They have the SAME rights that every other male and female in this country, the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. It isn't about rights, it's about activism and pushing the moral boundaries of this society in which the act of homosexuality has traditionally been viewed as unnatural and even "wrong" behavior.
US citizens MUST make a stand for our traditional values or risk losing our country's long-standing and well-proven moral foundation. Despite the rhetoric of activists, there is NO shame at all in believing the act of homosexuality is wrong and that one has the right and duty to vote against it becoming a societal norm. Despite the rhetoric, you are NOT a bigot for believing the act of homosexuality is wrong. In fact, gay activists are the ones who should be generally ashamed of their overblown rhetoric. Many of these activists are the very epitome of the bigotry they denounce in people of religion and in attempting to deny them their RIGHTS to majority vote via gay activist judges. SHAME on gay activists!
There is no 3rd sex. There is only male and female. There is nothing except the act of having homosexual sex that defines homosexuals any different than other males and females. This is NOTHING on which to base law.
There are many who care about gay people in their lives but still do not approve of gay marriage or believe in the extra benefits desired by gay people.
Gay activists' obvious plans are to "wear you out" until they get the extra benefits they desire. Don't allow it.
Click here to access transcripts from recent shows.