FRC’s Tony Perkins: We’ll See How Gays Have Destroyed The Military In About 2034

Has America’s military completely collapsed in the first year after repeal? Of course not–our service members are too professional to let that to happen.

But these challenges are only a non-story because the media won’t tell the story. We need only look at no-fault divorce in the 1970s to recognize that radical shifts in public policy take decades to fully manifest. No one can honestly deny the impact that no-fault divorce has had on children and the institution of the family. Within 20 years of the introduction of no-fault divorce, we saw the acceleration of cohabitation, single-parent homes, and unintended pregnancies. By the time Americans recognized their mistake, it was too late.

Let’s hope the same isn’t true for our brave men and women in uniform.”

– Family Research Council head Tony Perkins, warning of the coming disaster, in a press release.

h/t: Joe.My.God

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #gayagenda #random stories and more


  • MikeE

    Let’s see, a man with absolutely NO training or special knowledge about military matters is making a statement about the effects of the repeal of DADT? Yes, he is juet sooooooooooo relevant.

    As for his comment regarding no fault divorce: it’s really funny, because I NEVER hear these people propose that divorce be banned/outlawed. What a two-faced hypocrite.

  • Wendy

    Why should he care, really?? He’ll likely be DEAD by then!

  • Atomicrob

    It’s no wonder the Southern Poverty Law center designated the FRC a hate group. Perkins denegrates the LGBT community on a daily basis. Now, he’s issuing a press release to comment on his own thoughts.

  • alexoloughlin

    Sorry Perkins, but Holland lifted the ban in the 70s, followed by a large number of other countries. Canada and Australia have allowed it since 1992 (20 years ago), the UK for over 12 years, you jackass. Once again, another dumbass right wing republican ignoring the facts.

  • Dumdum

    Oh sure it’s all fun and games until somebody loses an eye.

  • Gigi Gee

    I look forward to 2034. Hopefully by then Perkins and the rest of his ilk will be but distant memories.

  • niles

    It’s awesome to know that one’s very presence will cause the utter destruction of civilization as we know it. Awesome.

  • the other Greg

    @niles: Yeah, I LOVE destroying civilization! Makes me feel like Godzilla!

    Anyway, don’t these people want things to get really, really bad so that Jesus will come back?

  • Mjl-428

    @MikeE: I think that every time.

    can someone explain to me how you can compare allowing Gays to serve openly in the military to no-fault divorce?

    wouldn’t allowing gays to serve openly be more in line with allowing other racial minorities to serve in the military instead? or did he omit that because he didn’t wanna sound like a racist?

  • Dan Avery

    What Perkins is doing is called “moving the goalposts”: When you’re argument proves false, you just change your facts to keep it valid. Oh the world was never supposed to end in 2012—it’s going to end in 2014!

  • Mjl-428

    @Dan Avery: just like that old priest who kept predicting that the world would end last year and moving it back every few months saying he got it wrong? and still does it to this day?

  • Musk

    And if we haven’t destroyed the military by 2034, take another look in 2134 and see if we’ve destroyed the military. And if we still haven’t, revisit this issue every 200-300 years to see if we’ve destroyed the military yet. I mean we’re never on time anyway, so just be patient. I going to go out on a limb right now and predict that by 3418 we will have destroyed the military. How do you like them apples, Tony?

  • hyhybt

    If open service causes unintended pregnancies, maybe it *was* a mistake :)

  • MK Ultra

    In 2034, Tony Perkins will be remembered by no one. The only association he will have with history is being looked back on as a hate group leader, no different than how we view the KKK today. He’ ll be seen as a monster while gays will be fully accepted in society.

  • Mjl-428

    @Dan Avery: hey how come my comment is awaiting moderation?

  • Little-Kiwi

    Since 1992 LGBT citizens have been allowed to serve openly in the Canadian military. Not just gays and lesbians, but our trans brothers and sisters. That’s 20 years for those who can’t do math.

    And there’s no problem. Why? Because people who have the passion to serve their country tend to care more about serving their country than about hating LGBT people.

  • joshames

    Yes Tony, because trapping people in terrible marriages for life is a great thing. It was such a mistake to let people live their lives as they see fit.

  • Charli Girl

    Omg too funny!!!

  • hf2hvit

    Of course, Mr. gayface Perkins doesn’t address any of the military heterosexual sex scandals currently under inveestigation because he’s too obsessed with homosexulaity.

  • murphy0071

    Tony Perks needs to visit a fisting club and lay back and enjoy his hatred.

  • gaym50ish

    I wonder if he realizes our “brave men and women in uniform” have ALWAYS included gays. Repealing DADT simply freed them to be open about it.

    Rape of women in the services is a FAR greater problem than any imagined consequences of gays serving openly. And yet the Pentagon lifted a ban on women serving on submarines without a whiff of objection. No endless studies. No public debate. No protestations about unit cohesion or the risks to women serving alongside horny men. No legislation, and no congressional hearings detailing the sexual harassment of women that goes on every day in military units. Just an announcement by the Navy brass, and the policy was changed.

  • hyhybt

    @Mjl-428: The comparison runs thus:

    Most people see (or saw) both no-fault divorce (as opposed to having to prove grounds in order to get one) and open service as either improvements or as essentially harmless. **In Tony Perkins’ mind** both are not only bad things in and of themselves but will (or did) lead to (to him) other, worse consequences.

    To the extent that the comparison is between things as they exist in his head, it’s valid. The trouble, as always when dealing with him, is that the world as it appears inside his head bears so little resemblance to that outside it.

Comments are closed.