Perkins: Gay Rights is About Population Control

Tony Perkins, the uber-bigot who runs the Family Research Council, agreed with a caller on his show that gay rights is just a plot to implement population control and reduce the size of the human race. This argument always cracks me up. Do they think that if we don’t punish and discriminate against gay people, straight people are going to stop having kids?

A listener called in to tell the Family Research Council president that he thinks the reason homosexuality is “promoted is because it doesn’t lead to reproduction and that’s why it’s promoted. There’s this anti-life agenda, there’s a total anti-human, anti-life, human beings are a virus, type of mentality.”

Perkins responded that the caller was “absolutely correct,” saying that he once wrote about how “climate change alarmists and those who are pushing population control” actually “promote homosexuality” because “there’s no procreation there.”

“They go crazy, they deny it but the evidence is there, it’s footnoted in my book.”

Well, if it’s footnoted then I guess it can’t be the moronic argument that it seems to be.

[soundcloud url=”https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/174612445″ params=”color=ff5500″ width=”100%” height=”166″ iframe=”true” /]

"Just for your information, the economic system used in the former so-called socialist/communist countries such ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."
"Socialism describes the idea that the purpose of government is to promote the equality of ..."

Christian Right Still Oblivious to Their ..."
"It's not a strategic resource. The US, and Russia, both have plenty of uranium, and ..."

Gorka Lies About Clinton and Uranium ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • colnago80

    A listener called in to tell the Family Research Council president that he thinks the reason homosexuality is “promoted is because it doesn’t lead to reproduction

    Mary Cheney might beg to differ with this assertion.

  • reddiaperbaby1942

    If this were true, it wouldn’t be a bad thing. One of the worst threats to the health of the planet is the explosively growing human population, spreading across the globe at the expense of many other species.

    But these guys still have an Old Testament mentality: go forth and increase and populate the earth, for all other species were created for your benefit alone.

  • Michael Heath

    Ed reports:

    . . . gay rights is just a plot to implement population control and reduce the size of the human race.

    Wouldn’t the intuitive hypothesis suggest that increasing the population of people whose marriage rights are protected lead to a marginal increase in the number of children? Other factors impacted by the protection of gay people’s marriage rights may not yield such a conclusion, but that seems to me to be the most compelling default speculation without benefit of empirical research.

    We see anecdotal evidence this is true when we observe gay couples adopting or arranging for planned pregnancies where the couple are the parents.

    I didn’t attempt to discover Tony Perkin’s footnoted source for the same reason I rarely do research on any known liar’s assertion. It’s a waste of one’s time to presume a liar’s telling the truth.

  • abb3w

    Haldeman’s Forever War was not a documentary, and is not treated as a how-to manual.

    Unlike how Conservatives treat Orwell’s 1984.

  • Randomfactor

    The footnote reads: “*Not intended as a factual statement.”

  • raven

    “. . . gay rights is just a plot to implement population control and reduce the size of the human race.

    This is a common idea in the farther reaches of the luantic fringes. It’s an Alex Jones infowars class assertion. It’s all part of the New World Order, Illuminati, FEMA concentration camps, UN Agenda 21 complex.

    Dave Hodges the common sense show

    The enslavement of America has taken center stage and it is indeed called “America 2050“. The plan for America 2050 is to herd Americans into 11 megacities consisting of six million people each totaling 66 million people. Under this plan, there are no provisions for any other population developments. After reporting in the August 27, 2014 article, I thought the target date for the implementation of the megacities plan would be the year 2050 as indicated in the title of the organization which is behind the planning of this concept (the article can read here).

    316,000,000 million Americans will change to 66,000,000 megacity dwellers which equals

    250,000,000 missing Americans!

    I’d be careful if you want to read more. These guys are so far out that you really do want to wash your hands and reach for the brain bleach afterwords.

  • caseloweraz

    It could be argued that the push for gay rights is a demonic plan to provoke a backlash that leads to rampant population growth, which results in the collapse of civilization.

    Of course, such an argument is only slightly less ridiculous than the one Perkins makes.

  • John Pieret

    “climate change alarmists and those who are pushing population control” actually “promote homosexuality” because “there’s no procreation there.”

    Wait a minute! Didn’t the wingnuts just spend a year or more (wrongly) telling courts that gay people make bad parents? So, now they want them to procreate? Somebody here is confused … and I don’t think it’s me.

  • sugarfrosted

    Ooh I can play this game too. Gun rights are about population control. If you encourage people to carry guns they’ll be more likely to shoot people and statistically the people shot tend to be under 20.

  • theguy

    “anti-life agenda, there’s a total anti-human, anti-life, human beings are a virus, type of mentality”

    In reality, the dipshit calling in probably views gay people as a virus, and probably wants to snuff out their lives. The Fascist “Research” Council has advocated for the anti-gay law in Uganda that included the death penalty.

    And Mr. I-Paid-A-Small-Fortune-To-A-White-Supremacist Perkins wants to complain about “climate change alarmists,” but thinks he’s going to be persecuted for his rabid homophobia? Who’s the real alarmist here, chickenshit?

  • http://timgueguen.blogspot.com timgueguen

    I wonder how often Perkins has used the low numbers of gay people to make some claim or another. “A tiny minority of only 3 percent is forcing their perverted agenda on the Christian majority!” Yet apparently if we let gay people have equal rights suddenly there will be such a percentage of them that it could make population numbers drop.

  • raven

    Ooh I can play this game too. Gun rights are about population control.

    I’ll play.

    Being a GOP/Tea Partier is all about population control and reducing the birth rate!!!

    It really is, strangely enough. When the Bush/Cheney Great Recession hit, the US birth rate dropped. A lot. In fact, it went below replacement level. This is national suicide eventually.

    Economic conditions influence people’s reproductive choices. When times are hard, they have fewer children, not wanting them to starve or grow up in a GOP created wasteland.

    It has since recovered but not by much. If Tony Perkins was serious about saving the US from a future of roving herds of buffalo and wolves, he would hunt down Bush and Cheney and send them to one of the FEMA camps for safekeeping. Our safety.

  • raven

    Chart of the Week: Big drop in birth rate may be leveling off …

    www .pewresearch. org/…/chart-of-the-week-big-drop-in-birth-rate-may-…

    Sep 6, 2013 – The release of 2012 statistics on the U.S. birth rates indicates a flattening of the sharp decline in fertility that accompanied the Great Recession. …

    Them’s the facts. We now know fundie xianity is incompatible with sustainable human life.

  • howardhershey

    Wouldn’t the typical Christian Taliban solution to homosexuality (stoning them to death) lead to a population decrease?

  • yoav

    Economic conditions influence people’s reproductive choices.

    That’s why the teacups work so hard to make sure they take away those choices.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    All Perkins means is that homosexuality is a devilish urge that every Christian has to fight hard to resist.

  • lakitha tolbert

    #6 Raven: you wouldn’t believe how many, otherwise intelligent- seeming, African Americans believe that shit, though. There’s a tiny contingent of these Black conspiracy theorists at my job – the library.

    I don’t have a problem with them believing in conspiracies against Black people, so much as the kind of conspiracies they’re buying.

  • lorn

    I think that population control is not on the minds of pretty much anyone who support equal rights for GLBTs.

    That said, I really believe that in time population control, both in absolute numbers and dispersion, will become a major issue which we will have to wrestle with.

    The current assumptions is that everyone has a near absolute right to have as many children as they care to. Population imbalances are behind many wars. Lebanon was, many years ago, relatively peaceful after the various sides divided the land and government up between them. This changed as some groups, primarily fundamentalist Muslims in this case, had a much higher rate of reproduction and so a very much higher population in what was once a large enough and proportional share of space, power and control. Previously content with a share commensurate with their population they became dissatisfied as they became the majority of the population without access to the majority of the land and power.

    The same issue is playing out in the Israeli/Palestinian conflicts where division of the land and shifts in proportion of religious populations have shifted and failed to match economic, political, and military strength. Arafat’s call to use ‘wombs as weapons’ cast the conflict in a different light.

    Democracy has historically been at conflict with shifting populations and how to count them. “One man, one vote” is just a jumping of point and can be more an ideal than practical to apply in a less than ideal world. This was essentially the conflict around the 3/5 compromise. Southerners wanted to get full credit for each slave with each slave’s vote being cast by their owner. South Carolina, with more slaves than free, was egregiously overrepresented by northern

    reckoning.

    Population and the right to have children without any control will soon be a major issue. In some ways it already is but it is happening under various pseudonyms as conflicts over gender, tribe, religion, nations, migration.

    A good resource:

    Population Politics: The Choices that Shape Our Future

    By Virginia Abernethy

    http://books.google.com/books/about/Population_Politics.html?id=ccjZAAAAIAAJ

    One interesting aspects covered is that many of the most misogynist cultural and religious practices seem to be a result of a desire to limit population growth in areas unable to handle large populations. No excuse for current problems but it helps to know the history.

  • eric

    The idea that expanding gay rights will lead to lower population assumes that gay people in the US today get straight married, have straight sex, and kids. Which is kinda a silly assumption.

  • eric

    @18:

    I really believe that in time population control, both in absolute numbers and dispersion, will become a major issue which we will have to wrestle with.

    I disagree. What we see in western nations is that when you give women substantial equal rights, access to jobs, and easy access to birth control, the population growth rate drops ‘naturally’ to about 2.1, almost exactly where it needs to be, without any sort of top-down forcing policy. The solution to too-fast human population growth is simple in principle and requires no draconian China-like polcies: you just give women the ability to determine their own futures. Of course, implementing that solution in some places is going to be difficult, but even in those cases I think women’s rights might be a far better thing to push for than restrictions on number of children or what have you.

    This is one case where greater freedom creates the behavior we want, so no behavior-modification policies are really needed.