Home > Postcards from the Lege > Archives > 2005 > June > 14 > Entry
Perry issues reply on gay marriage comments
Gov. Rick Perry has drafted a reply to some 140 e-mails sent to him that were critical of his June 5 response to a reporter’s query in Fort Worth about what he would say to gay veterans wishing to wed upon returning from Iraq.
At the event, Perry said he’d suggest they settle in other states where laws do not ban marriage as in Texas.
His written reply to the criticism says: “Please note that Governor Perry has asked no one to leave this state. He said those seeking a gay marriage may find other states more receptive than Texas, but whether to leave Texas to pursue such an arrangement would be their choice. The governor’s comment was in direct response to a reporter’s question. The question asked pertained specifically to gay war veterans returning home and what they might think of a state not allowing them to marry.
“The governor will welcome back to Texas any veteran who has served this nation with distinction.
“Governor Perry respects the viewpoints of others, but he also believes that the vast majority of Texans agree with him that marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.”
Permalink | Comments (6) | Categories: Governor
Comments
Click here to report comment abuse.
By Lon
June 21, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this
Perry will continue to find that focusing his message to appeal to the far right wing of his party will hurt him. If not in the primary, it will certainly leave him vulnerable in November, 06. Thank God, a new day and a new leader is coming for Texas!
By Glen E. Hargis
June 22, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this
As a Republican since Eisenhower's first election bid, a prtizan of individual rights, and a (moderately) good Christian (DOC, same church 50+ years) I must say I agree with Gov. Perry that marriage is a sacrament of the church. As such, it should be up to individual churches (theist, Free-Thinker, or whatever) to say who should be married in their congregations. Governments have no more business ruling which adult couples can or can't marry any more than they can rule how, when, and by whom communion can be taken.
Goverment has an interest in enforcing contracts of marriage, just as it does all other contracts. It does not have an interest in decreeing the sex of the contract partners.
Glen E. Hargis
By Kathy Boyd
June 23, 2005 9:09 PM | Link to this
Governor Perry's remarks in answer to the reporter's question were right on the mark!
Lon certainly has a right to his say and he also is free to move to another state after Nov. 2006! His prediction of a "new day and a new leader" is way premature and I might add, waaaaaay off base! Keep dreaming, Lon.
By Chris
June 24, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this
The non-individual who would scrap any individual in an effort to save ANY institution is actually from the bottom of the humanity HEAP! Even that layer should not be scrapped!
We humans have a way of not thinking through our thoughts and not seeking more information from more thoughtful humans.
Faithfulness to anything is more powerful than mere lipservice.
Institutions are manmade.
Marriage vows, etc. are taken so lightly in reality that it seems useless in any relationship...except in the legal sense. The phrase "hanging by a
thread" may best describe the importance of marriage. Who believes it is necessary to have any outward ratification of a sincere relationship in order for that relationship to thrive? As I understand it, our society has decided that common law (the actual practice of a continuous relationship that mimics "marriage") marriages can only be dissolved (when the partners wish) with legal means.
The faithfulness of two people who are not disturbing other unions should be rewarded by equal access to legal relationships and all its benefits and deterrents. If it takes a marriage of worldly magnitude...so be it. Render unto the government what it requires and unto God what God requires.
Humans come in all assortments. I believe God rewards faithfulness to each other no matter what man tries. There are people who would put themselves on the judgment seat to say who can be rewarded along with everyone else, based on their judgment of what is actually going on in their homes. Maybe some same-sex couples don't actually have sex. That happens in heterosexual couples. There are religions who only believe in having sex for the purpose of procreation...and stop after having one or two children. Belittling any person for their faithfulness to another person who is not harming or in any way taking advantage of another person, should not be tolerated in the name of SAVING marriage or any other institution. The preservation of our natural world is important but not more so than survival of humans and healthy psyche.
By debra crosby
June 30, 2005 6:58 AM | Link to this
Gov. Perry's reply does nothing to make up for what he said. It was a ridiculous, callous comment from an equally ridiculous individual. The whole gay marriage thing boils down to sex. People who are afraid of gay marriage are afraid of gay people, bottom line. The institution of marriage in our society "sacred"? Don't make me laugh. With a divorce rate of about 50% - I don't think so! There are gay couples I know whose relationships are much more stable and caring than those of many of my heterosexual friends (and I am heterosexual, by the way!). The governor's comments rose a firestorm all around the country -- and made me embarrassed to be a Texan (as if GW weren't enough!) Ignorance, thy name is Perry.
By John Coffey in Garland
June 30, 2005 11:12 AM | Link to this
I am closest in agreeing with the comments by Glen E. Hargis, including that "Governments have no more business ruling which adult couples can or can’t marry any more than they can rule how, when, and by whom communion can be taken." But I don't agree that Gov. Perry had even the right to speak as he did, which made it sound his view should be universally enforced on the whole state of Texas.
I'm a Free-Thinker, pro-Democrat and strongly pro-Constitution.