2012 Election | Brian Brown | Gay Marriage | News | NOM

Rick Perry Signs NOM Pledge Opposing Same-Sex Marriage


Rick Perry has joined Michele Bachmann (above), Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney in signing an anti-gay marriage pledge drawn up by the National Organization for Marriage.

Perry In signing the pledge candidates promise to:

Support and send to the states a federal marriage amendment defining marriage as one man and one woman; Defend DOMA in court; Appoint judges and an attorney general who will respect the original meaning of the Constitution; Appoint a presidential commission to investigate harassment of traditional marriage supporters; Support legislation that would return to the people of D.C. their right to vote for marriage.

NOM President Brian Brown issued the following statement:

"Kudos to Gov. Rick Perry for making it clear: he's a marriage champion! The purpose of NOM's Marriage Pledge is to move from vague values statements to concrete actions to protect marriage. Gov. Perry joins Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum as a signer of NOM Marriage Pledge.  By doing so, Perry makes crystal clear that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, gay marriage is going to be a bigger issue in 2012 than it was in 2008, because the difference between the GOP nominee and Pres. Obama is going to be large and clear.  We look forward to demonstrating that being for marriage is a winning position for a presidential candidate."

The AP notes: "Perry had said that though he doesn't support gay marriage personally, it is a states' rights issue. He even suggested New York's decision to legalize it was therefore fine with him."

Perry later told hate group leader Tony Perkins: “I probably needed to add a few words after that ‘it’s fine with me,’ and that it’s fine with me that a state is using their sovereign rights to decide an issue. Obviously gay marriage is not fine with me. My stance hasn’t changed.”

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. So how long before GOProud sets up a meeting with this clown like it did with Bachmann?

    Posted by: Butch | Aug 26, 2011 12:57:28 PM

  2. Wouldn't it just be deliciously ironic if this became the LOSING position for the Republican candidate?

    Posted by: Eddie in OKC | Aug 26, 2011 1:02:54 PM

  3. i would think that signing such pledges would be a direct conflict with upholding the oath of office, therefore negating and disqualifying them from holding the highest office in the land.

    Posted by: dan | Aug 26, 2011 1:16:27 PM

  4. "it’s fine with me that a state is using their sovereign rights to decide an issue"

    is in direct conflict with the pledge's 1st requirement:

    "One, support sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification."

    Which is it, Perry?

    Posted by: Landon | Aug 26, 2011 1:33:46 PM

  5. Yay! This is creating jobs!

    Posted by: John in Houston | Aug 26, 2011 1:36:45 PM

  6. the repuks don't care about jobs or the economy only whom is sleeping with. considering their track record both they are in deep sh-t.

    Posted by: walter | Aug 26, 2011 2:09:45 PM

  7. This is a hate pledge. The more we say it, the more likely the media will repeat it (a la "Pray Away the Gay").

    The man has just pledged to a special interest group that he will work, as president, to deny basic human rights and full equality to an entire class of American citizens.

    If we fail to make this his Achilles heel, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

    Posted by: Trev | Aug 26, 2011 2:21:36 PM

  8. the general public that might vote for a cretin like Perry really don't care that much about LGBT people...it's not a deal breaker for them. He can be as homophobic as he likes...in fact look at the bunch of them...being anti-gay is not going to lose any GOP front runner the nomination. Let's get real here and realize the only option, whether you are happy with him or not, is Obama. There isn't a primary to find a new democrat so your choice, Ladies and Germs is quite clear. Virulently homophobic, anti-women, anti-immigrant racist, anti government, supporter of the rich to the detriminent of everyone else, ill educated, foul mouthed, D grade student, half wit...or the suave ninja Black Assasin, Osama killing, gay friendly, cool headed, stay out of women's reproductive rights, safe world, Nobel peace prize winner..who has a brain and is basically loved the world over.

    Posted by: paul | Aug 26, 2011 2:38:34 PM

  9. Raise your hand if you're surprised. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? ...

    Posted by: MikeMick | Aug 26, 2011 2:49:07 PM

  10. This may not hurt them in the GOP nomination, but it could affect the general election come November 2012. If this issue is debated, and I can certainly imagine that it will be, then it could turn off some folk. Do people really want a bigot in the White House?

    Posted by: Married in MA | Aug 26, 2011 2:52:21 PM

  11. @paul Don't go building Obama up to be better than he is. More often than not he just barely stops short of completely going along with Republican plans. He never makes the case for the progressive positions he's supposed to represent, gave up on getting rid of the Bush tax cuts, gave up on actual financial regulation, gave up on the public option, dragged his feet on gay rights issues, etc

    Don't get me wrong, I'm still voting for him. He's not nearly as bad as the Republicans, but that doesn't mean he's great or even good. Just not insane.

    Posted by: ravewulf | Aug 26, 2011 2:52:29 PM

  12. I love that No. 5 wants DC residents to have the ability to vote on gay marriage and yet it says nothing about actually giving DC residents a vote in the Congress. Cause you know...priorities.

    Posted by: Don | Aug 26, 2011 2:58:15 PM

  13. read my lips -- i don't care -- wouldn't vote for these folks ever anyway! They are preaching to the choir -- president is about appealing to the Middle!

    Posted by: David B. | Aug 26, 2011 3:31:54 PM

  14. Signing this document should disqualify you from being president. First, it proposes a Constitutional admendment banning SSM, then it says it will allow DC residents to vote on SSM. So which is it? People don't get to vote on Constitutional amendments.

    No one stupid enough to not understand the contradiction should be allowed to run for president.

    Posted by: Laura | Aug 26, 2011 3:34:46 PM

  15. It reminds me when people are asking why Hitler was able to get to power when it was clear in the very beginning that he had an antisemitic agenda.

    Posted by: Peter | Aug 26, 2011 4:18:33 PM

  16. I know our country has always been widely intolerant of LGBT-related issues, but this still makes me sad.

    Posted by: saucykitty | Aug 26, 2011 5:51:21 PM

  17. If I were Obama, this would be GREAT news for me! I would have my campaign hit these thugs hard on the fact that they've pledged their authority to enforcing the private views of a specific, politically unaccountable group. No-one elected president is allowed to do that. So I would argue in my campaign trips that Rick Perry and anyone who has signed this pledge cannot be put in the White House. The president has only ONE pledge: to uphold the constitution of the United States (which, for those that have forgotten, includes equal protection clauses).

    Posted by: Mark | Aug 26, 2011 6:10:31 PM

  18. I can't believe that not one of these candidates knows that the President has no role in sending constitutional amendments to the states. That is a power strictly given to Congress, or to the states themselves if they call for a constitutional convention. In my mind, if these candidates do not know the process of amending the Constitution, they are not qualified to be President.

    Posted by: John M | Aug 26, 2011 6:20:56 PM

  19. Bisexual Rick.

    Posted by: jason | Aug 26, 2011 7:13:13 PM

  20. This is basically them turning to our entire community and yelling in our face: "I AM YOUR ENEMY."

    Heard ya loud and clear.

    Posted by: JeffRob | Aug 26, 2011 7:15:34 PM

  21. It's been in local papers that RIck Perry's gay liaisons played a role in his divorce. Just our luck that he would fool around with one of those rare homos who can keep his mouth shut.

    Come out, come out wherever you are. And let's hope there's a well placed bit of DNA.

    Posted by: Rob | Aug 26, 2011 8:04:26 PM

  22. When (2) men...or (2) women...can concieve a child...I will rethink my opion...until then Marriage is as GOD Intended...between a man & a woman...

    Posted by: chris | Aug 26, 2011 9:43:07 PM

  23. @CHRIS are you for real? Or is that sarcasm? If you are really going to use the "marriage is for procreation" lame argument, this is the wrong forum for you to be in, lol.

    By the way, while you are at it, tell GOD, that he/she/it can kiss my ass.

    Posted by: gayalltheway | Aug 26, 2011 10:59:34 PM

  24. Perry is just another nut running for the Republican party. With on going wars, the economy failing, the marriage of small minority of people is all the Republican party can focus on? America is now seeing just how out of touch the Republican party has become.

    Posted by: John Bartlett | Aug 26, 2011 11:25:59 PM

  25. I live in El Paso, Texas. Believe me, if this sphincter becomes president, the U.S. will enter a very dark and regressive period. Mark my words.

    Posted by: Joshua | Aug 26, 2011 11:48:46 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Same-Sex Marriage-Hating Florida Teacher Jerry Buell Talks to TMZ, Won't Discuss Homosexuality: VIDEO« «