Sen. Al Franken Grills Focus On The Family's Tom Minnery Over Questionable DOMA Research

Focus On The Family, the Colorado Springs based vanguard of the Christian right, has long been known to advance the conservative agenda. The organization's advocacy group, CitizenLink, frequently appears before Congress. Such was the case Thursday when Tom Minnery, the group's executive director, testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Senator Al Franken (D-Minn.), one of the co-sponsors of the repeal effort, took issue with Minnery's interpretation of what constitutes a "nuclear family," and wasn't afraid to say it.

Reached for response, the author of the study Minnery cites told Politico, "Sen. Franken is right."

Watch Franken disagree in a big way:

Comments

[whirlybird]

12:33 PM on 07/30/2011

I love Congress folks who actually do their research...just love 'em. Go, Al, go!

[sugarpops]

03:58 PM on 07/28/2011

It still amazes me that Minnesota elected Senator Al Franken and Rep. Michele Bachmann.
You rock Al!!

[1differentdrummer]

03:19 AM on 07/29/2011

It is amazing, isn't it? Well, they get double their money's worth from Al but they don't get half their money's worth from Michelle.

[TarzanaGirl]

05:23 PM on 09/19/2011

What's even more amazing is that they elected a well-known comedian (Franken) to be the serious senator, and a shameless hate-monger (Bachmann) to be the comedienne (?)

[zelduh]

06:46 PM on 07/26/2011

I love Al Franken!

[juzcuz]

11:15 AM on 07/26/2011

Franken was brilliant! Focus on Family (ha-ha) are bigoted blockheads. Watched the entire 'show' and what a joke those conservative hate-mongerers are!! Truly embarrassing to see Focus in the works. Ugh.

[arnlws67]

03:30 PM on 07/25/2011

Three cheers for Senator Franken!

[celticjag]

02:12 PM on 07/25/2011

I haven't read all the comments, but I have reviewed the National Health Interview Survey and it breaks down families into seven categories. The first is the nuclear family and it is defined as follows. "A nuclear family consists of one or more children living with two parents who are married to one another and are each biological or adoptive parents to all children in the family." Seeing that the survey was compilied from 2001 to 2007 and that Massachusetts was the only state where same-sex marriage was legal during this time frame, it seems that the nuclear family was defined as a mother and father.

[Set to Jet]

06:54 PM on 07/26/2011

What weight to you give to the fact that the author of the study said that Frankin's interpretation was correct?

[celticjag]

02:41 PM on 07/27/2011

I would suggest that the "author" read the study that she has lent her name to. There are seven categories of defined families, please read the definition of the nuclear family.

[onwisconsin]

12:36 PM on 07/25/2011

It's between Al Franken and Bernie Sanders for my favorite senator.

[coloagnt]

02:35 PM on 07/24/2011

Al Franken ROCKS.

[LMPE]

12:26 AM on 07/24/2011

You tell 'em, Al!

[joemondo]

06:47 PM on 07/23/2011

And for those who didn't see it, when Pat Leahy got to Minnery, Minnery had to admit that DOMA hurts the children of married same sex couples.

[serif-m]

07:31 AM on 07/24/2011

What he admitted was that a child with two married parents has a better financial position than a child without that arrangement. There was no discussion about "hurting" children, and finances are not the only consideration in evaluating such a topic. You're distorting the actual discussion.

[joemondo]

09:23 AM on 07/24/2011

No distortion at all.

If the law results in a child of one married couple being more disadvantaged than the child of another married couple, the law is hurting the children of the first group.

[brainsurgery1]

05:29 PM on 07/23/2011

Heterosexual married couples have not set a very high bar for setting standards of any kind, including children's safety from violence, neglect, molestation. Yet the right to marry, some argue, is reserved only fir them. Divorce rates are higher than ever and every day we hear news of atrocities committed by heterosexuals upon their family members. And a collateral issue of all those divorces is that Social Seciriry is used to subsidize the failure of heterosexual husbands to remain faithful, in many cases, to their wives after marriages of ten years. These wives left in a financial desert by these heterosexual males are then eligible to receive, if they so choose, one- half of the ex heterosexual husband's benefits, without diminishing the benefits ultimately paid to the family -abandoning heterosexual male. This is an unjustifiable underwriting of the heterosexual males' lifestyle. Who wrote these laws? Heterosexual males.

[StevenKeirstead]

07:55 PM on 07/23/2011

Mostly right, except that divorce rates have been falling since the 1980s. Curiously divorce rates are higher among fundamentalist Christians than people of other faiths or no faith, and the rates are also highest in states that are most strongly opposed to same sex marriage, but lowest in Massachusetts!

[Deaconess]

08:02 PM on 07/23/2011

Because if you really follow the teachings of fundamentalism, you will so confused that you cannot function.

[serif-m]

07:41 AM on 07/24/2011

Are you referring to the Barna study? Because you should probably re-read it: http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/15-familykids/42-new-marriage-and-divorce-statistics-released

[Black Avenger]

05:13 PM on 07/23/2011

-------------------------------------------

Franken: "Isn't it true that a same-sex family would fall under definition of a nuclear family?"

Minnery: "I would think that where the study says nuclear family it means husband and wife."

Franken:" It doesn't ... and I frankly, don't see how we can trust the rest of your testimony, if you are reading studies this way."

---------------------------------------------------

In other words -- according to Sen. Franken -- in every instance of the word "nuclear family" in the study, its meaning is traditional parents AND same-sex parents.

Well, that's absurd on its face.

It not only redefines language, it promotes the idea that anyone unaware of this new definition is a homophobe who can't be trusted. It's Double-Think straight out of Orwell:

---------------------------------------------------

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

---------------------------------------------------

The study didn't specifically mention same-sex parents because they were not included in it. The author of the study realizing this oversight covered it up by saying same-sex parents are nuclear parents. Not smart, but under the pressure to be politically correct we should expect to see more of this kind of waffling.

Franken's problem is he was going for a "gotcha" rather than substance. He was panning the crowd for laughs.

In other words, although he's now a senator, Al Franken still a clown at heart.

[joemondo]

05:51 PM on 07/23/2011

"In other words -- according to Sen. Franken -- in every instance of the word "nuclear family" in the study, its meaning is traditiona­l parents AND same-sex parents."

Incorrect. Senator Franken corrects Minnery's assumption. And proved Minnery didn't know what the study actually said.

"The study didn't specifical­ly mention same-sex parents because they were not included in it."

If that's true, then Minnery lied about it anyway because then no conclusion about same sex couples can be drawn.

[js0860]

06:16 PM on 07/23/2011

Interesting logic. Your quest to "normalize" same sex parents doesn't change history or is considered the "norm".

And now for some rigorous honesty: I am for gay marriage (one of the few Republicans that is, I guess), and I read things from my perspective as much as the other guy. I have no problem with my gay friends adopting. They are some of the best people that I know. Your assertion, however, is a huge stretch. Minnery's assumption is valid.

[Shane Ricks]

09:09 PM on 07/23/2011

"The study didn't specifical­ly mention same-sex parents because they were not included in it."

Unless you were part of the study then you have no basis for this information. That is seriously lacking in substance in my opinion. The significance of the nuclear family as an accurate representation of the family unit has been in question since the early 90s. So unless you have some definite evidence that the author and those involved in this study have been out of touch with sociology and familial studies since the 90s then your statement is highly suspect.

And considering your emotional statements it is likely that you have no real basis for your comment other than your own bias and dislike of Al Franken and this was an attempt to give authority to your insult.

[Flyingpigs]

04:55 PM on 07/23/2011

Al Franken clearly shows how the Christian Right Tea Bagg'n GOP distort and manufacture studies for their own agenda of their version of totalitarianism... Perhaps a V for Vendetta would be appropriate...

[TBull]

04:47 PM on 07/23/2011

What is the statute of limitations for voter fraud? Until congress undertakes a full and fair investigation of Franken's election, nothing he says it does can or should be taken seriously.

[chaapai]

11:09 PM on 07/23/2011

Boo Hoo! They'll get to it right after they investigate the election fraud that Got GWB appointed president.

[JudgeMoonbox]

11:57 PM on 07/23/2011

"What is the statute of limitation­s for voter fraud? Until congress undertakes a full and fair investigat­ion of Franken's election, nothing he says it does can or should be taken seriously."

The Minnesota recount was the most public, most transparent venture of the sort; and you think it was inadequate? I suspect your definition of voter fraud is when eligible voters cast the votes--one per person--to which they are entitled for a candidate you consider politically incorrect.

Nothing you say can or should be taken seriously.

[joemondo]

04:35 PM on 07/23/2011

No matter how you slice it, FoF was WRONG in saying the study said children in hetero married couples far better than children in same sex married couples.

If gay married couples were included in the married set, FoF was wrong.

If gay married couples were not included in the married set, FoF was wrong, because no conclusions about gay vs non gay married parents could be drawn.

Either way, FoF wrongly tried to use a serious research study to bolster their claims. The fact is that Minnery either lied about the study's definition of nuclear family, or was just plain clueless about what it said - and either way, the only reasonable conclusion is that Minnery can't be taken seriously.