Skip to comments.Wall Street Journal Fails to Identify GOP-Bashing Author as Gay Activist
Posted on 09/15/2008 4:54:24 AM PDT by Kaslin
Note: Brian Fitzpatrick contributed to this article
This past Tuesday (Sept. 9), The Wall Street Journal allowed a homosexual activist to criticize GOP gay-bashing on the top of its op-ed page but didnt let readers know the author has a dog in the fight.
In his lengthy article, The GOP Should Kiss Gay-Bashing Goodbye, James Kirchick is identified simply as assistant editor of The New Republic. But Mr. Kirchick is not just another opinion writer.
Kirchick was named the 2007 Journalist of the Year by the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association (NLGJA). In 2006, he won the NLGJAs Excellence in Student Journalism Award. Last month, he spoke at a session on opinion writing at the NLGJA convention in Washington, D.C.
Kirchick argues that Republicans should embrace homosexual rights because the national mood favors legal recognition of gay couples, but more importantly, because the GOP is on the wrong [emphasis added] side of history. Opposition to the homosexual agenda is thus defined as bigotry.
Rather than focusing on the GOPs interests, Kirchick devotes most of his column to promoting the notion that homosexuals are an oppressed minority group, victimized specifically by the GOPs social conservatives. Backers of the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA), for example, depicted gays as a nefarious force. At the 1992 GOP convention, gays became the target of a divisive campaign aimed at stirring up the GOPs socially conservative base. Pat Buchanan and Dan Quayle joined in denigrating gay people. Happily, John McCain refuses to mak[e homosexuals] pariahs for political gain. Its unfortunate, however, that McCain did not go after his party for their cynical stigmatization of an entire class of citizens.
Portraying homosexuals as victims comes straight out of the gay activist playbook. Mr. Kirchick is following the approach laid out by public relations experts Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in their 1989 book After the Ball. One of their primary strategies is to define homosexuals as victims deprived of equal rights, in order to recast the debate over homosexuality as a civil rights issue rather than a moral issue.
If homosexuals are viewed as victims, then anyone who disagrees with the homosexual agenda can be smeared as a bigot. The next step, called jamming, is to make people feel ashamed for questioning the gay agenda in the first place. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld might have been satirizing jamming with his line, Not that theres anything wrong with that!
The emphasis on victimization conceals the moral radicalism of the gay rights movement. For example, Kirchick defines the proposed FMA as writing discrimination into the Constitution. Think about that for a moment. If that is true, then all marriage laws the world over joining male to female in matrimony are simply tools of bigotry rather than reflections of Gods natural, universal plan for humanity.
Mr. Kirchick gently chides John McCain for not criticizing his partys stigmatization of homosexuals, but thats exactly what Mr. Kirchick does to people who believe in traditional morality.
By redefining traditional morality as a form of bigotry, gay rights advocates are laying the foundation for the criminalization of Christianity, Judaism and every other religion that preaches Gods view of sexual morality. If that sounds radical, consider that 11 Christians were jailed in Philadelphia in October 2006 and five were charged with felonies related to their alleged hate crime of preaching out loud at a gay street festival.
Or you could ask the pastors in Canada, Great Britain and Sweden who have been hauled before human rights commissions and threatened with jail and fines simply for publicly discussing sexual morality. One English bishop was investigated for a hate crime for saying on the radio that he believes gays can change, because God loves homosexuals enough to heal them from their sin like any other sinner.
A few years ago, a lesbian attorney and gay rights leader told a gathering of scholars and journalists that the gay rights struggle is a zero sum game. Someone wins, someone loses. She was referring to Tufts Universitys decision to throw a Christian club off campus for not allowing an unrepentant gay to be a club leader. She finished with rare, brutal honesty: Gays win, Christians lose.
Mr. Kirchicks article is effectively a warning: Utter one word against the rising sexual dystopia and you will be called a bigot and banished from polite society. At the least, the Journal should have alerted its readers to his status as an activist on this issue.Robert H. Knight is Director, and Brian Fitzpatrick is Senior Editor, of the Culture and Media Institute, a division of the Media Research Center.
“Kirchick argues that Republicans should embrace homosexual rights”
No, we shouldn’t. As a conservative Republican and a Christian, I don’t hate gay people, but they shouldn’t be given special rights just because they’re gay. I believe, according to the Bible, that homosexuality is a sin and immoral. Now that doesn’t mean that we condemn the person; we just condemn what they do.
With that being said, homosexuality conflicts with the Judeo-Christian values that made our nation great. I also heard, statistically, that gay marriages usually end in divorce, anyway.
“Republicans should embrace homosexual rights because the national mood favors legal recognition of gay couples”
That is how Dems lead. Conservative Republicans don’t change principles because of moods.
The “Gay Community” can go pound sand.
A homosexual isn’t an oppressed “minority”. A homosexual is a man who wants to be identified by the sexual action he CHOOSES to partake in.
Gloria Steinem can’t hold her nose, blow, and make a penis pop out. Neither can Barak Obama use Comet to scrub off the black.
But the homosexual can choose to participate or not participate in homosexual activities. You are a minority because you CHOOSE to participate in deviant sexaul activities. That is YOUR problem, not mine.
We will see more of this type of deception from the once staid WSJ. Murdoch is ruining this once fine paper. After decades I will be surrendering my subscription upon renewal.
Everything found in the Op-Ed of the WSJ is a waste of trees.
“...author has a dog in the fight.”
Now that’s funny!
“oppressed minority group” BULL!
They’re a celebrated group attempting to mainstream disgusting behavior!
“Disgust” is a valid expression!
Vote Family Values
My new Bumpersticker & tagline.
Good way of putting it.
Same here, I'll be subscibing to Investors Business Daily when my WSJ ends in November.
The whole “normalization” of homosexuality and gay “marriage” are about the destruction of the traditional family,
the destruction of our society based on the traditional family,
and is one aspect of the communist infiltration of our country (see “Communist Goals for America”, 1963).
Ultimately, it’s one of the spears of Satan.
Thanks for posting this article.
It is probably a safe bet that most of the maggot infected so called journalists are hate filled homosexuals.
This maggot infected mediot posing as a journalist has wasted most of his life trying to gild the gay life style and abase the rest of us.
Sometimes their enthusiasm for sodomy clouds their judgement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.