Posted on 07/02/2009 11:32:45 AM PDT by Maelstorm
In early May, National Public Radio, a supposed bastion of liberal media bias, found itself in the cross hairs of the lesbian and gay community over an online review of "Outrage," a documentary chronicling the hypocrisy of prominent, purportedly closeted politicians with staunchly anti-gay voting records.
What sparked the controversy was not the documentary itself, but the fact that NPR's review failed to name names. In fact, while Nathan Lee, the review's initial author, had included the identities of those fingered in the film, NPR editors took it upon themselves to censor the review prior to publication.
Would a review of a film exposing the hypocrisy of politicians on any other subject fail to identify the politicians in question? Not likely.
Alas, NPR's skittishness seems to be reserved only for those who may be gay and enjoy positions of power to legislate on matters directly affecting the gay community. (NPR has shown no such hesitation speculating about the sexuality of celebrities like "American Idol's" recently out-and-proud Adam Lambert.)
Such is the sad state of affairs that is the modern media landscape when it comes to issues of real substance and importance to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community.
Forty years ago this week, LGBT patrons of New York City's Stonewall Inn, long tired of police harassment, took to the streets in protest following yet another raid of the inn. The uprising is widely credited with sparking the modern gay civil rights movement.
And yet, 40 years later, despite increased public acceptance and the passage of some basic legal protections, not only is sexual orientation still a taboo for many in the media, all too often it serves as a focal point for hate, ridicule and misinformation.
Tens of thousands of same-sex couples are now legally married in the United States. To many, this represents real progress toward increased equality; to Fox News' top-rated host Bill O'Reilly, the simple act of two people in love making it official could open the door to people marrying "a turtle," "a goat," "a duck" or "a dolphin." This coming from a guy who once famously said, "I think everybody's got to relax on all this gay stuff."
Relax, indeed.
O'Reilly and several of his Fox News colleagues - folks like Glenn Beck, who used dolls to make the point - have even inexplicably argued that marriage equality could lead to "triad" marriages.
Perhaps riffing on Fox News' tune, the Christian Broadcasting Network's Pat Robertson recently suggested the "ultimate conclusion" of legal same-sex marriage is legal polygamy, bestiality, child molestation and pedophilia.
As Congress took up debate this year over legislation to enhance the federal hate-crimes statute by including gay, lesbian, and transgender people among its protected classes - race, color, religion and national origin have been protected for years - media conservatives became absolutely unhinged.
O'Reilly said of the hate-crimes bill, which included new protections for the disabled as well, "[Y]ou could make an argument that a pedophile has a disease, and because the disease is there, he's a target or she's a target," later adding that pedophiles could be included because "\[D\]isability is included. They have a mental disability." He's dead wrong. Pedophilia is not considered a "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; in fact, the ADA specifically excludes pedophilia.
O'Reilly wasn't alone attacking the hate crimes legislation with easily debunked misinformation. Focus on the Family's James Dobson, radio host Rush Limbaugh and Robertson marched in lockstep, all essentially reading from the same set of patently false talking points.
In addition to being relentlessly maligned during policy discussions, LGBT Americans remain the butt of jokes in conservative media circles. Take for example, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough applauding a viewer's "wit," saying to political analyst Mike Barnicle, "They've started calling you 'Brokeback Barnicle' because of how close you and \[co-host\] Willie \[Geist\] sit."
Then there's the in-your-face bigotry of people like Michael Savage, the third-most-listened-to radio voice in America, who once likened gay parenting to "child abuse"; called a member of the transgender community a "sick degenerate"; and warned his listeners that "\[W\]hen you hear 'human rights,' think gays. ... \[T\]hink only one thing: someone who wants to rape your son."
Filling the ranks of every media outlet, including those with a conservative slant, to be sure, one would certainly find at least a few gay, lesbian and transgender employees - some in positions of real power. It's long past time for these employees to stand up, take a page from the Stonewall uprising and unflinchingly say, "Enough is enough." To remain publicly silent would be an outrage.
Here is the Duke Rape Case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMftwQYgWhE&feature=channel_page
How about outing the suspected homosexuals in the media? People like Anderson Cooper?
It IS child abuse. They do not consent to be brought into an alternative sexual lifestyle. They are denied parents of opposite sex. They are pushed through the courts to mainstream that which decidedly SEEKS to be "different".
Pravda media in action.
Proposed federal law would be a hate crime against America (One News Now ^ | 6/26/2009 | Robert Knight)
It would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to a list of specially protected classes such as race, ethnicity, sex and religion. If this bill passes, the Congress of the United States will be officially creating a new civil rights category based on sexual confusion. Like "sexual orientation," "gender identity" is infinitely flexible, and includes transvestitism (cross-dressing) and transsexualism (believing that one is in the wrong sex's body and sometimes surgically changing one's sex organs). In the House version, an effort to amend the bill to exclude "pedophilia" was defeated in committee along party lines. Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) even read a partial list of paraphilias from the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, including pedophilia, and declared that "all of these philias and fetishes and isms that were put forward – need not live in fear because of who they are."
Have they been watching CNN? NBC? BRAVO? HOLLYWOOD?
Step back and take a look at how the liberal elites slurred conservative protesters calling them "teabaggers" and made numerous wink and nod references to "teabagging" (an homosexual act dealing with the scrotum). THIS from the so called "mainstream media".
1. OK, so this columnist is angry because these politicians consider their sex lives private. All the people who wrote in to NPR are angry for the same reason.
I’m betting at least 99% of them support a “right” to abort that is based on keeping one’s sex life private.
2. NPR is government funded and seems concerned about smacking politicians around in public. Gee, I wonder why?
3. NPR may be worried about being sued. I doubt this movie proves these pols are gay. Which seems more likely to be in the movie? “It’s been rumored on the cocktail party circuit for years that Senator Bob Bedfellow has been involved in many gay affairs” or “Here’s footage of Senator Bob Bedfellow humping a man named Phil.” Somehow, I think it’s going to be rumors and innuendo.
4. He’s lying about what O’Reilly said. Not that I care, because O’Reilly is reaping what he sowed.
5. Really, homo marriage won’t lead to polygamy? Tell me, Mr. Frisch, can you name one reason that a man who can marry a man or a woman shouldn’t be able to marry two women? If the reason for gay marriage is equality, why are gays and monogamous heteros more equal than polygamists?
The argument made in this thread's lead article is misdirection.
“O’Reilly wasn't alone attacking the hate crimes legislation with easily debunked misinformation. Focus on the Family's James Dobson, radio host Rush Limbaugh and Robertson marched in lockstep, all essentially reading from the same set of patently false talking points.”
Whether it is the ADA or another provision, it DOES push for the Sex Positive agenda's goal of ending ALL moral judgments over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
When Democrats blocked a provision exempting pedophilia, that became perfectly clear.
“Anyone who defines their identity by their sexual preferences has already entered the realm of destructive behavior.”
Exactly what I was thinking. Being gay, like being straight, is incidental to being a human being; it is not a vocation, and I get tired of hearing from those who think it is.
What gets me is the mock indignation on display in this article. What really upsets the writer is that any opposition to the sexual activism of the left still exists though I’d be hard pressed to find very many mainstream conservatives willing to report on or take on what is best described as the “Gaystapo”. Look at Dr. Laura, look at Michael Savage, look at any researcher that goes on record expressing views not aligned with the radical gay agenda? Dr. Cameron, the premier conservative expert on homosexuality, has had rumors and lies lifted up as fact in an attempt to discredit him. The ego-centric left can not accept question, this issue is much like Global warming the difference is that many otherwise conservative people have bought the lies. I think it can be changed following an approach much like the one used to push back against the Global warming mess.
We need a Sexual Revolution Swindle type film. We need calm reasoned professionals discussing the issue with level headed clarity. Just because one opposes the goals of radical sexual activism which continues to cost society dearly and push us not towards just social immorality but feeds the socialist goals of dependency does not need to degenerate into hate because criticism and asking questions is not hate. It is only hate for those who are afraid of the debate. Also it is clear that fiscal conservatism can not survive in a society driven to indulge the wants and whims of an increasingly self centered narcissistic class that sees itself entitled to having the government fulfill its every radical desire.
Those who think you can have fiscal conservatism with social liberalism which requires the iron fist of a coercive government to shape society forcing everyone to comply with the fringe behaviors of a few are deluding themselves just as much as the author of this article is.
Thus, either homosexuality or adultery, both of which are obsessive sexual behaviors, are contrary to our created purpose.
No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen
By DINITIA SMITH
Published: Tuesday, September 11, 2001
He also writes about the Weathermen's sexual experimentation as they tried to "smash monogamy." The Weathermen were ‘’an army of lovers,’’ he says, and describes having had different sexual partners, including his best male friend.
“Anti-gay bias still rampant in the media: When will broadcasters grow up? (Comedy?)”
When I grew up I read the Bible and found out men lying down with men is abomination. I have that on no less authority than the maker of those men. I figure He ought to know.
Not only that, but they are going to stand before Him at His judgement seat and give an account to Him.
It truly is an abomination, the sin of Sodom, which brought God’s wrath on Sodom and Gomorrah.
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.