As I said before, I was really learning a lot about the UK elections, being really informed and enlightened, when I clicked over to an intriguing opinion post. Why did I click on an opinion post on CNN? Because it was included in a "headlines" RSS feed. That was just the first deception. The title was "Closeted anti-gays are the enemy within." I was sure by the title that this would be about gay people not trusting their own fellow group members for not being gay enough. You know, the usual inter-party politics. I of course was disappointed, but not entirely.
When I saw that it was an opinion piece by a gay activist writer, I nearly clicked away. But I saw several links to Christian groups and then thought, "Uh oh, another one bites the dust." CNN was using an opinion piece to bring out a news article that they otherwise could not report honestly as news. LZ Granderson's opinion piece (this link is deliberate and important) was a typical screed against people trying to inform gays that many people move on from that lifestyle successfully and lead good, happy, and yes, even spiritual lives. Which is true. Granderson mocked his pastor friend's help instead of seeing it as born out of love and concern, whether he disagreed with it or not. He then did something that I find extremely humorous and hypocritical at the same time. He said that he couldn't listen to an ex-gay speaker because he sounded like Big Gay Al from "South Park." So let me get this straight. It's OK to force stereotypes on people who look or sound a certain way, if they are NOT gay. I think I get it.
So, what bout Big Gay Al? Even he(the fictional South Park character) refused to force his gay-ness on the Boy Scouts. Which leads me to my next point. Mr Granderson is clearly projecting his gay-ness onto other people. This is the only way he can see it everywhere the way he does.
And now on the the links. When Granderson "reveals" Mr. George Rekers's recent trip with a gay "helper," he calls him "The Family Research Council's" George Rekers, complete with a link, to what? To CNN's own link page, that's where, and not links to the Family Research Council. And why do you suppose he did that? Because if he had actually linked to the Family Research Council, readers could find out that Rekers has had nothing to do with the FRC in well over a decade, and that his connection to them is tenuous at best, having only been a member of the original board back in the eighties.
Then Granderson does a "poisoning the well" and straw man trick, simply listing other people who have had public disgrace in the past. Ted Haggard, Senator Mark Foley, Governor Jim McGreevy. (Hey, wait! You left out Mussolini, Hitler, Eichmann and Satan.) How long does Ted Haggard have to pay for his public humiliation to satisfy these people by being the whipping boy for these constant attacks? What Haggard did was shameful and wrong. But does merely hypocritically mentioning him in an opinion article make for any kind of real argument? No. So when Ted Haggard is mentioned, there is a link, to where you may ask? Why, to CNN's own links again. "Don't worry. We're CNN, your Big Brother. We'll look after you and tell you what to think. We don't have to justify our statements, or possibly let people speak for themselves. We ARE the authority. We can just quote ourselves as news, even though it's really just bad opinion." Anybody here smell smug in the air?
And then there's the hypocrisy of saying, in the good old Kerry fashion, "we were for you before we were against you."Granderson and other gay activists attack people for having the same struggle they have. Isn't that just outwardly expressed self-hatred? Imagine if Democrats, Republicans, Jews, Scientologists, Muslims, or Christians began to attack those who were appearing to embrace their beliefs. Would that be headline news? You bet! But not at CNN.
So when you see a link, don't just assume it actually backs up the argument of the writer or the so-called news organization, click over to see if they are actually backing up their facts. In CNN's case it's almost always NOT the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment