RECENT  POSTS:  » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/14/2011

CBN helps Peter 'Teflon' Sprigg apply another coat

by Jeremy Hooper

The Family Research Council's Peter Sprigg pretty much single-handedly crippled his host organization's reputation when he made comments calling for gays to be "exported" or criminalized:


*SOURCE: Gays seek immigration reform [Medill Reports]

*SOURCE: MSNBC

That's just a fact. Because one really can't go back form something like this. Suggesting gays be deported or arrested? Those aren't in the realm of Freudian Slippage. By choosing to air these comments openly, Peter Sprigg revealed an ugly truth about the Family Research Council's guiding mindset -- one that, quite frankly, shocked even those of us who already knew how much FRC stood against us.

But of course Sprigg will never actually acknowledge these, the plainspoken comments that made a persecuted community's jaws go from dropped to floor-scaping. Instead, he'll continue to dance around it all, so that he can make himself and FRC look like the victimized voices of mere conservatism. And he'll do so with the careless cooperation of the Christian Bible Network:

It's simply maddening. If someone like Sprigg made these very same comments about any other population, this would be an international story. Especially when said person is regularly used by outlets like CNN as a counterpoint voice. The above two clips would not be bullet points in a story -- they would be *THE* story. "Christian media pundit calls for criminalization of minority group," scene at 11. We've seen that story play out with pundits who've dished out comparably minor infractions.

But for Peter "Teflon" Sprigg? Not only does he keep his job with the organization that many mainstream conservatives consider a top dog (all of the major GOP presidential candidates appear at FRC's Values Voters Summit), but he even seems to have received a PROMOTION. We suddenly see Sprigg everywhere, discussing everything except his own brute comments. What the hell?!

Look, nobody is saying that conservatives of 2011 should be banned from debating policy. As long as LGBT rights are still a debate, it's fine (even if annoying) to have a factual media discussion on the various topics at hand. Procedure, politics, partisan outlooks -- these are acceptable topics. But there is a MAJOR difference between taking on the minutiae of a bill and casting out a whole group of rich, vibrant American citizens! We are more than confident in our side's ability to win on the merits of any given LGBT debate, ultimately leading us to the day when any such debate will be seen as a non-starter. But until we get to that day, the media does not have to book supposed "experts" who've more than laid bear their true, frightening desires for millions of the world's people.

Sorry, but our placement inside a remote island's prison is not a point to which we can, will, or should "Agree to disagree"!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails