RECENT  POSTS:  » Read: NOM's guide to pressuring lawmakers to ban marriages (while pretending you're doing something good and positive instead) » Full trailer: 'The Normal Heart' » Vintage Clinton era oppo memo perhaps even more relevant today » Concerned Women For America advises churches to lockdown exclusionary marriage views » Video: What does conservative columnist Cal Thomas see as America's biggest threat? Take a guess. » Correcting NOM's fallacious fear graphic » Gee, Bryan, can't understand why federal courts are rejecting you gay = incest view » Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual » Prop 8 defense attorney now planning lesbian daughter's wedding » If you can't afford your event, NOM, perhaps you should just cancel  

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

09/28/2011

If Peter Sprigg called to 'export' or criminalize any other minority group, would 'WaPo' still give him ink?

by Jeremy Hooper

Yet another mainstream press outlet continues to give credence to Peter Sprigg, a man who has admitted on video that he'd like to "export" and/or criminalize gay people. This time it's The Washington Post that is giving the FRC policy fellow his pass, allowing Peter to foster the idea that same-sec couple don't really want to marry:

Peter Sprigg, a senior fellow for policy studies at the Family Research Council, said the census figures show that the number of gay couples seeking to get married is small. He pointed to a census analysis that 42 percent of same-sex couples living in states where gay marriage is legal actually wed. In comparison, there are 54 million heterosexual married couples and 8 million couples who live together but are not wed.

“Even where it’s legalized, most same-sex couples living together do not choose to marry,” Sprigg said. “To my mind, this calls into question whether most homosexuals even want to participate in the institution of marriage.”

Same-sex couples more willing to reveal relationships in census, figures show [WaPo]

Comparing long-sanctioned heterosexuals to long-denied gays who only have marital rights in six states and D.C. and who are all denied under federal law? Why that's just plain obtuse, at best. So not only is Peter's mere placement deeply offensive by virtue of his string of unbelievably hostile comments, but it's also just a complete waste of time in its unreasoned attempt to pit apples vs. long-oppressed oranges!

Though the placement itself is the larger issue. At what point are our press outlets going to stop accepting CALLS FOR OUR REMOVAL as mere conservative talking points and start realizing them for the truly frightening threats that they really are?

6A00D8341C503453Ef014E88E5D8A5970D-40

*The export/criminalize comments:


*SOURCE: Gays seek immigration reform [Medill Reports]

*SOURCE: MSNBC

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