Outrageous! WaPo pretends Bryan Fischer is mere 'same-sex marriage opponent'
In a piece on the IRS development, Washington Post writers Josh Hicks and Ruth Tam give a prominent slot to one of the most vicious opponents of LGBT rights, painting him as merely a "same-sex marriage opponent":
Same-sex marriage opponent Bryan Fischer, director of the issues analysis for the American Family Association, predicted the same outcome, adding that the possibility concerns him.
“There will be enormous federal pressure now on states to conform to the IRS,” he said.
“The Supreme Court decision placed an [improvised explosive device] under every state marriage amendment in the land,” he said. “I predict we will very quickly see legal action in the 37 states that do not give legal recognition to same-sex marriage to force them to conform to federal policy on their tax forms, and you will get activist federal judges that will comply.”
IRS shifts to equal tax treatment for same-sex marriages [WaPo]
I surely don't have to tell you his record. But I do apparently have to tell the Washington Post. So here goes:
-- On multiple occasions, called for an “Underground Railroad to deliver innocent children from same-sex households”
-- Says gay people must be criminalized and treated like drug addicts; even asks (at 2:29): "Do you put them to death, do you lock 'em up...what do you do?"
-- Directly links homosexuality to pedophilia and bestiality: "We should discriminate against unnatural and aberrant sexual behavior, whether pedophilia, bestiality, or homosexuality."
-- Said that by overturning the Defense of Marriage Act and throwing marriage back to California, the Supreme Court is "doing to us what the Nazis did to the Jews"
-- Admits he wants to discriminate against gay people
-- Suggests Boy Scouts (who he calls the "Boy Sodomizers of America") would be better off drowned in the sea than to allow gay scouts
KEEP READING: Bryan Fischer [GLAAD CAP]
I ask the question I always ask in situations like this: Would a mainstream media outlet give such a pass to someone who had said such heinous things about any other group of people? If someone had similarly smeared people of color, would they let that person hide behind an innocuous label like "opponent of affirmative action"?
In that obvious answer lies the obvious problem.
comments powered by Disqus