« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
08/12/2010
What next, FRC: Claiming the paper's Help Wanted ads validate your views on unemployment?
How deceptive is the Family Research Council, even when it comes to minor points? Well check out this snippet where they try to make it sound as if mainstream and left-leaning outlets are joining them in resistance to Judge Walker's Prop 8 ruling:
Even the ultra-liberal San Francisco Chronicle, which broke the story on Walker 's sexuality, agrees. In an op-ed published this week, law professor John Eastman argues that this judge compromised the "public's confidence in the judicial process." His "failure to disqualify himself or at least to disclose his potentially disqualifying relationship to the parties requires that the opinion in the case be vacated and a new trial conducted before a different judge... Judge Walker has unilaterally neutered the votes of more than seven million Californians. A contentious step under the best of circumstances, such a decision should only be rendered, if at all, by a judge whose impartiality is beyond reproach. Judge Walker's, unfortunately, is not."
Vaughn & State Plus 8 [FRC]
Only problem for FRC? The piece to which they are referring here is not AT ALL an example of "The San Francisco Chronicle..agreeing" with their side! It's not a column from the paper's editorial boar or even a new s report. Instead, it's an Op-Ed from the ultra conservative John Eastman:
Should judge have recused himself on Prop. 8? [Chron]
John is an out and proud Prop 8 supporter (he donated $1000 to the "yes on 8" campaign) who was quick to knock the California Supreme Court's initial Prop 8 opinion just days after its May '08 issuance:
Those that support same-sex marriage have, in more candid moments, said what we're seeking to accomplish here is really the decoupling of the sanctity of marriage from the procreation function that made it a societal institution and making it just a matter of contract.
Of course, if you do that, you establish an entirely different institution than existed before. And this is no longer a state as a matter of policy, you know, letting a third cousin that married legally in one state come in and continuing to recognize it. This is a rather transformative thing that's going on.
Calif. Gay Marriages Raise Legal Questions Nationwide [PBS]
And when John made his failed bid for the Republican nomination for California attorney general earlier this year, he was the one who earned aggressive backing/fundraising from the National Organization For Marriage, and other Prop 8 figures. He even printed NOM emails on his own campaign site in order to help make his case for the nomination. Not only is John Eastman not a SF Chronicle employee who reflects "agreement" on behalf of the paper: He's a firm member of the same crowd that so regularly writes off papers like the Chronicle as nothing more than liberal rag sheets!
Yes, FRC's attempt to confuse folks into believing that The SF Chronicle is on their side is a relatively minor thing. But it takes minor lies to build up a duplicitous movement. And when talking about a movement that so steadfastly relies on a particularly hostile game of "telephone" in order to dupe people into believing their nonsense, it's best to take on every careless whisper before they turn into election day shouting matches!
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
