Another reason for CNN to stop booking Tony Perkins: He considers them 'propaganda'

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

09/09/2011

by Jeremy Hooper

The Family Research Council's Tony Perkins has been booked on almost every show CNN offers, typically framed as little more than a "from the right" pundit who's opposed to certain civil rights. He also recently wrote an Op-Ed for CNN.com and has been cited by numerous anchors over the years on issues like same-sex marriage and religious freedom.

Now in the past, I've always protested such bookings, because I know that Tony is responsible for positioning us as a kid-threatening disaster in need of "ex-gay" therapy, churning out brochures that compare same-sex marriages to those bonds which might exist between a man and a horse (complete with horse photo), directly likening us to terrorists, calling LGBT rights a battle of "good versus evil," saying DADT repeal proponents are "willing to jeopardize our nation’s security to advance the agenda of the radical homosexual lobby," claiming gay teens kill themselves because they know that they're "abnormal," saying the gay activists who challenge FRC are "held captive by the enemy," writing that same-sex marriage will be "opening the door to all manner of moral and social evil, tweeting that gays don't need to "be a slave to feelings," and fundraising around the idea that gay kids are immoral and telling them otherwise is "disgusting" (to name just a few FRC eyebrow-jackers). But if that's not enough to make CNN producers think twice before recruiting someone with such a clearly extreme agenda, perhaps I can provide a more clear-cut reason in terms of the network and its brand. Namely: Tony telling his home church that the very network that gives him airtime is little more than "propaganda":

*AUDIO SOURCE: July 24, 2011 Sermon -- Bro. Tony Perkins [Greenwell Springs Baptist Church]

Tony should be thanking his lucky stars (or press agent) that he gets to operate in a political world where rhetoric like his still earns mainstream credence. But instead, he bites the very broadcast signal that feeds him? Why that's lacking in both manners and pragmatism!

space