WaPo Ombudsman: Yep, Bigots, We're Pro-Gay Marriage
Well, I guess if you can redefine the definition of marriage, you can also redefine the definition of "objective newspaper." This hilariously obtuse piece of reasoning comes from the Washington Post's soon-to-be "inefficiencied" ombudsman, Patrick Pexton, and a Post reporter, who, for some odd reason, doesn't wish to be named.
This so-called reporter, Pexton, and a reader entered into a three-way email debate over the issue of how the Post reports on the issue of same-sex marriage. The reader, a social conservative, is tired of seeing his beliefs described (in an "objective" newspaper, mind you) as bigoted and hateful. He is also of the opinion that the religious side of the debate deserves to be taken as seriously as the side in favor of same-sex marriage.
Here's the reporter's reply:
As for accuracy, should the media make room for racists, i.e. those people who believe that black people shouldn’t marry white people? Any story on African-Americans wouldn’t be wholly accurate without the opinion of a racist, right?
Yes, that's right, a Post is reporter comparing those of us opposed to same-sex marriage to racists.
Worse, though, is the Post ombudsman defending his reporter with shockingly stupid reasoning:
Alongside that do-gooder instinct is a strong desire for fairness because, being out in the world, reporters encounter a great deal of unfairness. We want to expose that and even rub your noses in it. In a way, we’re shouting, through our stories: “This is unfair! Somebody do something!” Conservative and liberal journalists alike feel this way.
First off, to compare same-sex marriage to the Civil Rights Movement is profane. No one is attempting to stop gays from marrying. All we're saying is that in order to get married, gays and straights alike, must follow the same rules everyone else does: You can only marry one person of the opposite sex to whom you are not related. Those rules exclude no one.
What's next? We redefine the definition of driving in a way that allows toddlers to do it? We redefine the definition of "ombudsmen" so any marginally intelligent, out of touch leftist with an ax to grind against conservatives can do-- oh, wait.
Nothing, though, is funnier than this part of Pexton's excusing of his reporter, "because, being out in the world, reporters encounter a great deal of unfairness."
And what part of the world is that exactly?
The most provincial, narrow-minded, bubbled population in the country resides in the media corridor of New York, DC, and Los Angeles.
How much time has this reporter or ombudsman spent in a part of a Dakota or Carolina that didn't have an Applebee's or a campaign event going on? How many Southern Christian churches, Boy Scout meetings, and gun shows have the Post's penny loafered do-gooders attended -- not as reporters but as Americans? How many hunting trips have these do-gooders gone on? How many of these justice-seekers have worked on a farm, a construction site, or tended bar in a one stoplight town?
These cloistered bigots know nothing of faith or what 98% of America is all about. All they know is caving to left-wing peer pressure and the hurling of words like "racist" and "justice" in order to feel superior.
This whole push to redefine marriage isn't about "justice," it's about crafting a weapon in the ongoing culture war against the right, and the end game is the Christian Church. As we've already seen this year, when it comes to sexuality, preaching what the Bible says is now de facto bigotry; which means the Bible itself (the most civilizing force for justice in the history of mankind) is being declared bigoted.
With his birth control/abortion pill mandate, Obama's already put the camel nose of destruction into the tent of the Christian Church. Within five years, churches that refuse to allow same-sex marriages to be performed on their premises will be vilified in the media and threatened in unimagined ways by our government.
There are many ways to ensure devoted same-sex couples enjoy the same legal rights as married couples without obliterating the sacrament of marriage and opening a Pandora's box that can only lead to the Church's destruction. As someone who immediately supported the idea of civil unions the moment they were proposed some twenty years ago, I am all in favor of this.
But I know a left-wing weapon when I see one, and that's exactly what this push for same-sex marriage is.
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC