Why is CNN giving Dobson space?
Good grief — CNN, clearly in a fit of spasms over a perceived need for “balance,” has given Daddy Dobson space to rail on in with a neat homobigot commentary piece — “Special to CNN” — entitled Media provides cover for assault on traditional marriage.
He spends most of the column bloviating and whining about the fact that state constitutional amendments have passed overwhelmingly when on the ballot, and that these stories of “success” by the “pro-family” crowd was ignored by the MSM. As a result of the lack of coverage, the self-important demi-god of the American Taliban says, the Marriage Protection Amendment in the Senate failed.
Indeed, on the day before 48 senators bailed on marriage, a 20th state voted on its own constitutional amendment. It was Alabama, which supported traditional marriage by 81 percent to 19 percent! A search of the database Nexis revealed that not one reference to this dramatic vote in Alabama was published in the print versions of The New York Times or Washington Post. There was virtually no mention of the story in other national newspapers. Yet, each of them devoted considerable coverage to the Senate’s defeat of the Marriage Protection Amendment.
CNN and the mainstream televised news networks uttered hardly a peep about the Alabama decision. Why was the issue buried? Because the “poll” in Alabama and 19 other states didn’t match the template put forward by those who wanted the amendment to be crushed. Their bias against the family is breathtaking.
He continues on a rampage, blasting the senators who opposed the amendment who should have known better (i.e., taken his phone calls or knelt before him):
As for the senators who voted against the amendment, the excuses they gave were pitiful. Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Michigan, Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-Rhode Island, Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minnesota, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, and many others thought they had the perfect alibi. They claimed that the issue should be handled at the state level. What hypocrisy!
All of these senators are smart enough to know that, first, it would create utter chaos to have 50 different definitions of marriage in one country, where every state is required by the Constitution to support the laws of the other 49. Come on, Senator McCain and company. You and your colleagues know better than that.
It goes on and on. Shakes Sis focused on this section of DD’s foaming-at-the-mouth diatribe as he compares the prospect of SSM to slave-trading:
And here’s the best part: “So where does the issue go from here? Time will tell. It took William Wilberforce more than 30 years to bring about an end to Britain’s slave trade in the 1800s. Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of a protracted victory.”
…William Wilberforce was white (unlike some prominent American abolitionists one might name, like Harriet Tubman or Frederick Douglass), and he was also an Evangelical Christian who managed to successfully convince the House of Commons to require missionary work a condition of the British East India Company’s 1813 renewed charter. In other words, to do business, they had to agree to “introduc[e] Christian light into India.”
…To you or me, mentioning this rather obscure British patrician in passing might just seem weird. To Dobson’s devotees, however, it becomes a message that white evangelicals must continue their struggle to blur the line separating church and stateâ€”and, more nefariously, a message to politicians that if they want to stay in business, theyâ€™d better play by Dobson’s rules.