Accuracy in Media

The American people by an overwhelming margin reject so-called homosexual marriages. When the issue came before Congress, even President Clinton, a notorious gay rights supporter, felt compelled to endorse the “Defense of Marriage Act,” reaffirming that marriage involves a man and woman. As Jerry Falwell would put it—Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. But the liberal media have other ideas. Responding to militant homosexual pressure, the Washington Post is now running notices of homosexual “unions.” The first such couple to be honored by the Post was Craig Gibson and H. Leslie Brown. They were joined in a so-called “Holy Union” ceremony at a Universalist Church in Washington.

The homosexual rights movement was pleased with the announcement, calling it a “good” step by the paper. The Post?s media reporter, Howard Kurtz, was forced to concede that the Post was among a “relative handful” of papers publishing such notices. This is not a distinction to be proud of. It shows how liberal the Post has become.

These “unions” are not marriages. In fact, they?re not even legal. They are not recognized by the state. In effect, the gays are seeking approval of shacking up with one another. This makes their deadly promiscuity even more objectionable. It is also sacrilegious to say they are “holy unions” since most religions reject the practice of homosexuality. But this approach has now won the approval of the Washington Post, the largest paper in the nation?s capital.

It?s true that the notices are not being put on the page of wedding announcements. But that is hardly consolation to those of us who believe in traditional marriage. Why did the Post do it? One explanation may be the liberal “anything goes” mentality. However, there may be another explanation. The Washington Times reports that the move was pushed by homosexual journalists at the newspaper itself. The Times quoted an official of a national gay journalists association as saying the group had nine members at the paper, and some of them may have pushed for the change.

There is more to this issue than just pandering to a special interest group that wants public approval for its dangerous lifestyle. The move by the Post represents emerging acceptance of the idea that homosexuals should not only be able to get married, but adopt and raise children. We would be blind if we didn?t recognize this coming. And yet the evidence is already in. Research into these matters already demonstrates that children are harmed when they are raised by homosexuals. These children are at greater risk of developing social or psychological problems. The children do not develop healthy sexual identities, and some go on to be homosexual or even have sex with their parents. One study found that 29 percent of those raised by at least one homosexual parent reported having sex with that parent.

This is the road the Post is on. The paper may think it is being tolerant, but in reality it is making a mockery of marriage and promoting behavior which destroys lives, especially young lives. In an important sense, the Post has become a house organ for the gay rights movement.




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments