[ad_1]
The press wants so much to believe that religious conservatives have a vivid and uncontrollable hatred for homosexuals that newsrooms create dramas and quarrels where nothing seems to exist.
The last battle imagined between the religious right and the gay community (where the gay community is glorified) comes from CNN, which on Thursday published a captivating article (technically an "analysis") titled "Pete Buttigieg, a Christian gay, drives the religious straight nuts. "
With such a title, the reader is right in expecting the accompanying article to include a litany of examples showing that the religious right has a decidedly non-charitable vision of South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg. The CNN article certainly provides examples covering all, vast and diverse, diverse denominational factions and traditions constituting the religious right.
Nope.
The author of the article, CNN Politics Digital Director Zachary Wolf, did not provide such examples. In fact, the only evidence that Buttigieg led the religious right to the "nut" is three tweets from Franklin Graham, who is very do not a fan of the mayor.
As a full member of the "religious right", I can say with confidence that Graham does not speak for me. I can also state with confidence that he does not speak for the whole of the religious right. To be fair, the CNN article itself explains that "some" of the "religious right" see Buttigieg as an anomaly (again, he quotes only Graham). But this "some", which makes a lot heavy loads, justifies neither the title nor the raison d'être of the story. We are told that Buttigieg leads the religious right "to ping". We are then told that his existence as a homosexual Christian "does not calculate" for "some of the religious right". We then have only one example of what the title and the body of the story allege. It does not make sense.
It would be one thing if this CNN article existed in a vacuum. But we continue to see this in our national media, claiming, without proof, that a member of the LGBT community is appropriating the hell of religious conservatives.
In 2018, for example, newsrooms announced a war of words between Vice President Mike Pence and gay Olympic skater Adam Rippon. USA Today even claimed that the vice president had "retracted" after being put in his place by the skater. In reality, it is Rippon who spoke all the time. He repeated the baseless assertion that the vice president was supporting conversion therapy for gays, which the Pence office denied. The vice president invited Rippon to the White House to discuss the issue, which the skater refused.
So, an athlete lied about Pence. Pence invited him to speak about it. USA Today Painted East Pence "back[ing] low. "Confusing.
From there, newsrooms such as the New York Times have published titles such as: "Mike Pence mingles with Olympian Adam Rippon about the Gay Rights Record."
More recently, the press rooms have attempted to create a so-called "quarrel" between Pence and Buttigieg on the fact that the first is a Christian and the second is gay. But, as in the story of Rippon, the "fight" Pence / Buttigieg also concerns one of the parties that speaks (this part being Buttigieg). Pro Tip: This is not a dispute or even an argument if only one party is involved.
I understand that we are in the era of reality TV politics and that newsrooms like drama dramas to generate clicks and glances. But let us at least Something to save gossip, we sell in our titles.
[ad_2]
Source link