Gay Parenting Study Not All it's Cracked Up to Be

Back when California's Proposition 8 case was in court, the defense had a terrible time with their case, chiefly, studies of gay parents vs. straight parents, and the fact that no study said one was worse or better than the other. Now, the very fact that parenting was even part of a marriage equality case shows you that anti-gay activists love to go off on tangents, especially "oh, won't someone please think of the children?"

As anyone with a working brain knows, having children is not a prerequisite of marriage, and unmarried people pop them out all the time. It's a red herring. But it's a red herring they are deeply attached to. So, it apparently became very important to prove that gay parents are somehow worse than a heterosexual mom and pop are. And so they did. Here's a hint for why your antennae should go up: the first two publications to tout this new study were The Washington Times (Rev. Moon's arch conservative paper) and Deseret News, a Mormon paper. Mormons--if you didn't know--are one of the main powers behind the scenes in restricting marriage equality.

So, that seemed like a tipoff. And I was right. There's a ton wrong with this study. But again: what does any of that have to do with marriage? If same-sex marriage were ended and prohibited all over the world, there are still going to be gay parents.

[Excerpt]


ABC's Carrie Gann sugarcoats anti-gay study paid for by anti-gay activists

. . .Not only does ABC bury the fact that the "study" was funded by anti-gay conservatives, but ABC's reporter Carrie Gann goes on to exonerate the conservatives and their study from any perception of bias (because, somehow, she knows it's really a good study). . .


Read more at: AmericaBlog

NewsBusters Thinks "Weinergate" Not Getting Enough Attention?

Congressman Anthony Weiner

A straw man argument is when you make up a false or tangential argument, disprove it, and then pretend like you made some sort of point. I suppose a lot of political writers--left and right--use straw man arguments, probably often without realizing they're doing it. But it really seems to be NewsBusters' bread and butter. 

The sad saga of Anthony Weiner's "Weinergate" (un-) sex scandal has been wall-to-wall on talk radio and cable news. I've heard snippets from the right-wing squad, some from the mainstream, and quite a bit from left-leaning media, since that is my interest (plus FOX "News" is all but banned in my house!). The story is getting almost universal finger-wagging at Congressman Weiner, a lot of tsk-tsking, and a lot of intentional and unintentional double entendres. One thing it isn't, is under- or downplayed. It's everywhere.

And even in ordinarily friendly territory (Stephanie Miller, Randi Rhodes, Rachel Maddow, even Weiner's friend Jon Stewart), Weiner has been roasted. Rachel put him on a sex-scandal-o-meter. She grouchily mentioned he'd lied to her face. Ed Schultz has called for Weiner to resign. Randi commented that he's a man, and that practically all men by now have sexted/texted/online-videoed, and she's probably right. But she was pissed that he lied, and quite unhappy with the whole situation. Nobody defended Weiner, other than to put his scandal into perspective, namely:

- Weiner was never a holier-than-thou, my morals are better than your morals crusader.
- Weiner didn't apparently have any actual sex.
- Compared to Ahnuld's 10-year "secret" and John Edwards' love child, this is pretty mild stuff.
- Online sexcapades are fairly common these days, sometimes even tolerated within relationships.
- In the future, the chances that any political hopeful has a nekkid pic somewhere are huge.
- Yes, Weiner lied. Having secretive sexual hijinks usually involves lying, particularly when busted and embarrassed. It's unfortunate, and it pissed me off too. As a politician, however, Weiner does not have a track record of being dishonest. I put this exactly in the category of "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," which never bothered me like it bothered Republicans.

But to say they've been "soft" (ahem) on him, or trying to sweep this story under the rug is just so not true. It's been practically the only subject on liberal talk radio, MSNBC, and--yes I worked some right-wing world in--The Wall Street Journal Daily Wrap radio show. For two days, in addition to a large chunk of the previous week. NewsBusters must start with a headline, and work from there.

[Excerpt]

Bozell Column: Media Go Leaner on Weiner

Last July, ABC and NBC highlighted a temper tantrum from Rep. Anthony Weiner, alleging on the House floor that the Republicans were denying health care to the heroes of 9/11. To Diane Sawyer, Weiner spoke for all of America: “Every now and then, someone seems to express the nation's frustration with the endless wrangling and delay in Congress. . .”


Read more (if you must) at: NewsBusters

Gay Marriage Strengthens Marriage in General?

Causality is often difficult to prove, but it doesn't stop people from trying. That "gay marriage" will destroy the institution itself is an oft-mentioned claim. The hows and whys are never delineated with any logic or reason, but those holding the view will often claim a "slippery slope." Which is deeply ironic, since slippery slope is the name of an illogical premise. Even better, there is now evidence that Massachusetts marriages are stronger than the rest of the country, five years after same-sex marriage was legalized.

The Cognitive Dissonance of American Political Thought

Image from Salon

All of us have our little moments of cognitive dissonance, which is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas at the same time. The thing is, a rational person will usually recognize that "these things don't go together," and then sort out the dilemma. An example might be holding the belief that gay people have all the same rights as any other American, but that they shouldn't have the right to get married. A rational person would realize that those two thoughts are in conflict, and then come down on one side or the other.

But increasingly, our political discourse is jam packed with this duality. To wit: The government would screw up a public option in health care, and the result would be terrible. But given the option, everyone would take it, and all the insurance companies would go out of business! Well, which is it, terrible or great? And that's just one example.

Part of reason that this paradoxical thinking is so prevalent might have something to do with the ascendancy of talking heads like Glenn Beck who do more than their part to foster it. The article excerpted below does a better job of explaining what I mean, so here you go. . .

[Excerpt]

The Antilogical Reasoning Of Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck has already solidified his position as the Evangelist of the Coming Obama-Pocalypse. Now he is pioneering a revolutionary new model for polemics that introduces a level of absurdity heretofore unimagined in the world of rational thought. It is a breakthrough that rattles the foundations of conventional discourse. In recognition of this achievement, Beck will forever be remembered as the Stephen Hawking of what I shall dub “Antilogical Reasoning” - or reasoning that contradicts its own premise. Perhaps the best example of antilogics is Beck’s recent comments as to whether President Obama is a racist. . .

Read more at: News Corpse

Pot, Meet Kettle: FOX "News" Calls CNN Biased

Image from source, News Corpse

A while back, I found this comment at Newshounds, a site with the motto, "We watch FOX so you don't have to":

WAR IS PEACE.
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY.
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
FOX IS NEWS.

--Chuck Anziulewicz Homepage 08.13.08 - 10:54 am

The reason that resonated with me is, the network and its ardent fans absolutely will not admit that FOX "News" is biased toward conservatives and Republicans. Anybody with eyes and ears and a brain can see that it is. Despite their Fair and Balanced motto, they show their bias in almost every program, in countless ways.

Defenders will say that only The O'Reilly Factor is biased, and that Hannity & Colmes is balanced because of its right-left format. Bollocks. From their story selection, to their chyrons, to the angle they hit stories from, and the guests they put on to discuss the stories, they show their bias. Almost everything about FOX "News" shouts their slant.

So it is particularly amusing that FOX is now calling CNN biased in print advertisements. And using typically twisted logic to boot.

[Excerpt]

Fox News Ad Says That CNN Is Partisan

In a feat of heroic irony, Fox News published an ad promoting itself that called CNN a partisan network. It is beyond me how they could have completed work on the ad with all the laughing that one would expect to ensue. But they did complete it and it was printed in several newspapers including the Washington Post and News Corp. sister pub, the Wall Street Journal. . .

Read more at: News Corpse