Thursday, May 10, 2012

Finally! A journalist challenges Tony Perkins rather than kissing up to him

For a long time, many on my side of the spectrum have been raising holy hell at news organizations like MSNBC and CNN for giving the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins a platform even though his organization is an SPLC-declared hate group for the way it demonizes gays through lies and cherry-picked research.

I differed with those on my side who didn't want to see Perkins being interviewed at all. For me, it wasn't the fact that he was interviewed, it was the fact that he was not challenged on his views or the behavior of his organization.

Journalists treated Perkins like a pundit or an expert when he is neither.

But finally, one journalist, Soledad O'Brien of CNN did what other journalists have not done - she neither let Perkins soft pedal his way through, nor did she let him go on a monologue. O'Brien asked him the tough questions and challenged some of his assertions.

THIS is journalism, folks. Enjoy:

From Mediaite comes a portion of the interview:

The two discussed whether allowing same-sex couples to marry would ultimately redefine the institution of marriage.

“When government takes a policy position on marriage, it has an effect,” Perkins said.

O’Brien pressed him over what the consequences would be for gay marriage. Perkins said it went back to the 1960s with no-fault divorce and adoption.

“We’ve seen the consequences of that and have over 40% of children being born out of wedlock. We have a decline in marriage, the rise in cohabitation. The social costs of that are tremendous,” he said.

“When government took a position, let’s say, against the ban on interracial marriage it had an effect too, right? It brought legal marriage to blacks and whites,” O’Brien noted.

Perkins disputed the basis of O’Brien’s question.

“You’re talking about redefinition,” Perkins said. “There is no rational reason to keep people of different races that were of opposite sex to marry. They met the qualifications of the definition of marriage. What we’re talking about here is a further redefinition of marriage…”

“But hasn’t marriage been redefined and redefined?” O’Brien interjected.

Bookmark and Share


Mykelb said...

About time the journalists got educated on our subjects and started asking hard questions. It has been 60 years or more since the Mattachine Society was founded and since 1972 since we were no longer found to be mentally ill. Kudos to Soledad, hopefully the other hosts on CNN and MSNBC will follow suit and talk with GLAAD about our issues and really blast these religious bigots back into their pews where they belong.

Wade MacMorrighan said...

Now, why can't she do the same thing with Maggie, and even have a historian or an Anthropologist on to debate Gallagher?

Anonymous said...

As we learned from 2010 in states across the nation, when Republicans SAY it is all about the economy and jobs, it really is about social issues when they get into office. Tea Partiers became Teavangelicals.

Erica Cook said...

I do agree on one topic. Marriage in the US is week. But no solution to any problem has ever come from things staying the same. Now for the 5,000 years bit. Lets go back to Europe 5,000 years ago. The pagan faiths for which my faith is based on had a special place for the sacred union of people from the same gender who married each other. We had families by taking in unwanted children and by accepting children of family members who died.

Tor said...

Simply ask the biblical scholar: "how many wives and concubines did Solomon have?" Case closed. The definition of marriage changes.

also - they use the phrase "across all cultures." Not so.

truthspew said...

So Perkins gets spanked on CNN and MSNBC! About damned time.