Fair and balanced: Illinois redefines marriage, TV reporter grins

Recently, I shared how Chicago television station WBBM-TV sent its “chief correspondent” Jay Levine to Springfield to cover a redefine marriage rally with a live report. The next day, pro-marriage advocates rallied. Chicago’s newspapers noted the critical role that black legislators were playing in protecting marriage. Did WBBM-TV send its chief correspondent to cover this pro-marriage rally? No. Did they send anyone? Doesn’t look like it. WBBM’s 6pm and 10pm newscasts showed video, only about three or four clips, of middle-aged white people praying. They didn’t interview anyone. They didn’t show any blacks. Their 10pm newscast made brief mention of the role of the black caucus — but their 6pm newscast didn’t. Fast forward to when Illinois’ General Assembly passed a gay “marriage” law. WBBM sent Levine back to Springfield for a live report. Levine had an approving grin on his face as he interviewed a sodomitical marriage supporter live on the air. There was a time when journalists were journalists, and strove for at least the appearance of being impartial.

Advertisements

@suntimes brags about manufacturing rather than reporting news on Catholics, sodomy

I don’t know if Chicago Slum-Times “reporter” Brian Slodysko is Catholic. I don’t know if she cares passionately about the salvation of souls, or tosses and turns at night, agonizing over desecration or unworthy reception of the Holy Eucharist.

In a story she allegedly wrote on the Slum-Times’ website November 18, headlined, “Cardinal mum about three prominent Dems — Quinn, Madigan, Cullerton — backing gay marriage” Miss Slodysko brags about trying to provoke Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago and proceeds to throw a passive-aggressive temper tantrum when he doesn’t take the poison bait:

…the normally outspoken leader of Chicago Catholics had little to say about three prominent elected leaders — Catholics themselves — who championed the measure.

“What’s the point of talking?” George told a Sun-Times reporter Sunday after Mass at St. Genevieve Parish, on the city’s West Side.

He made the comment after being asked specifically whether he would seek to deny communion to the trio of Chicago Democrats: Gov. Pat Quinn, who’s expected to sign the bill into law this week, as well as House Speaker Michael Madigan or Senate President John Cullerton.

Further commentary would be “creating a story of good guys and bad guys,” the cardinal said, adding that he feels his words are “sliced up without nuance.”

Yes, Your Eminence. Creating a story of good and bad guys is exactly what Miss Slodysko was doing.

If one wanted to write a serious story about denying the Eucharist to Catholic politicians espousing heresy and legalizing sinful behavior,  you’d write about that. You’d mention the controversy over that elsewhere nationwide, if not worldwide. You’d Google it and reach out to people like Father John Zuhlsdorf or canon lawyers. You’d talk to multiple sources, something Miss Slodysko failed to do, and that’s a pretty biggie in journalism circles, as I understand it. Did I mention her newspaper is bankrupt, fired all its photographers and makes its reporters take pictures with their iPhones, and that their website got hacked this weekend?

It wasn’t hard to find the Cardinal because he posts his schedule on the archdiocese’s website. It indicated he’d be at St. Genevieve’s for the Feast of Divine Providence. But Miss Slodysko never mentioned that, and only gave passing mention to the homily, bemoaning His Eminence’s failure to be a big, bad meanie in not mentioning sodomy.

So it’s clear that she stalked and then staked out the Cardinal to confront him and provoke him into making “controversial” remarks. When she didn’t get what she wanted, she threw (wrote?) a tantrum about this “normally outspoken leader.” The whole piece is a hit job trying to undermine the Cardinal’s (and by extension the Church’s, and therefore Christ’s) reputation by pointing out perceived inconsistencies and even mentions the KKK!

Homosexuals and lesbians are estimated to be what, two to three percent of the population? But in a city of 2,715,000,000 people, the murder capital of the USA where one in five residents lives in poverty under the most corrupt local government in America, the most important thing Sun-Times CEO Timothy Knight can do on a Sunday morning is send a reporter to Mass to try and bully a prince of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Extra! Extra! Read all about it!

Catholic Illinois pols voted “yes” to redefining marriage because of Pope Francis?!

I may have to go to confession. I may have taken the Lord’s name in vain when I read this. I can’t remember.

Catholic Illinois lawmakers told the Chicago Tribune that they voted to redefine marriage to include sufferers of same-sex attraction because of Pope Francis.

They cite his summer 2013 “who am I to judge?” remarks about gays. Of course, we should be cognizant of the fact that his Holiness was speaking in a specific context, but when you speak off-the-cuff, shit like this happens, if you’ll pardon my French. (Aside: I pride myself on having coined the phrase “poop chute politics” for the whole pro-sodomy rights movement.)

Hat tip to PewSitter who linked to this story from Protect the Pope (who in turn linked to the Trib article).

<cracking my knuckles> So let’s have some fun with our brethren’s quotes:

“As a Catholic follower of Jesus and the pope, Pope Francis, I am clear that our Catholic religious doctrine has at its core love, compassion and justice for all people,” said Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia, a Democrat from Aurora who voted for the bill after spending much of the summer undecided.

Yes, it does! Love, compassion and justice for the homosexual, the child molester, the murderer, the Hitlers and Stalins of the world, even the Obamas of the world. That doesn’t mean we give them legal protection to commit sodomy, rape, murder, theft, etc.

House Speaker Michael Madigan also cited the pope’s comments in explaining his support for the measure.

“For those that just happen to be gay — living in a very harmonious, productive relationship but illegal — who am I to judge that they should be illegal?” the speaker said.

We can EASILY extend this logic beyond The Gays to polygamy, or adult-child sexual relationships too. If you believe in LGBT equality, then aren’t you COMPELLED to extend “marriage equality” to the bisexual woman who loves both a man and a woman and wants to marry both? Eventually, the law WILL extend legal protection to those relationships, it can’t not. Eventually someone’s going to sue in the name of “due process” or “equal rights” and how is a court going to say no?

The “Progressive” takes a Darwinian/Marxist view towards freedom/liberty/rights. What they’re blind to is that as these sins escalate in number, they’re more akin to a roller coaster car going uphill, unaware when they get to the top, things are going to go downhill very quickly.

So they can point to nine or 10 years of gay marriage in Massachusetts and say, “See, society’s just fine!” They swallow the “fags and dykes are just like you and I!” junk they’ve been spoon-fed by the culture over the past 15 to 20 years but especially the last decade.

As has been said elsewhere, the redefinition of marriage started 50-years ago with acceptance of no-fault divorce, abortion, contraception, and the “sexual revolution.” We’re already reaping the fruits of that. Look no further than the black community to see what happens when fathers don’t matter anymore, or don’t stick around. Is it any wonder that it was black voters who helped defeat marriage redefinition referendums so many times? Is it any wonder that it was black Democratic lawmakers in Springfield who held out about voting for redefining marriage? They know what’s in the cards when the basic cell of society gets cancer. The cards don’t lie, just like Miss Cleo told us.

The dam has sprung leaks here and there. Eventually, the whole edifice WILL give way, whether it collapses under its own weight or someone else (probably Mohammedans) dynamite it.

I parody media hit job on small town elderly pro-marriage librarian

Suburban Chicago newspaper The Daily Herald reporter Russell Lissau wrote a hit job on a little old lady, a librarian in a small town, because she opposes redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, polygamy, children, animals, and whatever else Lissau probably embraces. You can read his screed here.

Reading it, I couldn’t help but wonder, would he have written the same thing about an anti-marriage librarian? Let’s have some fun with this parody of the article that Lissau would NEVER write:

Lake Co. library leader assails gay traditional marriage

The leader of a Lake County library district board on Tuesday assailed plans to legalize gayprotect the definition of marriage in Illinois.

PolygamyAbolishing divorce will be next,” Bonnie Quirke, the president of the Libertyville-based Cook Memorial Public Library District board, told the Daily Herald. “Is that really what we want? Is that really what they want?”

Quirke’s comments came during an interview prompted by posts she’d made on Facebook. In the interview, Quirke said she opposes the effort because it redefinesrestricts the word “marriage.”

“The whole purpose of marriage isn’t reproduction, it’s love,” Quirke said. “Two people of the same sex can’tcanreproduceturn to adoption and surrogacy.”

When asked about other forms of parenting available to same-sex couples, such as adoption and surrogacy marriage being illegal, such as marrying more than one person, or one’s parents, siblings, first cousins, children, developmentally disabled individuals, animals, and inanimate objects, Quirke remained resolute.

“Is that really in the best interest of children, to be raised by two men or two women one man and one woman?” she said.

Quirke also insisted gay men don’t maintain monogamous relationships.

“There may be a coupleare no exceptions, the AIDS crisis of the 1980s wasn’t caused by rampantly promiscuous gay men engaging in unprotected butt sex, but they’re not (monogamous),” she said.

The General Assembly approved legislation that would allowban gay marriage Tuesday. The plan now heads to Gov. Pat Quinn.

Quirke, of Libertyville, has served on the library board since 2005 and has been its president since 2010. She’s also a leader in the anti pro-abortion movement in Lake County and Illinois.

Quirke said her views on homosexualityheterosexual marriage haven’t affected her ability to serve the library district. She’s never tried to keep books on the subject out of the collection, she said.

“I think I’ve been a very good, strong advocate for the library,” she said.

Cook Memorial Public Library District Director Stephen Kershner said he doesn’t share Quirke’s opinions but defended her right to express them. He isn’t concerned her views on gay rights are shaping library policy.

“There are seven elected board members, and policies are made by the majority of the board, not by an individual board member,” Kershner said.

Mitchell Locin, a spokesman for the gay-rightsmarriage defense group Equality IllinoisNational Organization for Marriage, called Quirke “out of touch” with the people of Illinois.

-30-

Lissau’s article is one of the increasing attacks in a culture war that seeks to intimidate and subjugate anyone who doesn’t conform to the dictatorship of relativism.

Start out small, with a little old lady in a small town, then work your way up. When they (ultimately, Catholics, orthodox Jews, and Mohammedans) don’t give in, those enemies of the human race must be eliminated, systematically, for the good of society, in the name of freedom and equality.

Three years ago, Chicago archbishop Francis Cardinal George made the following prophetic statement:

“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.”

Pray for Mr. Lissau. Pray for Ms. Quirke. Pray for the conversion of sinners, heretics, and non-believers. Pray for yourselves, your priests, bishops and your pontiff, that we will have the courage to embrace persecution, suffering, and martyrdom, whether white or red.

Daily dose of hope and change

Consternation across the nation!

  • President B. Hussein Obama’s administration has all but called sodomite-marriage-loving self-identifying-Catholic Illinois Senator Dick “Turban” Durbin a liar according to reports
  • Obama Democrats are turning on each other as the $300,000,000 Obamacare website disaster continues
  • Obama’s alienating international allies left and right, as the Saudi royal family realizes it can’t trust the president and Europe expresses its own trust issues with The Chosen One

Hope and Change, folks. Forward!

Link

Media abandoning all pretenses of objectivity re: marriage stories? @cbschicago leads way

Is the media abandoning all pretenses of objectivity when it comes to reporting on efforts to rape the definition of marriage to include man-man, woman-woman, polygamous, polyamorous, incestuous, and adult-child relationships?

Witness WBBM-TV in Chicago, where “CBS 2 Works for You” except when it comes to providing basic journalism, like, both sides to a story.

Reporter Jay Levine provides a stunningly one-sided account of a “marriage equality” rally in Illinois’ capitol city Springfield. There were no interviews with anyone who opposed redefining marriage. None! What’s more, this was just a rally. There isn’t even a vote scheduled in the state’s General Assembly. There was no actual news. NOTHING HAPPENED.

You can’t even lay all the blame on the reporter. He probably had a producer working with him. And the newscast itself had a producer and executive producer. There was an assignment editor who assigned Levine this story. And surely a news director signed off on the time and expense of sending the station’s “top” reporter several hours away from Chicago to cover this non-event.  There was a deliberate, conscious choice to brand this story as “marriage equality” instead of “gay” or “sodomitical” or “homosexual” marriage. This was a systematic effort with multiple opportunities for multiple parties to ensure a balanced story was being told. But it didn’t happen, and there’s a reason for that, a very dark reason.

I’ll save my scribe on the media being a tool of Satan for another post. In the meantime, I’ll take consolation in the fact that nobody saw this story because WBBM’s newscast is in last place. THAT works for me, CBS 2.

Same sex “marriage” and hetero polyamorous relationships

Forget government shutdowns, the top story on NYPost.com this morning is headlined, “Open relationships growing among couples.” Creeping incrementalism at work. Polyamory is the “next wave” in the redefinition of marriage.

I’ve always thought the push for “gay marriage” was odd because gay men are not monogamous. One of the topics I hope to explore over time with this blog is, “Things gay men won’t talk about in polite company.”

Men with same sex attraction are overwhelmingly sluts. Gay men cheat on their boyfriends. It’s almost expected. I never did. But I had boyfriends tell me, “You will eventually,” not because of my character, but simply because I was a gay man. “Open relationships” are common even among “committed” gay couples.  They have “don’t ask, don’t tell” agreements or “only play together” with a third guy. Honestly I couldn’t tally up how many sex partners I’ve had, and that’s not something I’m proud of. A friend once confided that he’d had 60 partners by age 19 – and this was in the late 90s, before widespread Internet usage made hooking up REALLY easy. Is it any wonder that AIDS tore through gay men in the 1980s like a tornado in a trailer park?

I am the product of a committed relationship. My parents have a wonderful marriage. The thought of my dad cheating is inconceivable, as is the thought of them divorcing. Raised in that environment, with a solid understanding of what a relationship between two (not three, or 10) people should be, I got clothes-lined when I tried dating guys.

Some would say I’m just bitter, or self-loathing, or whatever. I accept the Church’s teaching that my same sex attraction is not in itself sinful, but IS inherently disordered, and that acting on that attraction, in thought or deed, is sinful and evil. I’ve lived that lifestyle, I know its consequences first-hand. There’s nothing “happy” about it. It’s a lie. Two individuals with inherently disordered tendencies do not a relationship make, sanctioned by the state or not. A society that redefines marriage is sawing off the very branch it’s sitting on.

Carry your cross with obedience, as Christ did. Pray for the conversion of sinners, and as our pontiffs have reminded us, always have hope.Image