GLAAD to CNN: On gay issues, abandon fairness


Most gay activists have nothing left of substance to say, so they are now focusing on trying to silence those who do:

The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has created a petition in an effort to convince CNN to stop inviting what the organization deems “anti-gay” guests onto the network. In fact, GLAAD aims to fight against CNN’s inclusion of the “anti-gay industry” as a whole when it covers issues and debates relevant to gay and civil rights issues.

Is there anything more extraordinary than trying to claim the other side of an issue doesn't even have a right to be interviewed in public about their views? GLAAD's petition goes squarely against our proud American tradition of free speech. If they were actually confident in their arguments winning the debate they would feel no need to silence those who disagree with them. Let me show what I mean: watch for yourself the interview that Maggie had on CNN with Anderson Cooper last August:

This is what GLAAD finds so offensive? As you can see, it's hardly the case that Maggie was allowed to submit any of her opinions unchallenged. In fact, Cooper's interview style was combative and demanding with Maggie ("how do you know he's biased?"), while with Evan he simply floated questions that would help Evan's talking points. In GLAAD's eyes, Maggie (and other people who agree with her, for instance, that children deserve to be raised by their biological parents) should not even be allowed to appear on air and have their views challenged by a CNN anchor! Can you imagine how this segment would have gone if, instead of someone like Maggie, they had invited another pro-SSM talking head on screen? GLAAD's attempts to marginalize those who believe in traditional marriage raise other disturbing questions for us: Do we really want to live in a world where "dissenting" views are silenced and forbidden? This represents a fast track to undermining our democracy, if you ask me. Maggie and others who share her point of view have always acknowledged that SSM advocates have a right to express their views in public. So much for fair and equal treatment in return. As for the rest of us, losing our core right to free speech is nothing to be glad about.