Here's a new one. Yeah, I know. I've been kind of slacking. (For anyone new to this blog, periodically, I counter the general manager of the Sinclair Corporation, parent company of Fox News. I encourage everyone to lend him an earful.)
Mark Hyman took three days to try to link the ACLU to the support of pedophilia. I won't rehash all three reports here, but do encourage everyone to take a look at his remarks (use the drop down menu and choose the ones titled NAMBLA).
My response to his three-days of lying:
Wow! It took you three days to blow a thick smoke screen in an attempt to convince your viewers the ACLU supports pedophilia. The only problem is most of your viewers can see through the twisted facts and lies.
Point one: the ACLU is not against the Boy Scouts nor do they wish to not “separate men from copulating with young boys.”
First, according to the FBI, 90% of the pedophiles are heterosexual, not homosexual. By your reasoning, there should be no scout leaders.
Second, the very homophobic implication that homosexuals want sex with young boys warrants an apology on your part to your viewers and homosexuals.
Third, the ACLU is against discrimination, born out of homophobic myths like the one you have tried to perpetuate. They only argued that if the Boy Scouts receive public money and use public facilities, then they have to scrap their discriminatory practices against homosexuals.
Point two: the ACLU did not support NAMBLA. What they did support is free speech. Since the material NAMBLA publishes is not illegal, the ACLU argued that the group cannot be held liable for any crime committed because someone “got ideas” from their literature.
Now think of the implication for a moment. Every night I watch your reporters teach me how to deal drugs, rob banks, of kill someone. Sure, they don’t give me the lessons all at once, but each story reported gives me ideas of what I should and should not do if I were to commit a crime.
Do you want every criminal behind bars suing you for putting ideas in their head that caused them to commit their crime?
Perhaps they should sue you for giving them faulty information, much like this three-day expose on the ACLU and NAMBLA.
Showing posts with label Sound Off to Fox News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sound Off to Fox News. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Saturday, June 10, 2006
ACLU Lynch Mob
Ok, he makes this way to easy. I met his challenge this week.
For those of you who may be new to this blog, I am referring to Mark Hyman, general manager of Sinclair Broadcasting, home station of Fox News. I run a challenge over at my MSN group, Boston Tea Party Protests. The challenge is simple; watch your local Fox News program for the general manager's editorial and respond to it. (Complete challenge with past responses, Fox News - The Point.)
His point this week criticized the ACLU for challenging a North Carolina ordinance that would ban sex offenders from the parks. Hyman artfully led his audience to believe that the ACLU was defending child molestors. The conservatives do have a knack for twisting the facts to spread hysteria.
So here goes, and feel free to click on the links above and give your opinion to Mark Hyman.
Mark Hyman wrote:
Court-ordered pre-trial negotiations broke down last month. Town Administrator Jason Young told The Point his side isn't backing down. So Woodfin, North Carolina and the ACLU are headed for a court date as early as this summer. Get pen and paper handy. You'll need it in a moment.
At issue is an ordinance banning registered sex offenders from the town's three public parks. The law was enacted after a 16-year old girl was raped in a park and after a pedophile living in property overlooking a park had molested several children. Child sexual predators often frequent locations popular with children. The ACLU sued this western North Carolina town of 6,000 on behalf of a registered sex offender, who was convicted of attempted sexual battery with a handgun, and is now demanding access to the parks. One of the busiest parks is adjacent to an elementary school, which uses the park for recess.
There are 21 known sex offenders living in Woodfin or in close proximity. Town officials know from first-hand experience that mingling pedophiles with young children is a tragedy waiting to happen.
Police Chief Brett Holloman, who is being sued along with the town, told The Point his job is to enforce the law.
It is disgusting that the ACLU, that is, the Anti-Children Litigation Union is anxious to support sex offenders, but shows no compassion for the safety of our children.
You can share your thoughts with the ACLU of North Carolina at (919) 834-3466 or at their website, www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
I responded:
I see the conservatives are whipping up a frenzy and forming a lynch mob again. No one wants to give pedophiles free access to our children, not even the ACLU. To imply otherwise is disingenuous at best, outright lying at worst.
The ACLU objected to the Woodfin law on several grounds including the right to free travel and the protection from retributive punishment once all terms of a sentence has been completed. The law, itself, is written too broadly and punishes people based only on their status and not on any threat they may pose to the public.
More disturbing is your connection of the case to child molestation. The case was filed on behalf of an adult convicted of a crime against another adult back in 1987. The plaintiff has completed all terms of his sentencing including prison and probation. Sex offender does not automatically equate to child molester. I would expect a member of the news corps to understand the difference and not purposely mislead the public simply to tell a rousing story to make a point.
Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any criminal, as can be verified through the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. Many sex offenders return to their families and live out normal, law-abiding lives. Is it right that we tell them they can’t take their children to the park because of a crime they committed twenty years earlier? If we allow this law to take hold, where do we stop with the retributive punishments? Should murderers be confined to the empty deserts of the southwest? Should thieves be barred from entering a business establishment? Should speeders be permanently taken off of our roadways?
Sorry, I can’t join your lynch mob. The ACLU got this one right.
For those of you who may be new to this blog, I am referring to Mark Hyman, general manager of Sinclair Broadcasting, home station of Fox News. I run a challenge over at my MSN group, Boston Tea Party Protests. The challenge is simple; watch your local Fox News program for the general manager's editorial and respond to it. (Complete challenge with past responses, Fox News - The Point.)
His point this week criticized the ACLU for challenging a North Carolina ordinance that would ban sex offenders from the parks. Hyman artfully led his audience to believe that the ACLU was defending child molestors. The conservatives do have a knack for twisting the facts to spread hysteria.
So here goes, and feel free to click on the links above and give your opinion to Mark Hyman.
Mark Hyman wrote:
Court-ordered pre-trial negotiations broke down last month. Town Administrator Jason Young told The Point his side isn't backing down. So Woodfin, North Carolina and the ACLU are headed for a court date as early as this summer. Get pen and paper handy. You'll need it in a moment.
At issue is an ordinance banning registered sex offenders from the town's three public parks. The law was enacted after a 16-year old girl was raped in a park and after a pedophile living in property overlooking a park had molested several children. Child sexual predators often frequent locations popular with children. The ACLU sued this western North Carolina town of 6,000 on behalf of a registered sex offender, who was convicted of attempted sexual battery with a handgun, and is now demanding access to the parks. One of the busiest parks is adjacent to an elementary school, which uses the park for recess.
There are 21 known sex offenders living in Woodfin or in close proximity. Town officials know from first-hand experience that mingling pedophiles with young children is a tragedy waiting to happen.
Police Chief Brett Holloman, who is being sued along with the town, told The Point his job is to enforce the law.
It is disgusting that the ACLU, that is, the Anti-Children Litigation Union is anxious to support sex offenders, but shows no compassion for the safety of our children.
You can share your thoughts with the ACLU of North Carolina at (919) 834-3466 or at their website, www.acluofnorthcarolina.org/.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
I responded:
I see the conservatives are whipping up a frenzy and forming a lynch mob again. No one wants to give pedophiles free access to our children, not even the ACLU. To imply otherwise is disingenuous at best, outright lying at worst.
The ACLU objected to the Woodfin law on several grounds including the right to free travel and the protection from retributive punishment once all terms of a sentence has been completed. The law, itself, is written too broadly and punishes people based only on their status and not on any threat they may pose to the public.
More disturbing is your connection of the case to child molestation. The case was filed on behalf of an adult convicted of a crime against another adult back in 1987. The plaintiff has completed all terms of his sentencing including prison and probation. Sex offender does not automatically equate to child molester. I would expect a member of the news corps to understand the difference and not purposely mislead the public simply to tell a rousing story to make a point.
Sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of any criminal, as can be verified through the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports. Many sex offenders return to their families and live out normal, law-abiding lives. Is it right that we tell them they can’t take their children to the park because of a crime they committed twenty years earlier? If we allow this law to take hold, where do we stop with the retributive punishments? Should murderers be confined to the empty deserts of the southwest? Should thieves be barred from entering a business establishment? Should speeders be permanently taken off of our roadways?
Sorry, I can’t join your lynch mob. The ACLU got this one right.
Friday, May 26, 2006
Hypocrits Exposed
Wow! Two in one week. And this one's related to the last one! Sometimes, the far right just makes it too easy....
For those of you who may be new to this blog, I am referring to Mark Hyman, general manager of Sinclair Broadcasting, home station of Fox News. I run a challenge over at my MSN group, Boston Tea Party Protests. The challenge is simple; watch your local Fox News program for the general manager's editorial and respond to it. (Complete challenge with past responses, Fox News - The Point.)
This time around, he decided to tackle a University's outcry over the librarian's desire to make the homophobic book, The Marketing of Evil, mandatory reading for all incoming freshman.
He certainly doesn't want California adding sexual orientation of historical figures to its textbooks, but has no qualms about stating the sexual orientation of newsmakers in his editorials if it casts them as raving lunatics - or at least unreasonable.
Mark Hyman wrote:
Faculty members at the Ohio State University at Mansfield voted 21-0 to condemn librarian Scott Savage. Professors threatened, attacked and called him names in emails. A pair of openly homosexual professors filed a sexual harassment complaint against Savage alleging fear and unease about being gay while Savage was still on campus. The school began an investigation.
Did Savage touch someone inappropriately? Did he use foul or degrading language? What was his unspeakable offense? Scott Savage submitted the titles of four books for possible inclusion in the school's freshmen reading list. That's it.
One book uncovered intellectual frauds such as Alfred Kinsey, an entomologist that is someone who studies insects who called himself a "sex researcher," and who used convicted sex felons and pedophiles in his studies.
After intense public pressure and a threatened lawsuit, the school dismissed the sexual harassment complaint. However, the problem still exists. A neo-fascist attitude exists among several of the faculty at OSU Mansfield. Tolerance and diversity are simply disingenuous slogans used by academics who are neither tolerant nor accept diverse ideas.
The question now is whether the school will sanction those professors who engaged in witch hunt tactics against Scott Savage.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
My Response:
Two days ago, you objected to California including the sexual orientation of historical figures in its text books. Today, your editorial explicitly states the sexual orientation of two professors. I wonder what the difference is. Maybe the answer lay hidden in your editorial.
A devout Christian librarian wanted a book, The Marketing of Evil, to be required reading for all freshman. Note the key word required - not suggested. The book is the conservative Christian right’s homophobic explanation of the gay agenda, a make believe agenda.
The first clue of homophobia is its desire to rely on, and greatly exaggerate, rumors about Kinsey’s sex life and mental state. Gay hate groups such as Concerned Women of America and the American Family Association give it rave reviews. Kinsey is the archenemy of the far right because his research led to the declassification of homosexuality as a mental illness.
The second clue is "World Net Daily" published the book. For the critical thinkers in your audience, "World Net Daily" is better known as "World Nut Daily". Enough said.
Now we have our answer why text books shouldn’t mention the sexual orientation of historical figures, but mentioning sexual orientation in editorials and the news is perfectly acceptable. If mentioning the sexual orientation casts homosexuals as raving lunatics, or in even the slightest negative light, tell everyone; otherwise, don’t mention it because everyone might start thinking homosexuals are normal.
That’s why the news will report stories about pedophiles and gay pedophiles as if there’s a difference. Critical thinkers in your audience don’t miss that one, either. I hope your reporters rely on more reputable sources for their stories than the crap…ooops… "questionable" sources you base your editorials on.
For those of you who may be new to this blog, I am referring to Mark Hyman, general manager of Sinclair Broadcasting, home station of Fox News. I run a challenge over at my MSN group, Boston Tea Party Protests. The challenge is simple; watch your local Fox News program for the general manager's editorial and respond to it. (Complete challenge with past responses, Fox News - The Point.)
This time around, he decided to tackle a University's outcry over the librarian's desire to make the homophobic book, The Marketing of Evil, mandatory reading for all incoming freshman.
He certainly doesn't want California adding sexual orientation of historical figures to its textbooks, but has no qualms about stating the sexual orientation of newsmakers in his editorials if it casts them as raving lunatics - or at least unreasonable.
Mark Hyman wrote:
Faculty members at the Ohio State University at Mansfield voted 21-0 to condemn librarian Scott Savage. Professors threatened, attacked and called him names in emails. A pair of openly homosexual professors filed a sexual harassment complaint against Savage alleging fear and unease about being gay while Savage was still on campus. The school began an investigation.
Did Savage touch someone inappropriately? Did he use foul or degrading language? What was his unspeakable offense? Scott Savage submitted the titles of four books for possible inclusion in the school's freshmen reading list. That's it.
One book uncovered intellectual frauds such as Alfred Kinsey, an entomologist that is someone who studies insects who called himself a "sex researcher," and who used convicted sex felons and pedophiles in his studies.
After intense public pressure and a threatened lawsuit, the school dismissed the sexual harassment complaint. However, the problem still exists. A neo-fascist attitude exists among several of the faculty at OSU Mansfield. Tolerance and diversity are simply disingenuous slogans used by academics who are neither tolerant nor accept diverse ideas.
The question now is whether the school will sanction those professors who engaged in witch hunt tactics against Scott Savage.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
My Response:
Two days ago, you objected to California including the sexual orientation of historical figures in its text books. Today, your editorial explicitly states the sexual orientation of two professors. I wonder what the difference is. Maybe the answer lay hidden in your editorial.
A devout Christian librarian wanted a book, The Marketing of Evil, to be required reading for all freshman. Note the key word required - not suggested. The book is the conservative Christian right’s homophobic explanation of the gay agenda, a make believe agenda.
The first clue of homophobia is its desire to rely on, and greatly exaggerate, rumors about Kinsey’s sex life and mental state. Gay hate groups such as Concerned Women of America and the American Family Association give it rave reviews. Kinsey is the archenemy of the far right because his research led to the declassification of homosexuality as a mental illness.
The second clue is "World Net Daily" published the book. For the critical thinkers in your audience, "World Net Daily" is better known as "World Nut Daily". Enough said.
Now we have our answer why text books shouldn’t mention the sexual orientation of historical figures, but mentioning sexual orientation in editorials and the news is perfectly acceptable. If mentioning the sexual orientation casts homosexuals as raving lunatics, or in even the slightest negative light, tell everyone; otherwise, don’t mention it because everyone might start thinking homosexuals are normal.
That’s why the news will report stories about pedophiles and gay pedophiles as if there’s a difference. Critical thinkers in your audience don’t miss that one, either. I hope your reporters rely on more reputable sources for their stories than the crap…ooops… "questionable" sources you base your editorials on.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
It's Not About Sex, Dummy
I run a challenge over at my MSN group, Boston Tea Party Protests. The challenge is simple; watch your local Fox News program for the general manager's editorial and respond to it. (Complete challenge with past responses, Fox News - The Point)
Sometimes, he just makes it too easy. His recent Point: gripes about California proposing to include gays and lesbians in the school's history textbooks. Now, you didn't think I'd be silent on this one, did you?
By all means, click on the links above and let Mark Hyman, General Manager, know how you feel about his Point.
Mark Hyman wrote:
How many children did Alexander Graham Bell have? Was Eli Whitney married? Was Susan B. Anthony a homosexual?
The answers to these questions don't matter. Would Susan B. Anthony's contributions to the women's suffrage movement have been of any greater or lesser value if she were a homosexual? Of course not.
Yet, California state Senator Sheila Kuehl believes public school textbooks should identify sexual orientation when cataloging someone's accomplishments. Her bill, SB 1437, is intended to accomplish just that. Kuehl claims her bill will "ensure that social science curriculum includes the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender peoples." Kuehl argues LGBT people merit special recognition in California school textbooks.
As the most populous state, changes in California textbooks will have a spill-over effect in other states, particularly smaller, rural states that do not have the buying clout to dictate how textbooks are to be written.
Kuehl's obsession with sex overshadows the important lessons of history. And it runs counter to the position held by some people practicing alternative lifestyles who argue their sexual orientation doesn't matter. However, it looks like it may in the California public school system.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
My Response:
First, homosexuality is no more an "alternative lifestyle" than heterosexuality is a "mainstream lifestyle".
Now a history quiz:
1. What ethnic heritage was Eli Whitney?
2. Was Susan B. Anthony male or female?
3. What color was Albert Einstein?
You should pass easily. If you didn’t know the answers, history books show their pictures.
Let’s make it harder:
1. Was George Washington a heterosexual?
2. How about Abe Lincoln?
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt?
Maybe that was too easy for you too. History books tend to mention wives of historical figures even if the wife made no significant contribution to history other than marriage. You don’t think mentioning the wives is teaching our children about sex, do you?
Before awarding a passing grade, you must answer the bonus question. (No cheating off Google to look smart.)
1. Who was our only bachelor President?
If you had a good history class - something difficult to find in our public schools nowadays - you may have been taught all of our Presidents were married except one. What you most likely weren’t taught is he lived with his male "partner", a senator from Alabama, for sixteen years. You definitely weren’t taught that because of prejudices and hatred towards homosexuals in those times, we may never know if he were gay, despite strong evidence suggesting he was.
If our history books mentioned this president had a male partner of sixteen years, do you really think that’s teaching our children about sex?
Let’s face it. Refusing to mention anything about a gay historical figure’s partner is your way of ensuring that our children won’t think homosexuals are normal people who can grow up to be President.
Not much has changed in attitudes towards homosexuals since James Buchanan’s time.
Sometimes, he just makes it too easy. His recent Point: gripes about California proposing to include gays and lesbians in the school's history textbooks. Now, you didn't think I'd be silent on this one, did you?
By all means, click on the links above and let Mark Hyman, General Manager, know how you feel about his Point.
Mark Hyman wrote:
How many children did Alexander Graham Bell have? Was Eli Whitney married? Was Susan B. Anthony a homosexual?
The answers to these questions don't matter. Would Susan B. Anthony's contributions to the women's suffrage movement have been of any greater or lesser value if she were a homosexual? Of course not.
Yet, California state Senator Sheila Kuehl believes public school textbooks should identify sexual orientation when cataloging someone's accomplishments. Her bill, SB 1437, is intended to accomplish just that. Kuehl claims her bill will "ensure that social science curriculum includes the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender peoples." Kuehl argues LGBT people merit special recognition in California school textbooks.
As the most populous state, changes in California textbooks will have a spill-over effect in other states, particularly smaller, rural states that do not have the buying clout to dictate how textbooks are to be written.
Kuehl's obsession with sex overshadows the important lessons of history. And it runs counter to the position held by some people practicing alternative lifestyles who argue their sexual orientation doesn't matter. However, it looks like it may in the California public school system.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
My Response:
First, homosexuality is no more an "alternative lifestyle" than heterosexuality is a "mainstream lifestyle".
Now a history quiz:
1. What ethnic heritage was Eli Whitney?
2. Was Susan B. Anthony male or female?
3. What color was Albert Einstein?
You should pass easily. If you didn’t know the answers, history books show their pictures.
Let’s make it harder:
1. Was George Washington a heterosexual?
2. How about Abe Lincoln?
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt?
Maybe that was too easy for you too. History books tend to mention wives of historical figures even if the wife made no significant contribution to history other than marriage. You don’t think mentioning the wives is teaching our children about sex, do you?
Before awarding a passing grade, you must answer the bonus question. (No cheating off Google to look smart.)
1. Who was our only bachelor President?
If you had a good history class - something difficult to find in our public schools nowadays - you may have been taught all of our Presidents were married except one. What you most likely weren’t taught is he lived with his male "partner", a senator from Alabama, for sixteen years. You definitely weren’t taught that because of prejudices and hatred towards homosexuals in those times, we may never know if he were gay, despite strong evidence suggesting he was.
If our history books mentioned this president had a male partner of sixteen years, do you really think that’s teaching our children about sex?
Let’s face it. Refusing to mention anything about a gay historical figure’s partner is your way of ensuring that our children won’t think homosexuals are normal people who can grow up to be President.
Not much has changed in attitudes towards homosexuals since James Buchanan’s time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
