I admit it. I check Fox News' web site every day. It's instructive, to say the least. It's interesting to see which stories every other national news organization is covering but they are not. Or how their headlines differ. It's also important to check their stories against other organizations stories, even when it's a wire feed story, to see what parts Fox has left out. I remember once catching them excluding a paragraph that was pretty key to an understanding of the entire story. Without that paragraph, things looked much different and not nearly as favorable for the side that Fox clearly preferred.
also interesting to see what stories they cover that no one else does.
In my experience, most of these stories provide "evidence" for what Fox
News promotes as the "war on religion.*" The one that caught my eye
today was this:
Proposed Law Would Force Churches to Host Gay Weddings!
Ok, so the headline didn't include the exclamation point, but it
was clearly implied. Because this is outrageous! This is intolerable!
This is one very short step away from evil government forcing Grandma
and sweet, innocent children to watch those dirty, dirty gays pleasure
each other at the altar on Sunday mornings! Until you actually read the
story and realize this is...
...nothing more than a garden variety proposed city ordinance
that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to the classes of
people who cannot be discriminated against in public accommodations. So
restaurants can't refuse to serve gays or transgender folks. Apartments
can't refuse to rent. Hotels can't refuse rooms. And places that rent
out rooms to the public can't discriminate. So churches that open up
their parish halls or other buildings to the public as rental spaces
couldn't refuse to rent that publicly-offered space to gays. Oh noes!
These public accommodation laws are nothing new. The Civil Rights
Act of 1964, anyone? It's hardly all that radical or new a notion to
add sexual orientation and gender identity to these laws. This proposed
law is in Hutchinson, Kansas and there isn't even a story about it on
that local paper's website that I can find. And, of course, any church
in Hutch that can't abide the thought of their parish hall hosting a gay
wedding reception or some other icky event by those icky Sodomites has a
really simple solution: stop offering your space as a rental to the
public. If you restrict rental just to congregants, problem solved. But
if you're going to be part of the commercial marketplace, separate and
apart from your religious mission, we as a society get to say you can't
discriminate. Seriously, you don't think there was a church somewhere
who tried to argue that racial desegregation being forced on them was a
violation of separation of church and state? That argument didn't fly,
neither should this one.
But Fox News just has to put forward every example it can
find to support its claim of a war on religion (all while steadfastly
denying anything like a "war on women"). Even though no church will ever
be "forced" to host a gay wedding. It just sounds better to say it that
way. I can't help but wonder what their coverage would have looked like
if they'd been around to report on Brown v. BoE, Little Rock in 1957,
and the Civil Rights Act.
Christianity and only Christianity. The outpouring of opposition to
Muslim mosques and community centers cannot in any way, shape, or form
be construed as part of some "war on religion." That would just be crazy