The National Post buckles to homosexual political correctness
From here:
Earlier this week the National Post ran an advertisement that has caused some controversy.
[........]
In an open society, these positions are worthy of being part of a debate on this issue. They are also legitimate arguments to make in a paid advertisement in a media outlet.
Where the ad exceeded the bounds of civil discourse was in its tone and manipulative use of a picture of a young girl; in the suggestion that such teaching “corrupts” children, with everything that such a charge implies; and in its singling out of groups of people with whose sexuality the group disagrees.
The fact that we will not be publishing this ad again represents a recognition on our part that publishing it in the first place was a mistake. The National Post would like to apologize unreservedly to anyone who was offended by it. We will be taking steps to ensure that in future our procedures for vetting the content of advertising will be strictly adhered to.
The Post will also be donating the proceeds from the advertisement to an organization that promotes the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people.
The advertisement is below. It is no more manipulative than any other advertisement – after all, the advertisements that pay the bills at the NP are all designed to manipulate opinion.
If the Post is so afraid of offending the wrong people (it doesn’t seem to care if anyone is offended by the ad’s cancellation) that it not only refuses to publish an advertisement questioning a contemporary sacred cow, but grovels at the feet of those it thinks it has offended by throwing cash at them, why bother to read it – why even call something so blinkered by fads a newspaper?
The American Civil Liberties Union, still working hard to curtail liberty
From here:
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced Tuesday that they are suing a Vermont inn on behalf of a lesbian couple, after the inn’s Christian owners refused to host the couple’s ‘wedding’ reception.
The Wildflower Inn in Lyndonville, owned by Jim and Mary O’Reilly, has a policy against hosting receptions for homosexual ‘weddings’, so when Kate Baker and Ming Linsley of New York City approached them last fall, they were turned away.
The ACLU alleges that the O’Reillys’ policy violates Vermont’s Fair Housing and Public Accommodations Act, which prohibits the denial of goods and services based on customers’ sexual orientation. The act contains exceptions for religious organizations and small inns with five or fewer rooms, but not larger establishments.
Nevertheless, the O’Reillys, who are devout Catholics, have stood their ground. “We do not … feel that we can offer our personal services wholeheartedly to celebrate the marriage between same sex couples because it goes against everything that we as Catholics believe in,” they wrote in a statement Tuesday.
“We have never refused rooms or dining or employment to gays or lesbians,” they continued. “Many of our guests have been same sex couples. We welcome and treat all people with respect and dignity.”
The ACLU ought to be renamed the ACSLU – the “S”, standing for “selective”. The liberties of Jim and Mary O’Reilly should be no less important than those of the lesbian couple: and the O’Reilly’s liberties are far more threatened. If recent events in the UK are anything to go by, it won’t be worth the bother for the Vermont Inn to stay in business, whereas all the lesbian couple needed to do was find somewhere else to hold their reception.
This is known as Equality in today’s newspeak.
