Monday, June 11, 2012

Seattle Times Asks Me to Correct and Clarify My Blog

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Lornet Turnbull, journalist with the Seattle Times, contacted me on Friday suggesting I had misrepresented or misunderstood the intention of her story in the Seattle Times in regard to my comments concerning  the silence of activists who seek to redefine marriage following the completion of a very successful signature gathering for R-74. In fact, it was record setting.

I specifically noted the silence of Sen. Ed Murray.

I wrote the Blog on "Silence," linking this June 6 Seattle Times story. (

While I linked the Seattle Times story, I had, as I normally do, read most all of the news sources in the Seattle area and around the state and had not been able to find any comments from those who seek to redefine marriage---particularly a comment from Sen. Ed Murray, the primary sponsor of the law to redefine marriage---a Senator who has seemingly made redefining marriage his life calling.

In the "Silence" blog, I said we would surely hear from Murray and other activists seeking to redefine marriage in the near future.

On June 7, the Seattle Times revised and updated the story and included some comments by Senator Ed Murray and others. I used Sen. Murray's comment that if he should fail in this current attempt to redefine marriage, he will come back, "year after year after year," as the title of Friday's Blog. Making the point that even if he is defeated this time on marriage, he will be back as soon as January 2013 and we should prepare for that reality.

In her email, Turnbull said she felt I was, "presuming to understand why the story was revised and updated."

I told her I was not assigning any motive for her update, but merely pointing out that there were no quotes in any of the news services I reviewed from those leading the campaign to redefine marriage---thus the title about "Silence."

She felt I should clarify my statements because in her updated version of the same story, she quoted from both sides and said, "some of  your readers also read my stories." Again, the point was not about quotes from one or both sides, it was about the fact that Murray and others on his side of the issue had been initially silent in all the news sources I had read, however, I assured our readers we would hear from him and others in their efforts to redefine marriage. Which, indeed we did.

I think Lornet Turnbull tries to be fair in publishing quotes from both sides. She has always been accurate in quoting me over the years.

However, she works for a news organization whose editorial board is anything but unbiased and consistently advocates for the most far left, secular progressive positions and candidates.

You will recall that the Times editorial board said in the last election that John Kosters was well qualified for a congressional seat (District 2) but they could not endorse him because of his social--- pro-life, pro-marriage, positions.

Several journalists at the Seattle Times have told me personally that the editorial board does not influence  their news stories. I want to believe that, but sometimes it is difficult, knowing the extreme position of the board and others within the organization.

Lornet asked if I would clarify my comments, I hope this helps.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.


  1. You got it right Gary. Things are very clear.

  2. Gary, the Seattle Times has twice summoned me to appear before their board for a Congressional candidate endorsement interview. Twice I declined, telling them I certainly wasn't seeking their endorsement. I stopped reading that leftist rag years ago. Ignore them.

  3. Gary - You have made oppression your life calling by completing confusing what a legal partnership agreement is vs. genuine Biblical marriage. Since you have been repeatedly informed of this most obvious distinction, it is apparent that you have another agenda - one rooted in deception which is obviously not from above.

    In Jesus Christ

    1. Patrick, I think the point Gary is making is that all moral law is established by God; therefore laws that men make that contradict God are by their very nature illegal. It doesn't matter if man considers it legal or not, it matters what God says. Surely you can see that?

      " If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do? "

      Craig in Lacey

  4. I think Lornet should do a story about how you lied to 3 federal courts when you assured them that the release of the R71 signatories would result in violence and harassment. In fact there hasn't been a single case of violence or harassment in all the many months since the release of these 10s of thousands of signatory names. Not a single instance, Gary. You spent tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars and 3 years litigating a delusion.

    Don't you feel any obligation to apologize and admit that you were wrong? Do you have any sense of shame?

    1. Have you ever seen Gary acknowledge or apologize for misinformation or an error?

      I think the answer as to whether he has any shame is 'self evident'.

  5. Gary your faithfulness to biblical principles is remarkable and inspiring. Your strength in the face of criticism is motivating and uplifting. Continue to stand strong. You are vigilant, discerning, prayerful and active. Thank you and may God bless you. I stand with you.

  6. Anon 8:19 - Gary has completed rejected Biblical principles and is living in his own religious flesh - just like all false teachers do.



Faith and Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.