Print 
PDF
Under the guise of "news," the Times is doing it again---presenting a story as "news" when it is, well, you decide.
News stories are more helpful than op-ed articles. And they are said to be different. Unrelated. Unbiased.
The people who are working to redefine marriage are running with the recent article, advancing a narrative of fear and urgency, using the story as confirmation and fuel.
Within minutes after Lornet Turnbull's Seattle Times' story was out, the marriage redefiners were quoting and referencing the story, saying, "If we're going to preserve the freedom to marry this November, we need to have resources to answer all the nasty ads on the way. Please contribute now..."
Not only was this story a good vehicle for same-sex "marriage" advocates' fund raising, but was directed at anyone who may still be undecided on the issue of redefining marriage.
Loving, caring people vs. nasty, intolerant people.
Wrapped as a gift in the guise of "news."
I've seen it before. I've even experienced it personally.
Back in August, Janet Tu wrote an article for the Times on Archbishop Sartain. While it appeared on the surface to be a story highlighting the Archbishop and his ministry, as you read on into the story, it was not a spotlight noting his good work, it was a blow torch intended to burn him because he opposes redefining marriage and supports natural marriage. And says so out loud.
He was said to be "out of touch with his congregation." I wrote a blog about it.
This time its the same agenda, with a different cast of characters.
This time the bad guy is not a Bishop, but a PR person---a consultant who is leading the media campaign to preserve marriage in Washington State.
Frank Schubert.
The "news" story begins, "The man behind the messages in campaigns against same-sex marriage in Washington and three other states is a master strategist both revered and reviled by those who know his work."
The story initially defines Schubert as very successful in his work, then begins a narrative of well chosen quotes that cast him and his work as a threat to every decent, fair, opened minded, tolerant person.
Here's the short version of how the negative profile is developed. Same format as with Archbishop Sartain.
The Message: "Schubert is very good at what he does. This is what he does."
Marc Solomon (Freedom to Marry): "Frank Schubert wakes up every morning trying to figure out how to take freedoms away from loving, committed couples."
Anne Levinson (WA United for Marriage): "Schubert relishes creating this rhetoric, and he doesn't care if it's borne out of truth. He polls and does focus groups to find out what voters' fears are and then designs tactics to play on those fears."
Lornet Turnbull (Times journalist): "Ironically, Schubert's sister, a deputy district attorney for Sacramento County who is running for Superior Court judge, is a lesbian raising children with her partner."
Turnbull again: "The twice married Schubert said..." And, "Gays have long argued they are not responsible for what's wrong with traditional marriage in the country."
Solomon again: "What you'll find is that his arguments are getting old and stale and will be less effective because so many people now know same-sex couples who are in committed relationships."
Turnbul again: "One of his [Schubert] more famous TV ads feature a girl running up to her mother asking her to guess what she learned in school that day: 'I learned how a prince married a prince and I can marry a princess."
Turnbul: "While gay-marriage bills say nothing about what kids should be taught in schools, the reality is that grades as young as kindergarten children are already being taught about different kinds of families, including those headed by same-sex couples."
The marriage bills don't need to address the impact on education, there is always a number of "clarification and adjustment" type legislative actions that follow, designed to "bring into conformity" gender issues, terminology, etc. with the marriage bill.
This has already happened with this bill. Murray and Pederson were on that before the session ended earlier this year. We all know that translates into the classroom. Every time a bill is passed that compromises traditional marriage, family values or the sanctity of life, its content is transferred into the classroom and ultimately into the textbook.
To imply that redefining marriage has no affect on what is taught in public school is very misleading.
Here are The Ten Components of the "news" story.
1. Schubert is a master strategist. He is revered and reviled.
2. Schubert is very good, but very dangerous.
3. A call to action. A story suitable with quotes for fundraising by homosexual activists. A renewed sense of urgency.
4. Schubert is obsessed with taking freedoms away from homosexuals.
5. Schubert plays on fear, not on truth.
6. Schubert is a liar.
7. Schubert's sister is a lesbian.
8. Schubert has failed in heterosexual marriage. He has been married twice.
9. Schubert's beliefs are old and stale. Flat earth beliefs. Not relevant. Represent a dwindling minority.
10. Kids in kindergarten are already being taught about same-sex families. This bill doesn't effect education.
Deception. From the largest newspaper in Washington State.
Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.
