CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Pushing Agendas, Ignoring Facts

Jul 17, 2011

This title could well describe what we find in the mainstream media any day of the week. I have documented time after time the way the secular left in the MSM simply ignore the evidence, dismiss facts, and trample on truth as they push their radical agendas.

Open the paper on any given day, or tune into the radio, or turn on the TV, and one example after another of this sort of activity will readily be found. It is as typical as it is monotonous. It is the same old same old in our MSM, and that is why the alternative media has taken off like a storm – people are so sick and tired of the propaganda and lack of neutrality in our major news outlets.

And it does not take a full-time faith and family activist to spot these occurrences. My wife in fact spotted the one I am about to describe. It is found in the Sunday magazine of today’s Herald Sun. In the “your say” section, the editor of the magazine evidently decided that she really was not all that interested in your say, so she posted one of her own letters!

In a very short letter she managed to get just about everything wrong – quite an achievement. Ms Sara Mulcahy offered us a 60-word humdinger. It really is amazing how in so few words one person can get so many things so utterly wrong. It takes someone on a crusade pushing an agenda to manage to get things so awfully screwed up.

Her “letter” was about same-sex marriage. Gee, why are we not surprised about that? These intellectualoids in the MSM think this is the only thing the entire nation is concerned about. Even though it is not, they will make sure that every single day it is brought up ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

That is one way to wage a propaganda war: gain control of the institutions of power and influence, such as the media, and then relentlessly push a tiny minority group agenda over and over until you can fool the masses into believing that everyone plus their uncle must really be into all this.

Thus even though the overwhelming majority of Australians do not give a rip about SSM, just keep flogging it to death in every conceivable manner until you get your way. So Ms Mulcahy is doing just that: like every other activist or fellow traveller, she keeps pushing an agenda until the opposition is worn down.

She begins her little indoctrination piece by making a telling admission: she was once married, briefly. But it was “a mistake”. That in itself is rather telling. But she goes on to say that it’s a mistake “we were free to make because everyone has the right to get married”.

OK, stop right there. Everyone? Did she just say ‘everyone’? But that is patently not true. Not even close. For starters, I cannot get married. Nope, can’t do it, and I should not be expected to. Why? Because I am already married. So I am now utterly disqualified from getting married.

So is a ten-year-old girl who may be madly in love with Justin Bieber. Even if the Canadian pop star returned her affections, she still can’t marry the guy. She is underage and just does not qualify. So is a person who is madly in love with her pet – and such people do indeed exist. That person is also disqualified from getting married.

So too is the insanely mad Collingwood supporter (we will not here discuss the possibility that anyone who supports Collingwood is insanely mad). No matter how fanatically in love he may be with his Mighty Magpies, this marriage is just not going to happen.

The truth is, there are all sorts of people who cannot get married. Indeed, chances are that the majority of the world’s population is not presently qualified to marry. Just because two women claim to love each other does not make them qualified to wed.

Anyone can get married, as long as they meet the basic requirements. But if you reject those requirements out of hand, then don’t expect any sympathy from me about not being able to get married. You have sealed your own fate bub, so no tears from me.

She then goes on to repeat one of the bigger lies in this debate, when she talks about “an estimated 10 per cent of the population” who cannot marry. Wrong Sara, go to the back of the class. You fail, again – big time. This myth has been blown out of the water time and time again, but that does not stop these agenda pushers from using it nonetheless.

The truth is, every single important study on this from here or overseas has found just one to two per cent of the adult population to be homosexual. So if Australia has 22 million people, and we deduct some 8 million people under 18, we are left with 14 million.

One and a half per cent of this number equals 210,000. And how many of those really even want marriage – and will actually get married? Again, a small percentage. Let’s be very generous (based on figures from those places where SSM is available), and suggest a figure of 10 per cent. That comes to 21,000.

So this handful of people is seeking to hold an entire nation to ransom as they demand we gut the millennia-old institutions of marriage and family. Sorry Sara, I just am not buying any of this, not for one minute.

She finishes by castigating Julia Gillard for not yet caving in to these demands. She claims the PM is just “chasing votes”. Well that is about the only thing she has gotten right so far. The votes simply are not there for this. People care greatly about the great big new tax called the Carbon Tax and issues like that, but they care next to nothing about promoting the push to redefine marriage out of existence.

She then says Julia must in her heart know that legalising SSM is the right thing to do. Just how do you know that Sara? Do you have some special inside information which none of us have? Are you alone privy to the inner workings of the nation’s leader?

We could conclude here, but I must add one other bit of information. Also found in this magazine is a three-page full-colour story about an American actress who wants to marry her female lover. Indeed, this is the cover story for this edition.

I have said before that if someone wants to bypass healthy debate and vigorous argument, ignore facts, and suspend truth, one need simply to peddle out a “human interest” story. Simply find someone who shares your agenda and spin a big sob story out of it.

“Oh boohoo, poor me. I just want to marry but all these cruel and bigoted people are not letting me. Why can’t I do what I want? Poor, poor me.” The violins start playing at this point. Of course such emotive personal stories will win hands down against just mere argument, fact and evidence.

They are designed to. Which is exactly why you will never see this magazine or hardly any other MSM vehicle feature a human interest story offering the other point of view. They just will not feature someone who has been harmed by the homosexual lifestyle.

They will not even consider allowing a former homosexual to tell his or her story. Nope, can’t be done. That would undo all their hard propaganda work. So they deliberately censor out any such story, and only allow stories that make their case.

So what we have here is simply your typical run of the mill MSM indoctrination process in action. This is what we get all the time from the MSM. And as long as that is the case, then alternative sites like this one will exist. Truth is important, and truth must get out into the public arena.

If the MSM will censor truth in order to push agendas, then I and others will keep on presenting a different point of view. If and when the MSM gets its act together, then I can go on a vacation. Until then, I will be keeping pretty busy.

[1391 words]

8 Responses to Pushing Agendas, Ignoring Facts

  • Don’t underestimate the populism of Gillard. She doesn’t give a rip about marriage. She is against SSM because she doesn’t want to appear extreme in her politics.

    She, like Obama, will change in a heartbeat when it is politically expedient to do so.

    Damien Spillane

  • Thanks Damien

    Yes she will likely go with what is expedient. And given her own personal contempt for marriage…

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Don’t hold your breath while you’re waiting for that vacation you’re talking about Bill…
    John Symons

  • You are overly generous in suggesting that even 10 percent of homosexuals are interested in SSM. Figures from the Netherlands indicate that less than half that figure – 4 percent – actually avail themselves of it.
    Dunstan Hartley

  • Yes quite right Dunstan.

    And that seems to be true wherever SSM has been legalised. Nobody really wants it that much.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Last year the Office for National Statistics UK published a figure of 1- 1.5% that was gay or bisexual. This is the most comprehensive study so far. Their methodology was thus:

    The estimate of homosexual numbers was drawn from a new ONS survey, called the Integrated Household Survey. It was compiled by putting new questions to individuals who already take part in six existing large-scale surveys.

    As a result the ONS has managed to draw answers from a large number. In total, the new Integrated Household Survey can cover 450,000, hundreds of times the size of databases commonly used in research.

    The questions on sexuality were put to 247,623, of whom 238,206 provided an answer. By contrast, the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles which last tried to make a count of the gay population in 2000, used a database of 12,000.

    The ONS survey put questions on sexuality both face-to-face and by telephone.

    It is interesting to read the response of the left wing newspapers, the Independent and the Guardian; the latter being the paper of choice for queers.
    The message coming from the Guardian and Stonewall is that it does not matter what evidence or reasoned argument one puts forward that queers represent a disordered minority who are holding a nation to ransom, they will ignore it and do what they want when the they want, regardless of the consequences.

    Only when Britain becomes an Islamic state, will the likes of Ben Summerskill of Stonewall be disabused of his self-willed delusion and denial. But even the threat to his own flesh and skin causes him not a moment’s concern as he stampedes down the Gadarene slope, followed by his sweating, grunting, gesticulating and cavorting disciples.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/official-statistics-reveal-uk-gay-lesbian-and-bisexual-population-2087829.html
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/sep/23/gay-britain-ons
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/sep/26/gay-britain-national-survey-statistics

    David Skinner, UK

  • Hi Bill, I have posted previously about same sex marriage. I am an atheist lesbian in support of ssm. We agreed that the most convincing argument would win. I understand that for you, God is the ultimate arbiter of the debate but I am interested in your commentary questioning the validity of polling showing increasing support for ssm. For some time all msm polls show that the young, the ‘liberal’ and the not very/ not at all religious are in the main supportive of ssm, Another poll today: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/behind-the-numbers/post/americans-split-on-new-york-gay-marriage-law/2011/07/28/gIQAEhckfI_blog.html
    seems to show that we both live in a bubble.

    I am surrounded by liberals, gays and lesbians, young people and people who never think about religion at all. Accordingly I rarely meet anyone who has a problem with ssm. I recenlty gave a talk to students from a progressive catholic high school and not one student felt that ssm was an issue- it was boringly obvious to them that ssm would soon be here and that was fine by them.. Each student said that they knew at least one ‘out’ person- either a friend, sibling or fellow student and even teachers! This did not surprise me as several of my lesbian friends teach at nominally religious private schools and as long as they are discrete, no one pays any attention.

    You however appear to live in that other bubble identlfied by the poll; older, conservative Christians, so this explains your difficulty in believing that there is a societal change in attitudes to ssm. Looking at this poll, do you still think growing ssm support is a confection of msm?
    Regards, Angela Pollard

  • Thanks Angela

    But let me call your bluff. I have co-authored an entire book on same-sex marriage, in which I offer plenty of reasons why we should not legalise SSM. I do not even once mention the word religion. The arguments are made on completely non-religious grounds. Feel free to get it and read it for yourself: http://www.panterapress.com.au/shop/product/4/why-vs-why-gay-marriage

    As to polls, several things can be said. They tend to be all over the place; how they are worded is quite important; and plenty of homosexuals themselves do not even want SSM. But perhaps most importantly, since when is what is right or wrong, and true or false, determined by surveys and mere numbers?

    And by your own admission, you are clearly living in a bubble of like-minded people. Perhaps you need to get out a bit more and see how the rest of the world lives.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

Leave a Reply