So are you aware of the fact that your tax dollars are going to pay the PC zombies to lie publicly, and promote the agenda of the homosexual activists? The recently established ABC FactCheck unit is anything but. It would be much more accurate to call it the LieMaker unit.
Take a recent “fact check” that had to do with Tony Abbott’s claim that marriage has always been about one man and one woman. That happens to be 100 per cent true. Have there been the rare exceptions along the way? Sure, but exceptions do not make the rule.
No culture ever promoted and recognised homosexual marriage until the Netherlands became the first nation on earth to do so in 2001. Up until then, no nation officially and publically recognised homosexual marriages. Yet you would never realise this if you just went by this scurrilous ABC “fact checker”.
All that it does here is push the homosexual lies and pretend it has offered us some scholarly fact checking. If they were honest and called themselves the ABC Propaganda unit that might be one thing. But claiming to be fact checkers as they lie through their teeth is especially appalling.
Their “experts” which they relied on were all homosexuals themselves or very partial to the homosexual agenda. One professor given a dream run by the ABC, Stephanie Coontz, of course has been a long standing historical revisionist here when it comes to family matters. She has long tried to argue that family and marriage come in all shapes and sizes, and they cannot be pinned down in any way.
Consider also John Boswell: we are simply told he was a Yale professor. The ABC nicely declined to inform us that he was also a homosexual who died of AIDS at age 47. His work – claiming, among other things, that homosexual marriages were performed in Christian churches – has been roundly debunked by experts.
And consider as well William Eskridge, a leading proponent of homosexual marriage. Are we informed of that in this article? Nope, he is just passed off as another prof from Yale University. Hey, guess what – you can lie just as much by what you do not say as what you do say.
And was one marriage and family expert who would have fully concurred with Tony Abbott allowed a look in here? Absolutely not. There are plenty of these experts and scholars, yet the ABC resolutely refused to dig up even one. Of course to do so would have undermined and discredited their little exercise in propaganda.
Indeed, are they even aware of such experts as David Popenoe, Bryce Christensen, Allan Carlson, Christopher Lasch, Philip Abbott, William Bennett, Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Brigitte and Peter L. Berger, Maggie Gallagher, James Q. Wilson, Douglas Farrow, Dana Mack, Connie Marshner, Mary Eberstadt and a host of other scholars and marriage and family experts? I doubt it.
Just imagine if I set up a CultureWatch FactChecker unit. Let’s say I did a fact check on whether tobacco is harmful to the user. What if I offered up a list of experts who all said that tobacco use is just fine, and causes no harm? What if I said Professor Jo Blow from such and such university, and smoking expert from another uni, etc., all agreed here?
Oh, and what if I failed to inform my readers that every single one of my “experts” were in fact in the pay of Big Tobacco? Would that not skew my presentation just a bit and render it a bit useless? Indeed, would that not be a clear case of professional misconduct on my part, by deliberately concealing valuable information about my expert witnesses?
I would be forced to take my article down immediately and offer a public apology for deliberately misleading the public. I would be told I can no longer engage in such shoddy journalism, and I never again would be seen as in any way being a credible commentator on such matters.
Yet “our” ABC does this on a regular basis, and with impunity, and with our tax dollars as well! If there ever was a case to stop the public funding of the ABC immediately, this would be it. Indeed, will the lefty Media Watch show – also another ABC scam – be covering this issue? Will they be exposing the ABC here? Why do I rather doubt that, big time?
And even more incredibly idiotic was the attempt by the ABC to make its case by appealing to Nero of all people! Just how far in scraping the bottom of the barrel did they have to go to try to get some “proof” here? But there was a good rebuttal to this nonsense by Andrew Bolt, so let me offer his helpful response:
The extra grant Labor gave the ABC this year for a “Fact Check” unit was a complete waste of money. It’s gone to yet another Leftist cell largely devoted to exposing conservative motes while overlooking Leftist beams. Worse, it seems to have trashed the facts to push propaganda. This week, the unit tries to dispute this statement from Prime Minister Tony Abbott: From time immemorial, in every culture that’s been known, marriage or that kind of solemnised relationship has been between a man and a woman. Aha! The ABC fact checkers pounce. False, they cry:
Roman Emperor Nero was married to not one man, but two. His nuptials were recorded and discussed at the time between subjects – friendly and hostile. What a fraudulent gotcha. This is not fact-checking but fooling and faking. What Nero did was actually culturally transgressive. His “marriage” no more reflected Roman mores than did his purported incest with his mother. Tacitus, a boy during Nero’s reign, recorded such “marriages” as “unnatural” and a “degradation”:
Nero was already corrupted by every lust, natural and unnatural. But he now refuted any surmises that no further degradation was possible for him. For a few days later he went through a formal wedding ceremony- with one of the perverted gang called Pythagoras. The emperor, in the presence of witnesses, put on the bridal veil. Dowry, marriage bed, wedding torches, all were there. Indeed everything was public which even in a natural union is veiled by night.
Suetonius recorded them a few decades later in an account of Nero’s “vices”:
XXVII. Little by little, however, as his vices grew stronger, he dropped jesting and secrecy and with no attempt at disguise openly broke out into worse crime… Whenever he drifted down the Tiber to Ostia, or sailed about the Gulf of Baiae, booths were set up at intervals along the banks and shores, fitted out for debauchery…
XXVIII. Besides abusing freeborn boys and seducing married women, he debauched the vestal virgin Rubria… He castrated the boy Sporus and actually tried to make a woman of him; and he married him with all the usual ceremonies, including a dowry and a bridal veil, took him to his house attended by a great throng, and treated him as his wife… That he even desired illicit relations with his own mother, and was kept from it by her enemies who feared that such a relationship might give the reckless and insolent woman too great influence, was notorious, especially after he added to his concubines a courtesan who was said to look very like Agrippina. Even before that, so they say, whenever he rode in a litter with his mother, he had incestuous relations with her, which were betrayed by the stains on his clothing.
XXIX. He so prostituted his own chastity that after defiling almost every part of his body, he at last devised a kind of game, in which, covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound to stakes, and when he had sated his mad lust, was dispatched by his freed man Doryphorus; for he was even married to this man in the same way that he himself had married Sporus, going so far as to imitate the cries and lamentations of a maiden being deflowered.
Cassius Dio referred to one of the marriages as among Nero’s “indecencies”:
Now Nero called Sporus “Sabina” not merely because, owing to his resemblance to her he had been made a eunuch, but because the boy, like the mistress, had been solemnly married to him in Greece, Tigellinus giving the bride away, as the law ordained. All the Greeks held a celebration in honour of their marriage, uttering all the customary good wishes, even to the extent of praying that legitimate children might be born to them. After that Nero had two bedfellows at once, Pythagoras to play the rôle of husband to him, and Sporus that of wife. The latter, in addition to other forms of address, was termed “lady,” “queen,” and “mistress.” Yet why should one wonder at this, seeing that Nero would fasten naked boys and girls to stakes, and then putting on the hide of a wild beast would attack them and satisfy his brutal lust under the appearance of devouring parts of their bodies? Such were the indecencies of Nero.
And how much of such reports is even true? How much is anti-Nero propaganda? But step back. What a strange argument the ABC fact-checkers are so deceitfully presenting. Gay marriage is sanctioned by history because Nero did it? This is fiddling while the argument burns. The ABC fact-check unit is out of control.
Exactly right Andrew. And as another commentator said elsewhere, “Nero also burnt Christians alive. Just because he did it, doesn’t mean it’s right”. Yes quite so. It is utterly appalling that the ABC is allowed to get away with this bogus baloney and shameful scam.
Even worse yet, I am forced to pay for these lie makers. Privatise the ABC now!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-01/tony-abbott-incorrect-history-marriage/5053844
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/abc_fact_checkers_reach_new_depths_gay_marriage_defended_because_nero_did_i/?fb_action_ids=214560242055593&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%22214560242055593%22%3A467364766714954%7D&action_type_map=%7B%22214560242055593%22%3A%22og.recommends%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D
[1652 words]