I was going to entitle this post "Getting it Wrong at the Inquirer, Again," a perennial favorite headline around here, to note the paper's poor judgment in placing the story, "Ala. Ready to Send a Message on Marriage," by Kaitlin Gurney, in the upper-right position on page one of today's late edition for reasons known but to, I don't know, God and maybe Amanda Bennett.

I mean, really, what's new and interesting about the citizens of yet another quasi-theocratic state like Alabama preparing to vote to deny full civil rights to a minority population, in this case, the marriage contract to gays and lesbians?

And then I stumbled upon this paragraph quoting state senator Hinton Mitchem, a sponsor of the proposed "constitutional" amendment:

The tractor company owner said he decided to sponsor the legislation after watching CNN footage of civil-disobedience marriages in San Francisco, where he was disgusted to see "two attractive men, locked in a passionate embrace, on national television."

Emphasis added.

Attractive? Where the hell did that come from?

And passionate?

Sounds like the feller was almost overcome from the moment.

Anyway, he sure is purdy, isn't he?

[Post-publication addendum: Bonus stupid quote, taken from the same article: "One church pastor, the Rev. Ed Litton of the First Baptist Church of Northern Mobile, said he considered the close timing of Alabama's vote and the Senate debate a 'coincidence that may have divine origins.'"

[Another handsome prayer warrior, no? And he's a blogger!]

| HOME |