Ya gotta love it. Bill O'Reilly, whose salacious phone calls to his former producer prompted a sexual harassment lawsuit and who tried to get his wife's boyfriend investigated by the local police, seems to have a problem with same sex marriage. He predicted that same sex marriage would lead to interspecies marriage - a prediction that doesn't seem to have come true in states where same sex marriage is legal. And while Bill isn't quite as vocal in his opposition to same sex marriage, he still lets his preference for straight marriage be known - a preference that's ironic given that he and the Mrs.' connubial bliss might have been impacted by their separate residences. Last night, he discussed gay marriage in the context of a subject that was unearthed by Fox News' resident good, Christian homophobe Todd Starnes whose article about the Obama campaign's "gay party pack" appeared on Fox Nation. Included in the Obama gear is baby clothing that says "my two dads" and "my two moms" support Obama. Bill used these items as a basis for a discussion about the political ramifications of Obama's support for gay marriage - but not before he pontificated his views on sacred straight marriage and implied that those who support gay marriage are really the bigots! Ironic, don't ya think!
O'Reilly began with the baby clothing. He sardonically commented "how adorable, how politically correct." He asked his audience to imagine the reaction to a hypothetical Romney baby outfit that said "I'm glad that I have a man and a woman for parents; the media would love that wouldn't they" which misses the point that the baby clothing is less of a statement of gay pride than a statement about support for the president. He wanted to know if the factor should make a shirt that says "this kid is happy with a man and a woman for parents." He pointed to himself which is interesting given that he has admitted that his heterosexual daddy was abusive. Juan Williams said that the kid would be happy and that he supports traditional families. He noted that the Bill shirt would be seen as "an implicit criticism of those who support gay marriage." O'Reilly responded, "you'd be a bigot." (Ya think!) When Williams said "you know the deal," Il Papa O'Reilly asked "the fact that I know the deal, Juan, does that mean the deal is right?"
When Williams said that we're at a point in society when more and more people think that gays should be respected..., Bill, in overtalking him, asked if that means "the baby can't wear the anti-gay marriage shirt but only has to wear the pro-gay marriage shirt." (Again, the shirt is a pro-Obama shirt. It merely reflects on the baby's family arrangement.) Bill admitted that gay marriage is becoming increasingly popular but "we all know that there are good people who support traditional marriage, don't want the intrusion..." Williams argued that Bill's baby couture would be seen as "antagonistic to gay people." (Ya think!) Bill felt that is "wrong in a society that respects both points of view." (One of which is bigoted, but O'Reilly doesn't see bigotry!)
Later in the discussion, Williams noted that the African-American churches are split on the issue. O'Reilly accused him of "demonizing" a group of people" and added "ya gotta respect the fact that there are people who believe marriage should be held at this standard as far as nature dictates..." (So those who said that "nature dictated" that blacks should have been denied civil rights should have been respected?)
Bill's comment, that "good people," who support traditional marriage "don't want the intrusion," was probably said by those who supported banning of interracial marriage. Bill, by baselessly defining gay marriage as an "intrusion," just made the argument that those who oppose gay marriage are bigots. But here's my question to Bill: Is the reason that your marriage appears to be on the skids due to the "intrusion" of same sex marriage? Inquiring minds want to know! And BTW, Bill, I don't "gotta respect" bigots.
Video available at Mediaite.
I heard the same crap as a little kid in the early ’60s.
Dear orally man and his “folks,” it’s called civil rights.