In the aftermath of yesterday’s elections, I stumbled upon the following gem from our professional, unbiased, utterly trustworthy and dependable journalists at the state controlled Associated Press. I’ve reproduced it in its entirety so that you might bask in the full, undiluted glow of this shining example of contemporary American journalistic brilliance:
Dejection fills Maine ballroom after marriage vote
PORTLAND, Maine – Cecelia Burnett and Ann Swanson had already set their wedding date. When they joined about 1,000 other gay marriage supporters for an election night party in a Holiday Inn ballroom, they hoped to celebrate the vote that would make it possible.
Instead, they went home at midnight, dejected and near tears after a failed bid to make Maine the first state to approve same-sex marriage at the ballot box.
“I’m ready to start crying,” said Burnett, a 58-year-old massage therapist, walking out of the ballroom with Swanson at her side. “I don’t understand what the fear is, why people are so afraid of this change.
“It hurts. It hurts personally,” she said. “It’s a personal rejection of us and our relationship, and I don’t understand what the fear is.”
With 87 percent of precincts reporting, gay-marriage foes had 53 percent of the vote in a referendum that asked Maine voters whether they wanted to repeal a law allowing same-sex marriage that had passed the Legislature and was signed by Democratic Gov. John Baldacci.
“The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across the nation,” said Frank Schubert, the chief organizer for Stand for Marriage Maine, which lobbied for the repeal.
For the gay rights movement, which has gained a foothold in New England, it was a stinging defeat. Gay marriage has now lost in every state — 31 in all — in which it has been put to a popular vote. Gay-rights activists had hoped to buck that trend in Maine, framing same-sex marriage as a matter of equality for all families in a campaign that used 8,000 volunteers to get out the message.
Five states have legalized gay marriage — Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Connecticut — but all did so through legislation or court rulings, not by popular vote.
Portland resident Sarah Holman said she was torn, but decided — despite her conservative upbringing — to vote in favor of letting gays marry.
“They love and they have the right to love. And we can’t tell somebody how to love,” said Holman, 26.
While the gay marriage opponents claimed victory, Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for No on 1/Protect Maine Equality, held off conceding until early Wednesday, when he issued a statement vowing to continue to press the issue.
The fight for marriage equality will continue, he told supporters at the Holiday Inn ballroom, where a buffet table included a three-tiered wedding cake — with two grooms standing side by side, two brides standing side by side and the inscription: “We all do!”
“We’re not short-timers. We’re here for the long haul and whether it’s just all night and into the morning, or it’s next week or next month or next year. We will be here. We’ll be here fighting. We’ll be working. We will regroup.”
For Burnett and Swanson, the July 10 wedding date — and a reception cruise on Casco Bay — is off.
Woe unto poor Cecelia Burnett and Ann Swanson. All they ever wanted was to fundamentally redefine the God-ordained building block of human civilization.
What’s the big deal?
Well, whatever the big deal may be, AP has certainly gone to great lengths to paint a picture of the tragic yet hopefully temporary setback for a valiant cause. The ultimate victory of the forces of love, tolerance, puppy dogs and kittens over those who are “foes” and “opponents” of same said love, tolerance and puppies will one day come, though sadly not in time for Cecelia and Ann to make good on that planned wedding and Casino Bay cruise.
But one day the world will be right.
One day the tears will be not of anguish, but of joy.
One day the forces of intolerance and narrow-mindedness will be pushed back, totally and for good.
That’s the flavor of hope and change permeating most State controlled media coverage of the homosexual war on marriage, and it’s the sort of seasoning sprinkled all over this particular bit of “journalism”.
Why can’t “gay marriage opponents” simply be presented by the media as being pro-actual marriage? You know, as defenders of marriage as it actually exists? Why are defenders of marriage as it is constantly painted as “foes” and “opponents” of love, peace, happiness and goodness?
Probably for the same reason that anti-actual marriage forces are almost always categorized in positive terms, a la “gay marriage supporters”, “pro-equality” and as a part of the ever so noble “gay rights movement”.
You see, those who wish to crush the God-ordained institution of marriage under their collective heel so that they might reconstruct it to suit their warped ideals, are for love. They’re pro-happiness. They’re pro-sunshine, pro-puppy dog and pro-laughter
Those who are pro-actual marriage…well…those folks are “foes” and “opponents” of love, peace, and goodness in general.
So goes the GayP State Media line.
Copyright 2009 S.A. Buss – Feel free to re-post this piece, but only with the copyright included and a link to Fire Breathing Christian whenever possible. Thank you!