In Debate, ABC Hits Republicans from Left on Gay Rights
During Saturday's Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire hosted by ABC, two of the three co-moderators - World News anchor Diane Sawyer and local ABC affiliate anchor Josh McElveen - posed questions about gay rights issues to candidates Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney.
Gingrich ended up confronting ABC's choice of questions by criticizing the media's general double standard in asking questions that are sympathetic to a liberal gay rights point of view while not showing sympathy for how religious organizations have been harmed at times by gay rights activism and anti-Christian "bigotry" from the left.
Reading a question a viewer submitted to Yahoo, Sawyer began this portion of the program by posing the question of what the candidates would say to a gay couple "personally sitting in your living rooms" about same-sex marriage and relationships. Sawyer:
I want to turn now, if I can, from the constitutional (INAUDIBLE) here to something closer to home and to maybe families sitting in their living rooms across this country. Yahoo sends us questions, as you know. We have them from real viewers. And I'd like to post one because it is about gay marriage. But, at the level, I would really love to be able to ask you what you would say personally sitting in your living rooms to the people who ask questions like this.
Sawyer then read a question from one viewer:
Given that you oppose gay marriage, what do you want gay people to do who want to form loving, committed, long-term relationships? What is your solution?
A bit later, as McElveen questioned Santorum about the former Senator's opposition to gay adoption and support for a constitutional amendment to ban government recognition of same-sex marriage nationwide, the ABC affiliate anchor pressed Santorum on whether it was better to be a "ward of the state" than to have gay parents, and whether same-sex couples who have already entered into legal marriages would suddenly have those marriage agreements revoked by the federal government if an amendment were passed.
McElveen first posed:
We're in a state where it is legal for same-sex couples to marry - 1,800, in fact, couples have married since it became law here in New Hampshire. ... And they're trying to start families, some of them. Your position on same-sex adoption, obviously, you are in favor of traditional families. But are you going to tell someone they belong as a ward of the state or in foster care, rather than have two parents who want them?
After Santorum's answer, McElveen followed up:
With those 1,800, if you've got a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, what happens to the 1,800 families who have marriage here? Are their marriages basically illegitimate, at this point?
After the discussion of gay rights had run for about six minutes, Gingrich complained:
I just want to raise, since we just spent this much time on these issues, I just want to raise a point about the news media bias. You don't hear the opposite question asked. Should the Catholic Church be forced to close its adoption services in Massachusetts because it won't accept gay couples? Which is exactly what the state has done.
Should the Catholic Church be driven out of providing charitable services in the District of Columbia because it won't give in to secular bigotry? Should the Catholic Church find itself discriminated against by the Obama administration in a key delivery of services because of the bias and the bigotry of the administration? The bigotry question goes both ways, and there's a lot more anti-Christian bigotry today than there is concerning the other side, and none of it gets covered by the liberal media.
Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Republican debate in New Hampshire, hosted by ABC, from Saturday, January 7:
DIANE SAWYER: I want to turn now, if I can, from the constitutional (INAUDIBLE) here to something closer to home and to maybe families sitting in their living rooms across this country. Yahoo sends us questions, as you know. We have them from real viewers. And I'd like to post one because it is about gay marriage. But, at the level, I would really love to be able to ask you what you would say personally sitting in your living rooms to the people who ask questions like this. This is from Phil in Virginia:
Given that you oppose gay marriage, what do you want gay people to do who want to form loving, committed, long-term relationships? What is your solution?
And, Speaker Gingrich? [NEWT GINGRICH]
SAWYER: Governor Huntsman, you've talked about civil unions. How do you disagree with the others on this stage?
[JON HUNTSMAN]
JOSH McELVEEN, WMUR-TV ABC 9: I'd like to go to Senator Santorum with a similar topic. We're in a state where it is legal for same-sex couples to marry - 1,800, in fact, couples have married since it became law here in New Hampshire. The legislature passed it a couple of years ago. And they're trying to start families, some of them. Your position on same-sex adoption, obviously, you are in favor of traditional families. But are you going to tell someone they belong as a ward of the state or in foster care, rather than have two parents who want them? [RICK SANTORUM]
McELVEEN: Well, what would be - I just need to follow up on that, if you don't mind, Senator. With those 1,800, if you've got a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, what happens to the 1,800 families who have marriage here? Are their marriages basically illegitimate, at this point?
[SANTORUM]
SAWYER: If I could come back to the living room question, again, Governor Romney, would you weigh in on the Yahoo question about what you would say sitting down in your living room to a gay couple who say, "We simply want to have the right to," as the person who wrote the email said, we want gay people to form loving, committed, long-term relationships. In human terms, what would you say to them? [MITT ROMNEY]
SAWYER: Speaker Gingrich-
GINGRICH: I just want to raise, since we just spent this much time on these issues, I just want to raise a point about the news media bias. You don't hear the opposite question asked. Should the Catholic Church be forced to close its adoption services in Massachusetts because it won't accept gay couples? Which is exactly what the state has done.
Should the Catholic Church be driven out of providing charitable services in the District of Columbia because it won't give in to secular bigotry? Should the Catholic Church find itself discriminated against by the Obama administration in a key delivery of services because of the bias and the bigotry of the administration? The bigotry question goes both ways, and there's a lot more anti-Christian bigotry today than there is concerning the other side, and none of it gets covered by the liberal media. [AUDIENCE APPLAUSE]
- Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center
