CNN's Lemon Harasses Conservative Guest; 'I Can Interrupt as Much as I Want'
In yet another episode of CNN's Don Lemon pestering a conservative guest,
he belittled and smeared the Heritage Foundation's Ryan Anderson on
Sunday. Anderson had claimed that same-sex marriage is not illegal, just
not recognized as "marriage" by many state governments and the federal
government.
"Well, I'm the anchor of this show, so I can interrupt as much as I want. So let me interrupt and then I'll let you talk,"
Lemon rudely lectured Anderson. Lemon called his argument "absurd" and
accused him of spreading "rumors and infactual information."
[Video below. Audio here.]
"And it's also important to come on to tell the truth and not spread rumors and infactual information when you come on," Lemon took a shot at Anderson at the segment's end.
Anderson had argued, before Lemon first interrupted him, that same-sex
marriage "is not illegal. There are no laws against it. When something's
illegal, it's criminal to engage in that activity."
"[T]hat's just not true. It is illegal. They can't be married," Lemon
insisted of same-sex couples. When Anderson tried to respond that "when
something is illegal, you can go to jail for doing it," Lemon
interrupted him again: "Did you hear what I said? I said let me finish,
Ryan. Let me finish and I will let you talk. Okay?"
At one point, Lemon uttered in a passive-aggressive insult, "Go ahead, Ryan. Finish your point. As absurd as it is. Go ahead."
And when Lemon asked both his guests to make their arguments for or
against legalizing same-sex marriage, he once again trashed Anderson's
argument. "Ryan, there is so much wrong in what you said, that children
do best when they're with their married parents," he asserted.
Below is a transcript of the segment, which aired on March 24 on CNN Newsroom at 7:12 p.m. EDT:
DON LEMON: Right now people are lining up outside the Supreme Court
trying to get front row seats to history. The Court tackles same-sex
marriage in less than two days. Justices will hear arguments for the
first case on Tuesday involving California's Proposition 8, the ban on
same-sex marriage. The second case centers on the Defense of Marriage
Act, DOMA, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
CNN.com, the number one news website on the planet, has been covering
this issue very closely and extensively. John Sutter is an opinion
writer, one of the voices featured on the site. And John, you recently
followed some gay couples. I looked at a video you had this morning, I
didn't read the entire thing, trying to get married in Mississippi, a
state that bans same-sex marriage. Here's a quick clip of that.
(Video Clip)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Miss. Rockwood is going to sign on the X's, Miss Welch on the O's.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know this application is a record, and it is a permanent record. But we're showing it's denied.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can't imagine what it might be like to be in
your position, to have to tell people who clearly have a home together,
share things and love each other –
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, and I appreciate you all understanding –
(End Video Clip)
LEMON: That's part of a story on CNN.com by John Sutter. Also with us
is Ryan Anderson of The Heritage Foundation. He's also written on this
issue for CNN.com. Ryan's most recent column argues that the court
should not rewrite marriage laws. So first to John. What compelled you
to get so invested and put together these pieces about same-sex marriage
for CNN.com?
JOHN SUTTER, CNN opinion columnist: Well I think there's an incredible
amount of bravery that those women you saw in that clip showed by being
part of that protest. Mississippi is one of 29 states where gay people
can be fired simply because of their sexual orientation. It's one of 29
states where you can be evicted simply for being gay. I think it's
important to try to broaden this conversation about LGBT rights in our
country. It's not just about marriage. That's what's before the Court
this week, but there are a host of ways that our laws discriminate
against LGBT people and make them, give them basically second-class
citizen status.
LEMON: Ryan you said you don't believe gay marriage should be legal and
especially you took issue with what's happening at the Supreme Court.
Why did you take issue with that, and you took issue with a Pediatric
study that was -- that came out this week saying that gay parents --
that children were well off even with gay parents and it made them to be
better kids even if they had been with single heterosexual parents.
RYAN T. ANDERSON, The Heritage Foundation: Sure. Just to clarify, the
issue here is not legality. So in all 50 states, there's nothing illegal
about same-sex marriage. Two people of the same-sex can live together
and love each other. They can go to their church and their church can
perform a same-sex wedding ceremony. They can work at a place of
employment that will give them same-sex benefits. What's at issue right
now is whether or not the Supreme Court will redefine marriage for
everyone. And whether or not the Supreme will then --
(Crosstalk)
LEMON: Wait, wait, wait -- hang on. You said same-sex marriage is not illegal?
ANDERSON: It's not illegal. There are no laws against it. When something's illegal, it's criminal to engage in that activity.
LEMON: That's just not true. That's not true. I know it's a matter of
semantics that you're saying but that's just not true. It is illegal.
They can't be married. Gays –
(Crosstalk)
LEMON: Hang on, let me finish. Gay people don't have the same benefits --
ANDERSON: Well, you interrupted me, just to be clear.
LEMON: Well, I'm the anchor of this show, so I can interrupt as much as
I want. So let me interrupt and then I'll let you talk. But it's a
matter of semantics what you're saying, because it is illegal. Gay
people don't have the same rights --
ANDERSON: No, no, it's not illegal. When something is illegal, you can go to jail for doing it.
LEMON: Did you hear what I said? I said let me finish, Ryan. Let me
finish and I will let you talk. Ok? It's a matter of semantics what
you're saying, because it is illegal. They don't have the same rights.
People don't have the same rights. You can't see in many places people
in the hospital, people who are sick. You don't have the same rights
under tax laws. You don't have the same benefits. It's not legal to
marry -- to be a married person in many states. Now go ahead.
ANDERSON: All right. So again, I disagree with you, because when
something is illegal, you can go to jail for doing it. It's illegal to
kill, it's illegal to rape, it's illegal to steal. Being in a same-sex
relationship is not illegal. So I think it's not a matter of semantics.
Actually I think you're just using the wrong terminology.
LEMON: No. You're using the wrong terminology. You're saying being in a
same-sex relationship is not illegal. No it's not. But being married in
certain states is illegal.
ANDERSON: No. Again, you can't go to jail for committing a same-sex marriage. The question is what is marriage?
(Crosstalk)
LEMON: Go ahead, Ryan. Finish your point. As absurd as it is. Go ahead.
ANDERSON: I don't really think it's absurd. I think you're being a little rude. I think a lot of Americans –
(Crosstalk)
LEMON: I don't appreciate you coming on –
ANDERSON: – think marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.
They want laws to reflect that. And it's not a matter of legality. It's
a matter of what is marriage.
LEMON: If it wasn't illegal, it would not be going to court to be legalized.
ANDERSON: Again, I think you're using the wrong terms. The question
right now is redefinition. It's not going to legalize something. It's
going to redefine something. It's going to redefine what marriage is.
LEMON: It's not going to the Supreme Court to be redefined. It's going
to the Supreme Court so that it can be legal across the country. It's
not going to be redefined. That's not why it's going to the Supreme
Court.
ANDERSON: It is. Right now the definition of marriage for the federal
government and for 41 states is the union of a man and a woman, a
husband and a wife --
LEMON: That is the legal --
ANDERSON: – a mother and a father.
LEMON: What is the legal definition of marriage?
ANDERSON: Right now marriage is defined in 41 states and by the federal
government as a union of a man and a woman, a husband and wife. And the
case before the Supreme Court is asking the Court to strike down those
laws and redefine marriage, and then use the coercive power of the
government to force everyone to accept a new definition of marriage.
LEMON: Okay. If each of you had 30 seconds before the Supreme Court to
make your case right now, let's hear it. Ryan, what would your best
argument be?
ANDERSON: The reason that the government's in the marriage business is
not because of my romantic life or because of the desires of adults. The
government's in the marriage business because men and women produce
children. Children need mothers and fathers, and marriage is the
institution that unites a man and woman as husband and wife, to then be
mother and father to the children that they produce. Mothers and fathers
are different and distinct. Children do best when raised by their
married mother and father. And that's why government's in the marriage
business. All Americans are free to live and to love as they choose. But
no one has the right to redefine marriage for everyone.
LEMON: Ryan, there is so much wrong in what you said, that children do best when they're with their married parents because --
ANDERSON: You really don't believe that children do best with their married mom and dad?
LEMON: No. Because not all married parents are good parents. Not all
married parents are good parents. That's the reason for divorces. That's
the reason why some children are taken from homes of heterosexual
parents. Not all heterosexual parents are good parents. Not all children
--
ANDERSON: No one said that everyone –
LEMON: But that's what your argument is saying. Go ahead, John.
ANDERSON: I said that children do best with their married mother and father.
LEMON: That's not true. That is not true.
ANDERSON: It is.
LEMON: No it's not.
ANDERSON: All the social science evidence – all the social science evidence –
LEMON: You're assuming that heterosexual marriages in a utopian society
are perfect. It is not. So you cannot make that argument, but that is
what your argument is saying.
(Crosstalk)
ANDERSON: I'm looking at the evidence. And the science shows that children do best –
LEMON: Ryan hang on. John – it's time for John's 30 seconds. Go ahead.
SUTTER: I think it's not fundamentally not about this
point-counterpoint and what social science says or doesn't say. I think
it's about listening to people across America and speaking with people
who are in same-sex relationships or who do identify as LGBT.
And if you listen to them with an honest and empathetic ear, you can
understand where they're coming from that, you know, state borders
matters incredibly to them in a way that they don't to anyone else in
this nation. And that, you know, we basically have two legal systems set
up, one for, you know, gay and lesbian people and one for the rest of
the country. And so I think it's more about just sort of taking like an
honest and open approach to listening to these people and hearing what
they have to say and where they're coming from. And that's what I try to
do with my, you know, reporting that was reflected in that video
earlier.
LEMON: And it's also important to come on to tell the truth and not
spread rumors and infactual information when you come on to talk about
--
ANDERSON: What did I say that was factually incorrect?
LEMON: Because what you're saying – forget. What you're saying is that
it's not illegal, and it is illegal. That's the whole reason it's going
to the Supreme Court to challenge its legality.
(Crosstalk)
ANDERSON: Show me in criminal law code where marriage is illegal. You're just wrong on this one, I'm sorry.
LEMON: Well, okay, thank you. We'll have to agree to disagree. Thank you both for joining us.
-- Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center
