Dennis Prager started out his article, “Mary Cheney, Liz Cheney and Left-Wing Hate,” with a reductio ad absurdum and just general straw man self-righteousness:

There are individual haters on the right and individual haters on the left. But there is no large-scale hatred in the United States of America today that compares with the hatred of the left for the right. Whereas the right regards the left as wrong – even destructively wrong – the left regards all those on the right as evil. Sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, bigoted – these are typical descriptions of the right made by the most respected names on the left.

That’s right, folks: Us people on the left HATE people on the right, who are just trying to show the left’s foibles. It’s so much easier to reach your audience and gain sympathy when you are being hated on.

A few months (almost a year? wow…) ago, I wrote a post about this on my other blog, “Do Skeptics Hate the People They Debunk?” In it, I argued that rational people don’t make emotion part of the argument, that it’s about the argument’s content, not anything else. In this blog (WND Watch), I’ve given in a bit more into the emotional responses as my own outlet, but I don’t think I’ve gone anywhere near the vitriol attributed by Prager. And, I’ve certainly quoted examples that would indicate many people that WND supports certainly come close – if not surpass – the threshold for “hatred” of certain political and social points on the left (e.g., anything about the Islamic religion or homosexual equality).

Anyway, Prager goes on:

But among all of the left’s hatreds, none compares with its hatred of anyone who believes that marriage should remain defined as the union of a man and a woman. The left believes anyone, or any business, that supports the only gender-based definition of marriage that had ever existed should be politically, personally and economically destroyed. Recall, for example, the left’s attempt to drive out of business a restaurant in Los Angeles because one of its employees donated 100 dollars to California’s Proposition 8, the left’s boycott of Chick-fil-A and the left’s vicious attacks on the Mormon Church.

This greatest of contemporary American hatreds expressed itself again in the last two weeks after Liz Cheney, running for the Republican nomination for U.S. senator from Wyoming, said that she believes in the traditional definition of marriage.

The comment would have probably gone almost universally unreported were it not for a Facebook post written by Heather Poe, the woman who is married to Liz’s lesbian sister, Mary Cheney:

“Liz has been a guest in our home, has spent time and shared holidays with our children, and when Mary and I got married in 2012 – she didn’t hesitate to tell us how happy she was for us. To have her now say she doesn’t support our right to marry is offensive to say the least.”

Mary Cheney shared the message on her own Facebook page, adding, “Liz – this isn’t just an issue on which we disagree – you’re just wrong – and on the wrong side of history.”

This triggered a tsunami of left-wing hate against Liz.

Without pointing out the absurdities and logical fallacies (see my first paragraph) in his first paragraph in that block quote, let’s just go on to some of his examples.

New York Times columnist Frank Bruni:

“Isn’t there a tradition of close-knit family members’ taking care not to wound one another? … Liz and Mary aren’t speaking to each other now, and there’s a long shadow over the Cheneys’ holiday get-togethers. Is any political office worth that? … I’m imagining her awkwardness the next time that she goes to hug or kiss them (and I’m assuming that she’s a hugger or kisser, which may be a leap).”

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd:

” … the spectacle of Liz, Dick and Lynne throwing Mary Cheney and her wife, Heather Poe, and their two children under the campaign bus. … Dick’s Secret Service code name was once ‘Backseat.’ Liz’s should be ‘Backstab.’”

Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson:

“Liz Cheney is also the sort of person who would not only throw her sister under the bus but also effectively do the same to her sister’s young son and daughter. … The Cheney sisters, once extremely close, reportedly haven’t spoken since the summer. What price political ambition?”

Blogger Andrew Sullivan:

“I would like to respond on behalf of Mary and Heather and the rest of us: f–k [Sullivan, of course, spelled out the word] your compassion. … You cannot publicly attack your own sister’s family and say you love her as well. It does not compute.”

Maybe Dennis Prager and I are using different definitions of the word “hate,” but I certainly don’t see “hate” in any of those comments. I see disappointment, indignance, and almost a sense of feeling sorry for the family since this issue has clearly emphasized a strain in the relationship between sisters. According to my built-in Apple® dictionary, “hate” means to “feel intense or passionate dislike for” or to “have a strong aversion to.” Neither of those seem to apply here. At least, I don’t read them that way. If Prager does, he needs to grow a skin thicker than the width of a human hair — though I s’pose that may be interpreted as me “hating” him.

Prager concludes with this:

I have received numerous emails from parents and siblings of gays who have completely cut off communications with their parents and siblings solely because those parents and siblings oppose same-sex marriage. In my view, this decision to shatter one’s family over this issue is the real immorality here.

The support of Bruni, Robinson, Dowd, Sullivan, Beinart and Toobin for this shattering of families by gay family members is not only morally wrong. It is frightening. Clearly, for them it is not enough for parents and siblings to show their gay family member love – and even celebrate their gay relative’s family – they must also permanently shut their mouths.

This is not only left-wing hatred. It is left-wing totalitarianism: Your good and kind behavior is completely insufficient. You must also speak and think as we do.

Or we will destroy you.

More logical fallacies … specifically, we go from him having been contacted by people who have cut off communication with a gay relative, which has shattered the family (argument from popularity, though it is unfortunately true), but then this somehow means that those who Prager quoted are pro-shattering of families by gay family members. Um … huh?!?! And he then proceeds to call that (in part) hatred and totalitarianism.

His “commentary” has gotten 12 ratings in the past few days (not many) for an average score of 3.67/5 (fairly low), but it has garnered 74 comments. They are what you would expect and, sadly, not worth going into (sad because of the content).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s