Friday, August 27, 2004

Media's 'Christophobia' Is Destroying Democracy

Media 'Christophobia' is destroying democracy
Christian Heritage Party Communique
l 11 No 31
By Ron Gray

Reading Dr. James Dobson's new book, Marriage Under Fire, reveals that something very ugly is loose in North American culture -- a phenomenon that several CHP candidates also experienced during the last election campaign: a severe intolerance for the Christian world-view on the part of those who clamor loudly for 'tolerance'.

It's what Rev. Tristan Emmanuel, in the title of his recent book, calls Christophobia.

The kind of hatred being expressed towards Christians in Canada today is probably a precursor of persecution, just as depersonalization of Jews in Nazi Germany preceded the Holocaust. (Please understand that I'm not comparing what Christians endure today in Canada with the Holocaust. That would be absurd. Neither is what Christians in Canada experience anything close to the persecution of Christians in China, Sudan, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan and a host of other communist and Wahabbi Islamist states. But Michael Horowitz, a Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute -- who is Jewish -- has written that Christians are "becoming the Jews of the 21st Century." He, too, sees a pattern of exclusion developing. What surprises Horowitz is that so few Christians see the menace growing around them.)

Persecution of Bible-believing Christians and Jews is the most common expression of hatred abroad in the world today -- but those who depend on the mainstream media for their 'news' will never have heard that some 200 million Christians in Communist and Muslim dictatorships live under severe persecution; they will not know that about 160,000 Christians are martyred -- murdered for their faith -- every year.

Those facts don't make the news, because they're not 'politically correct'. As Horowitz says, anti-Christian prejudice is the last respectable bigotry.

And it's fuelled by the anti-Christian prejudices of the media and the Secular education establishment.

Another Jewish writer/broadcaster -- movie critic Michael Medved -- in his book Hollywood vs America revealed that in seven years of reviewing Hollywood movies up to the year 2000, he had found not one favorable portrayal of a Christian. Not one.

A new study by the Media Research Center in the United States perhaps reveals why these anti-Christian attitudes are growing and increasing in virulence: there is a massive, monolithic pro-liberal, anti-Christian bias among the 'gatekeepers' of the mainstream media.

The latest MRC SPECIAL REPORT summarizes relevant data on journalists’ attitudes -- as well as polls that reveal growing public recognition of media bias. Many surveys over the past 25 years consistently show that journalists do not reflect the public they purport to serve. Columbia University sociologists Robert and Linda Lichter and Professor Stanley Rothman turned over this stone to reveal the media bigotry against Christians in 1984; a subsequent study by the Los Angeles Times confirmed their report. Robert Lichter expanded the work into a book The Media Elite, in the 1990s. Now the MRC survey shows that the situation has not changed -- and that media bias against Christians is in part behind the massive anti-Bush campaign in the liberal US media.

On issues such as abortion, for example, more than 90 per cent of journalists say they believe a woman should have a legal right to an abortion at any time; about 70 per cent of the general public believe there should be legal restrictions on abortion. Lichter’s research also found that 75 percent of media 'gatekeepers' do not agree that homosexuality is wrong, and an even larger proportion, 85 percent, assert that it's OK for homosexuals to teach in public schools. Yet the majority of the North American public -- in spite of more than a decade of relentless pro-'gay' media propaganda -- consider homosexuality wrong.

The Columbia University sociologists also found that 54 percent of journalists don't regard adultery as wrong, and only 15 percent strongly agreed that extramarital affairs are wrong. "Thus, the media elite emerge as strong supporters of the sexual revolution, in spite of the social disasters it has fostered," wrote Lichter.

• Journalists are much less religious than the public:

Weaver and Wilhoit discovered that journalists and the public differ on the importance of religion: "[T]he percentage of journalists rating religion or religious beliefs as ‘very important’ is substantially lower (38 percent) than the percentages in the overall U.S. population (61 percent)…"

Lichter and his team found in the 1980s that "only 8 percent of top journalists go to church or synagogue weekly, and 86 percent seldom or never attend religious services."

• Journalists are far more pro-abortion than the public:

In their 1992 study, continuing a series of major national studies of American journalists begun in 1971 by sociologist John Johnstone and continued in 1982 and 1992 by David Weaver and G. Cleveland Wilhoit at the Indiana University School of Journalism, Weaver and Wilhoit asked a broad sample of 1,156 journalists for their views on abortion, and found very few who oppose what has become the most common "medical" procedure.

More than half (51 percent) of journalists said abortion should be legal under any circumstance; 40 percent said it should be legal under certain circumstances, and only four percent said abortion should be illegal. The public at large is much less likely than journalists to see abortion as "a right", and much more likely to say it should always be illegal, they reported.

• Elite journalists are much more pro-'gay' than the public:

In 1995, the Times Mirror Center found a "values gap" when they compared the views of 228 top journalists and media executives to other groups:

"The public is divided as to whether homosexuality should be accepted (41 percent) or discouraged (53 percent)." That's actually a whopping 12 per cent margin against -- the Times-Mirror, in calling the public "divided" on the issue, seems to have been influenced by its own pro-'gay' propaganda! "But," their report continues, "members of the national media feel it should be accepted by an 83 to 4 percent margin, and this view is almost as prevalent among the local media (75 percent to 14 percent)."

• Media 'gatekeepers' are even more pro-abortion and pro-'gay' that other journalists:

Nearly all news media elites surveyed (97 percent) agreed that a woman should have the legal right to abortion, and 75 percent agreed that “homosexuality is as acceptable as heterosexuality.”

Rothman and Black’s 2001 update to the original Media Elite surveys found that reporters continue to profess these overwhelmingly liberal attitudes on social issues.

But perhaps the most horrifying statistic of all was found in the 1980s survey by Lichter, Lichter and Rothman: Of the "media elite" -- the "gatekeepers" who decide what will be treated as news and how it will be presented -- 67 percent said they believe it is "part of their job to shape public opinion."

That means when you turn on the TV or pick up a major metropolitan newspaper, you may think you're getting news or entertainment; but you're really getting deliberate brainwashing -- by people who think they know better than you what's good for you to know… and who are determined to "protect" you from any information they regard as "dangerous" -- such as the Christian standards of right and wrong on which this nation was built.

Authentic Christianity was the basis for the end of slavery (still practiced in the Middle East and in Marxist nations), for the elevation of the status of women wherever the faith has been introduced, for the establishment of universities and hospitals and countless charities throughout the world.

So what does Christianity "threaten"? Only self-centred libertinism. But in the minds of the self-appointed elites, that's enough to make us "dangerous".

And that makes them dangerous to us, and to the survival of western civilization -- which these self-appointed "elites" also hate.