The other day I saw in a Google tag for a column by someone on one side of the gay marriage amendment, a describtion of Charlotte N.C. Bishop Peter Jugis as "camera-happy."
Sure, the column was commentary about a video the Bishop had made on the amendment in which he described the church's position on the amendment.
But "camera-happy"?
At first, I just laughed and laughed at the ignorance the description displays. Hell, I've probably been in more Internet vidoes than the Bishop. As for TV and such, he is sought ought on occasion, certainly. Don't think he goes after TV cameras.
It's hard to imagine a guy so shy rising to his position, but he did.
And I thought it was amusing, so I asked him aboubt when I saw him after Mass on Sunday. He did not seem to take it in the way I did. It's obvious he is pained by, probably not the description, but the response as a whole.
For the writer to ascribe such venality to an opponent, just because he or she can, doesn't strike me as good journalism, nor honest commentary.
Disagree with him if you must. The Bishop is going to disagree with you, forever, on this issue and a few other on which the Church simply cannot compromise. But don't hurl asinine insult.
The description isn't in the column, just the preview you get when you come upon it in a Google search. But it was put there, deliberately, by someone.
To me it proves only that the writer has not met the man. That's not opinoin, but fact.
My opinion is that it also proves the writer will go out of his or her way to avoid the man, and as such, will never have an honest debate of this or other important issues. Nope. It was a simple hurling of invectives at an opponent because he doesn't think as you think he should.
Sad, sad, sad.
Here's the bishop's video --
Can you watch that and think that this descriptor on Google,
"Charlotte's bishop takes lights, camera, action against gay marriage ...
clclt.com/.../charlottes-bishop-takes-lights-camera-action-against-gay-...
Mar 15, 2012 – Peter J. Jugis, Charlotte's camera-happy Catholic bishop, throws the church's weight behind Amendment One. ... Creative Loafing Charlotte "
is at all fair?
Even if you take out the "camera-happy," a blatant lie, it's still not an accurate description. He's not throwing any weight around. He's just explaining the Church's position.
But in the interest of fairness, here's the commentary.
http://clclt.com/theclog/archives/2012/03/15/charlottes-bishop-takes-lights-camera-action-against-gay-marriage
I could go on and on about that, also. But it's just more of such sad,poor commentary. It is rife with things such as ,aking erroneous assumptions because it vilifies a perceived opponent, saying if X must be true, than Y, similar to X, must also be true. But Y is not true.
Sad, sad, sad.
