Last month President Obama made a news splash by instructing the Secretary of Health and Human Services to prepare new laws protecting the right of homosexual partners to visit their loved ones in the hospital.But were new laws really required? Was there any evidence that hospitals were denying visitation privileges? Or was this all a tempest in a teapot, designed to brew up sympathy and momentum for other homosexual issues?
In a terrific piece of reporting published at the Family Research Council blog, Peter Sprigg sets the record straight about how the Obama White House curried favor with homosexual activists, how those activists deliberately misrepresented the facts about hospital visitation policies, and how the New York Times and Washington Post demonstrated a remarkable lack of balance, professionalism and objectivity in its coverage of the matter.
