. . . And who are local, and who watch the early evening news (5 pm? 6 pm?): I was just interviewed by a reporter for local channel 4 about the Love Needs No Cure vigil (see previous post). It’s interesting being interviewed. You really get a sense of the divisiveness that mainstream news feeds on and feeds. I asked the reporter if he was going to talk to any medical or psychological experts about the therapy, and he said he was more interested in the “he said/she said” aspect of faith leaders talking about it. Versus the actual merits of either side, I guess. It seems once the technology of video press releases is perfected, we won’t need journalists at all anymore. That will be a nice cost savings for many media outlets. Anyway, I was trying hard to stick to my main point, that people “suffering from homosexuality” are actually suffering from homophobia, and that they need affirmation and support, not quack “cures.” But the reporter’s eye only gleamed when I said that the “ex-gay” movement is really a thin veneer for a political agenda to deny people their civil rights. I suppose it’s a divisive thing to say. But I donâ€™t believe that promoting tolerance means tolerating intolerance. In formal logic (or semantics) that might seem wrong, but here on Earth tolerance and intolerance cannot co-exist, and to â€œtolerate intoleranceâ€ is to give up on creating a culture of tolerance. In any event, if the interview does make it to air, it’ll be 2 seconds of whatever the dumbest thing I said was. But it’ll still let people know that the Ethical Society is here and that we support gay and lesbian rights. Which would make me happy. So if you do see me on TV, don’t tell me any details. Sometimes ignorance *is* bliss.