Analysis: Dr. Phil on Marriage Debate

November 21, 2008 by Damon 

In what is believed to be the first national talk show to devote its full hour to California’s battle for marriage equality, Dr. Phil offered up a sweeps month episode that claimed to examine both sides—literally, as the audience was divided down the middle with those for on one side and those against on the other.

Sitting on the panel were San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, HRC president Joe Solmonese, and attorney Gloria Allred debating anti-gay Pastor Jim Garlow of Skyline Church, Maggie Gallagher of National Organization for Marriage, and Jeff Flint from the Yes on 8 campaign.

Dr. Phil tells the audience that he is looking to present each side of the campaign and that he won’t take a stand either way as it should be a “personal decision.” If he means that the majority voting on a minority’s civil rights should be a personal decision, then, uh, Phil, we disagree. Let’s examine the rest of the hour. . .

Segment 1: The now-familiar talking heads were met with wild, unnatural applause from their respective followers after each statement. With all the hooting and hollering going on, you might think for a moment that they were overflow audience from The Jerry Springer Show (but they are dressed too nicely).

The challenge of this kind of talk-over-each-other forum is that whoever gets the last word in before the commercial break often seems to score a hypothetical point for their side. Gallagher erroneously states that gays & lesbians don’t need marriage: “All the practical rights and benefits for people to live their life are still available through civil unions.” Wild applause and cut to commercial.

Point 1: Team H8

Segment 2: The topic is the campaign ads on both sides. “Did they go too far,” asks Phil, pointing out that at $74 million this was the most expensive social issue campaign in history.

There is a surface discussion about the Prop 8 ads which presented misinformation about the religious and education ramifications if Prop 8 should fail. Joe Solmonese points out that the Prop 8 campaign couldn’t find any California public school educator to put in their ad to support their bogus claims about same-sex marriage being taught in schools.

“First they call you haters and bigots if you disagree with them on marriage,” Gallagher spewed. “Now they call you liars if you disagree with them about the consequences of gay marriage.” Uh, Maggie, if the shoe fits. Check out the screengrab (right) to see an unintentional message being sent to viewers.

After 20 minutes, Gloria Allred finally gets a word in and lays into Gallagher. Solmonese thankfully brings the conversation back to the differences between marriage and civil unions.

Point 2: Equality

Segment 3: Opens with b-roll of a handwritten sign that boldly reads “GAYS HATE GOD.” Ick. Having been on the frontline of the rallies, I know the rallies have brought out many gay people and allies of faith. The sign seems like an anomaly or perhaps a plant by anti-gay operatives—either way, it unnecessarily stokes the flames. “Man-on-the-street” interviews follow about the church and its involvement in the campaign. Shot at what appears to be Garlow’s Skyline Church, church members deliver the false messages they’ve been fed through e-mails, mailings, commercials and likely their pulpit. Where is The View’s Sherri Shepherd?

Back on Phil’s stage, Garlow takes this opportunity to further exaggerate a myth of widespread post-election violence happening against churches and anti-gay demonstrators. Newsom interjects and says that any violence is wrong but points out that gay and lesbian couples have long been the victims of violence. He adds that we are talking about civil marriages and that this shouldn’t even be a religious issue. (Translation: Pick up your toys and go home Garlow.)

Point 3: Equality

Segment 4: Going into the second half, Dr. Phil pulls the gloves off to talk about the techniques used by Prop 8’s ProtectMarriage.com to extort money out of companies that supported Equality California. Jeff Flint tries to explain and Dr. Phil calls it what it is: “threatening and intimidation.”

Regarding boycotting going on by “No on 8″ supporters, Gallagher cries foul and attempts to draw a difference between boycotting the businesses of individual donors vs. the businesses that donated.

Newsom refocuses the topic by talking about the devastating change that has happened by altering the Constitution.

Point 4: Equality

Segment 5: We’re nearing the end of the show and there have been no gay couples talking about why marriage is important to them. Until now. This segment features video packages of two couples: David and Bob and Jennifer and Dan. Both couples have two young children so there are nice parallels drawn between the families.

“We’re the couple down the block with two kids,” says Bob in their video package. “Marriage commits permanence,” adds David, against a background of photos from their traditional Jewish wedding.

Bob continues: “After Prop 8 passed on election day I felt betrayed…I felt angry. We want the legal protections of what marriage offers. We want the best for our children. We just want to be equal.”

“We feel like second-class citizens,” concludes David. “If it’s us now, who’s it going to be next?”

Now it’s time for Jennifer and Dan’s package where they will try to explain why their union is superior. Jennifer doesn’t believe gay couples have lost a civil right, just the word ‘marriage.’ It’s interesting to watch the two packages back to back. Both feature scenes of the parents at home with their respective kids: David and Bob’s segment is about themselves and how marriage affects their own family so the footage is all about them and their happy family; Jennifer and Dan have no real grounds to explain how marriage between a same-sex couple directly affects their own family, so much of their segment is spent talking about “them” and showing scenes from the anti-gay TV ads and, yes, shots of David and Bob at home.

Following the packages, the two couples are live in Dr. Phil’s studio audience for follow up. David is passionate and bridges the gap to show the comparisons between the two families: “We have what you have.”

Point 5: Equality

Segment 6: We’re in the home stretch and going into the last segment. “I’m always looking for a way to bring people together,” says Dr. Phil. “Gloria, is there a way to dial down the rhetoric?”

Allred chooses instead to talk about the California Supreme Court protecting the minority over the whim of the majority, reinforcing that this is about a legal marriage license and not a religious issue.

Phil asks Garlow if there’s a way to find common ground. Garlow says the acts of violence and name calling has to stop and then launches into a jumble of election statistics. “This issue has been examined microscopically,” he says, trying to convince viewers that voters knew what they were doing when they voted Yes on 8. Allred and Solmonese try to quickly respond but Dr. Phil has to go to a break. I’m sure one of them would have said something to the effect that casting a vote on a fundamental right is not examining the issue, sir.

Point 6: Toss Up

Segment 7: And now it’s over. No time for impassioned audience stories or follow up questions.

“We’ve only scratched the surface here,” before he thanks his guests. “For those of you at home, I hope we’ve given you some insight into this most important issue.” True, Dr. Phil reaches a large audience that could benefit from dialogue about equality for same-sex families, but you’re left with the uneasy feeling that if Oprah and Phil and all the others had given this much attention to the issue before the election, maybe things would have turned out differently.

As he does every show, Dr. Phil closes the show by walking through the audience to join his wife Robin (reminding viewers that he can still marry). Dr. Phil says he wants to be a healer. Perhaps not segregating and dividing the audience would have been the first step.

Based on my highly unscientific scoring criteria, Equality seemed to win by episode’s end. But as the credits roll and the camera pans through the audience, the relatively blank faces of the audience members on both sides say it all: Nothing really came from this.

viagra
free viagra
buy viagra online
generic viagra
how does viagra work
cheap viagra
buy viagra
buy viagra online inurl
viagra 6 free samples
viagra online
viagra for women
viagra side effects
female viagra
natural viagra
online viagra
cheapest viagra prices
herbal viagra
alternative to viagra
buy generic viagra
purchase viagra online
free viagra without prescription
viagra attorneys
free viagra samples before buying
buy generic viagra cheap
viagra uk
generic viagra online
try viagra for free
generic viagra from india
fda approves viagra
free viagra sample
what is better viagra or levitra
discount generic viagra online
viagra cialis levitra
viagra dosage
viagra cheap
viagra on line
best price for viagra
free sample pack of viagra
viagra generic
viagra without prescription
discount viagra
gay viagra
mail order viagra
viagra inurl
generic viagra online paypal
generic viagra overnight
generic viagra online pharmacy
generic viagra uk
buy cheap viagra online uk
suppliers of viagra
how long does viagra last
viagra sex
generic viagra soft tabs
generic viagra 100mg
buy viagra onli
generic viagra online without prescription
viagra energy drink
cheapest uk supplier viagra
viagra cialis
generic viagra safe
viagra professional
viagra sales
viagra free trial pack
viagra lawyers
over the counter viagra
best price for generic viagra
viagra jokes
buying viagra
viagra samples
viagra sample
cialis
generic cialis
cheapest cialis
buy cialis online
buying generic cialis
cialis for order
what are the side effects of cialis
buy generic cialis
what is the generic name for cialis
cheap cialis
cialis online
buy cialis
cialis side effects
how long does cialis last
cialis forum
cialis lawyer ohio
cialis attorneys
cialis attorney columbus
cialis injury lawyer ohio
cialis injury attorney ohio
cialis injury lawyer columbus
prices cialis
cialis lawyers
viagra cialis levitra
cialis lawyer columbus
online generic cialis
daily cialis
cialis injury attorney columbus
cialis attorney ohio
cialis cost
cialis professional
cialis super active
how does cialis work
what does cialis look like
cialis drug
viagra cialis
cialis to buy new zealand
cialis without prescription
free cialis
cialis soft tabs
discount cialis
cialis generic
generic cialis from india
cheap cialis sale online
cialis daily
cialis reviews
cialis generico
how can i take cialis
cheap cialis si
cialis vs viagra
levitra
generic levitra
levitra attorneys
what is better viagra or levitra
viagra cialis levitra
levitra side effects
buy levitra
levitra online
levitra dangers
how does levitra work
levitra lawyers
what is the difference between levitra and viagra
levitra versus viagra
which works better viagra or levitra
buy levitra and overnight shipping
levitra vs viagra
canidan pharmacies levitra
how long does levitra last
viagra cialis levitra
levitra acheter
comprare levitra
levitra ohne rezept
levitra 20mg
levitra senza ricetta
cheapest generic levitra
levitra compra
cheap levitra
levitra overnight
levitra generika
levitra kaufen

Related Posts:
Glaad.org

Comments

2 Responses to “Analysis: Dr. Phil on Marriage Debate”

  1. Dr. Phil Tackles Marriage Equality : glaadBLOG.org on November 21st, 2008 4:11 pm

    [...] Check back with glaadBLOG later today for live blogging analysis. [...]

  2. csharp1970 on November 30th, 2008 12:49 am

    This entire issue is infuriating to me. Equal protections are guaranteed, they are simply not enforced. The bible and the U.S. Constitution are NOT the same text. It is NOT GODernment, it is GOVernment! We must protect American secular government from these religious fundamentalist extremists! They are creating religious law using faith-based initiatives. Take a look at fundamentalist Sharia law: Sharia law is religious law and is often subject to its most extreme interpretation.

    Government should not define marriage! Every American should have the right to enter into a civil union. The word “marriage” is inherently religious and should be rejected in a secular society, period! If after the government grants a couple a civil union certificate, they wish to enter into a religious “marriage” in their place of worship, so be it. That said, no place of religious worship should be forced to “marry” anyone.

    I will protect the right of religious people to perform marriage ceremonies as they see fit in their places of worship. Furthermore, I will protect the right of a Christian fertility doctor to refuse to provide lesbian couples with fertility treatments. That said, I will also fight like hell and fury to ensure that the LGBT community is protected by the U.S. Constitution. We need to revisit our strategy.

    I want the whole pie, not a piece of it. Do we really think that our LGBT brothers and sisters in Middle America will see marriage equality? Not likely. I want the nation, not piece by piece, but in the U.S. Supreme Court. I want civil marriage for EVERYONE, so that NO ONE is denied equal protections under the law. It may sound radical and audacious. It may take longer, but it is not impossible to achieve.

If you would like a pic to show with your comment, you can get a gravatar here.

You must be logged in to post a comment.