"Reuters" has put out an "article" from its "religion writer" that has been published at the Washington Post website. In it there is used an incredibly offensive phrase. The article sails along after this offensive phrase as though nothing bad has occurred in the first paragraph, as though we are meant to gloss right over it and go straight on to the first quote by a well-known diocesan-level Anglican bishop. Do not stop at Go, and certainly don't think about juxtaposition.
The question must be asked - who fed that line to this reporter? Can a phrase like that just pop up on its own? Not in this day. Not six weeks before an historic inauguration that may draw four million people to the Nation's Capital. Nope.
Where did this phrase come from and why is it popping up now, when Judge Randy Bellows is expected to issue his final ruling perhaps within days regarding the property of the churches in Virginia who voted to separate? Perhaps even tomorrow as this article may be published in the print edition of newspapers all over the country.
Why, even now, The Episcopal Church is gleefully announcing it intends to appeal the Judge Bellows ruling - even before he issues it. If TEC can't win on the merits of the law itself, perhaps it's time to cynically unleash political weapons instead and try to regain lost ground through a different kind of offensive, especially in contrast to this watershed moment in American history when that phrase should be put away forever.
So - how did that phrase come to be used in this article? Where did it come from? And how did it end up in this article? Time to dust for fingerprints, friends. We're not in Kansas anymore.