The April 18 news article, "WSU psychology professors address gay marriage pros and cons" spoke volumes about the paper's position on this subject.
This article did nothing to explain or justify the feelings behind peoples' opposition to gay marriage, but rather, treated the cons as a mere after thought. After taking three short paragraphs to list the cons, the writers and editors then spent an entire newspaper column explaining the pros for gay marriage and reasons why everyone should embrace it. This article was most blatantly unbalanced, and as such should have appeared in the opinion section of your paper. It was hardly qualified for the front page. Is the Standard-Examiner a newspaper or a venue for propaganda?
One more thought on this subject: Let's give the paper the benefit of the doubt and assume that the event was reported as it played out on the WSU campus. If this is the case, then Azenett Garza and Maria Parrilla de Kokal, failed to attain their stated goal of "promoting understanding of diverse communities". If this article accurately reported the event, then the event itself effectively silenced the voice of those who oppose gay marriage, all in the name of diversity.
To all parties involved in the printing of this article, and in the event I ask: Just exactly how does that promote understanding?
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia