I often wonder if their editors have any sort of grasp on the English language: "Mixed race roommates causes issues"
(someone went back and edited the web version of the article, but this was what was printed and was available on the website for a time - thanks, Google Cache!)
They are not afraid to fabricate quotes and facts: USG Seeks Retraction for Inaccurate Lantern Story
And they are always willing to give space to the finest opinion articles around: "NASA errors put global warming 'facts' in doubt",
"Hate crime laws support discrimination"
This last one is the one that prompted this post.
Allow me to quote one comment:
Hiromitsu, you obviously took the time to look up "30 kinds of sexual orientations [sic]" according to the APA. It would have taken you about .5 seconds more to find the difference between a paraphilia and a sexual orientation. Even Wikipedia contains that information. What inquiring minds want to know is, was your article misleading by design, or are you just that lazy of a writer? Then again, this is an opinion article, so I guess Lantern writers/editors think that makes them "EXCEMPT FROM RIL LIFE FACTS, CUZ ITS OPINYON. LOL AMIRITE."
I'd address your completely flawed view of what hate crimes legislation does and does not include, but I already made a point about ignoring easily available factual information...