At Easter egg roll, focus on a family issue (200 gay families to the WH)

[DeepModem Mom]

IHT: White House Letter: At the Easter egg roll, focus on a family issue
Elisabeth Bumiller
MONDAY, APRIL 10, 2006

....Next Monday, some 200 gay families are planning to attend the annual White House Easter Egg Roll to showcase themselves to the nation and President George W. Bush. But some religious conservatives say the families are "crashing" the public event and exploiting children for political ends.

"We're not protesting the president's policies on gay families," insisted Jennifer Chrisler, the executive director of the Family Pride Coalition, the organizer of the gay families attending the event. "We are, however, helping him understand that gay families exist in this country and deserve the rights and protections that all families need."

Not so, said Mark Tooley, the director of the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy, an influential conservative group.

"It's facetious and not very persuasive for Family Pride to say they're not making a political statement," Tooley said in an interview last week. In the conservative Weekly Standard magazine in January, Tooley called the gay families crashers and surmised that President Rutherford B. Hayes, who held the first public White House Easter Egg roll in 1878, never would have imagined the controversy that the event was stirring up more than a century later....Laura Bush, has adopted a neutral position.

"All families are welcome to attend the Easter Egg Roll, provided they comply with the rules," Susan Whitson, Laura Bush's press secretary, said Friday. "No more than two adults per group, and at least one child under the age of 8."...

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/04/09/news/letter.php

[saltpoint]

1. Well we wouldn't want to disturb the ghost of Rutherford B. Hayes now,

would we?

Let the poor dear rest in peace.

No, wait a minute. I think he cheated to win the presidency, too.

[Rose Siding]

8. Poor, poor Rutherford B. Hayes! *googling*

:rofl:

Never having given the gentleman a moment's thought, I went looking for quotes. The context is lacking, but don't they make him sound progressive?

In avoiding the appearance of evil, I am not sure but I have sometimes unnecessarily deprived myself and others of innocent enjoyments.
Rutherford B. Hayes

It is the desire of the good people of the whole country that sectionalism as a factor in our politics should disappear...'
Rutherford B. Hayes

It will be the duty of the Executive, with sufficient appropriations for the purpose, to prosecute unsparingly all who have been engaged in depriving citizens of the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution.
Rutherford B. Hayes

[saltpoint]

9. Hi to you, Rose Siding. Yes. Rutherford comes out halfway good

in some of his quotations. But I guess he stole that election from Tilden hands down.

He shares a lot in common with another president I can think of...

Awfully nice to see you again on the DU boards.




:thumbsup:



:thumbsup:

[mike_c]

2. the fundy's have made gay families a political issue...

They created the context within which gay families attending the WH easter egg hunt has become an inevitable political statement. That protestation rings a bit hollow.

[Zenlitened]

11. Agreed. Well said.

:thumbsup:

[Demeter]

3. The Personal Is Political, when Govt. Steps On Classes

If those in power want to divide the world into Thems and Us'es, and step on the Thems, then that is political abuse of personal differences, for no reason other than the difference.

When this lesson is learned, the 60's will fianlly be over and the Third US Revolution Complete.

[Burma Jones]

4. What will they do if Gay Hispanic Immigrants show up?

go back to restricting the event to Military Families?

[goclark]

6. That would be delightful :)

[pinto]

5. Rutherford B. Hayes?...now there's a reach. LOL.

[951-Riverside]

7. They're crashing the white house eh?

Gee I wonder Mr Fundie, how they are going to pull that off?

[QuettaKid]

28. wait a sec ! ! ! !

did bush pee his pants in that pic !?!?!?!

[xchrom]

10. if what susan whitson says is true

"All families are welcome to attend the Easter Egg Roll, provided they comply with the rules,"

then perhaps some further clarification from mr tooley is in order.

because the statement from laura bush's press secretary is quite explicit in saying that if the attendee's comply with the rules -- they ARE welcome.

how do these gay parents crash something they are indeed invited to -- if they follow the rules?

[Javaman]

12. Paraphrasing Animal Farm: some families are more equal than others. nt

[dipsydoodle]

15. Good analogy.

Well thought of.

[Indy_Dem_Defender]

13. I sure fucking which they only thing

in life I had to worry the fuck about was if gay families fuckin' hang out at the white house for a easter egg hunt! I mean fuck stupid fuckin' fudies get with the program, 2 wars that have no ended in sight and a possibility for a 3rd one as well, where are these fuckin' idiots priorities at, is this all they have to worry about in life god damn?

steps off soap box, sorry for the cussing, just had to say it like it is!

[dipsydoodle]

14. How can you

crash a public event ? Either it's public or it's not so. The religious cons seem to have overlooked the event is for children and the preference to be gay of their parent(s) is inconsquential.

My sister is gay , with 3 sons, and if she was over there she'd give them a real good ear bashing.

[brentspeak]

16. I agree that the Family Pride Coalition is being disingenuous

Of course they're using the Easter Egg event to make a political statement. Why don't they just tell the truth?

[Kailassa]

18. Who are you to accuse them of not telling the truth?

Gays are having to fight for survival in a society becoming increasingly overwhelmed with anti-gay hate propaganda. It is vital that they make themselves visible in a friendly context such as this, so Americans can see that they are just normal people who want to get on with living their lives as quietly and normally as possible.

What they are doing is demonstrating to the public that they can be loving families, and they are doing this in as non-threatening a way as possible. Whether they or the government call it a "political statement" comes down to "how do you define political statement?", and is irrelevant anyway.

Another, equally honest perspective on it is that they are taking their kids to an easter-egg hunt, just as many other parents are doing.

[indigo32]

20. And why is that relevant?

They plan to go and participate in the day the same way all the other families do.

[brentspeak]

32. It's relevant because it's in the article

This is a thread started so people can reply to the content of the article. You did read the article too, right?

(Good grief, now I have to explain something that was already pretty obvious.)

Half the subject of the article covers a dispute concerning Family Pride's reason to be involved in the event The executive director of Family Pride said that the gay families are not going to the Easter Egg event as a form of protest. But: "We are, however, helping him understand that gay families exist in this country and deserve the rights and protections that all families need."

In other words - duh! - they are going there as a form of protest. I recognize double-talk when I see it. She could be successful writing for FOX News. My post was just a comment on the content of what the Family Pride spokesperson said, nothing more. The entire Easter Egg event could be nothing but gay families, and I would care less. Gay families don't bother me; her disingenuity did.

[AlienGirl]

21. For gay people, merely *existing* is a political statement

[indigo32]

23. you said it

:thumbsup:

[TankLV]

26. BINGO!

I am truly disgusted by some DU'r here.

[Zhade]

30. No ~ for people like the poster you replied to.

You know, the kind who thinks gay parents planning on attending MUST be lying about why they're going.

[TankLV]

25. They're gay. They're showing up. It's a public event. It says EVERYONE

is invited.

But not aparantly to people like you.

The fact that we exist and and not killed or beaten or invisible is a "political statement" to you and your fellow travelers?

So, if only the gay families would stay home and go back to trying to be invisible to homophobes, that would be OK for you and your fellow travelers?

I think I smell something, and it isn't something I would want to associate with.

But, coupled with your hatred of anything progressive, I don't find it surprising at all coming from you.

[AlienGirl]

17. I predict there will be some "security concern"

I don't think Shrubco actually plans to let them come. I precict that some "security concern" will be manufactured to keep the gay families out--probably stated something like, "We are forbidding the attendance of any organized groups with a political agenda due to terra concerns." See, they didn't have to say they don't want Family Pride there because they're gay, they can say they don't want any organized political groups there, and then apply it to Family Pride while claiming members of Repub political organizations "are there as individuals, not as a group."

Tucker

[DUHandle]

19. Maybe they will have to rewrite

the Turf Protection Law.

[Danieljay]

22. this is going to be good....bring on the popcorn

:popcorn:

[Kailassa]

24. You find the struggles of a minority against persecution amusing?

Well, every year buschco remain in power society should provide more entertainmnt for you.

[Danieljay]

31. Yes, I dream about it nightly.

Come on, Give me a flippin break already! What on earth gave you that idea?

In your defensiveness you left out the possibility that I just might take joy in watching evangelicals squirm when faced with the reality of diversity.

Some people need to take a chill pill before making assumptions that are so far from the truth I feel they aren't even worth responding to.

Deep breath my friend, I just might be on your side?

[henslee]

27. Those goddam drag queens and perverts and their kids are mucking

it up for all us normal folks.

[winston61]

29. Normal, provided normal is closed minded bigotry

and hatred of something you don't understand.

[cosmicdot]

33. Mr. Tooley shouldn't suggest he's associated w/ the Methodists

with that title: "the director of the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy"

he's not a representative nor a spokesperson of the United Methodist Church ... he's speaking for IRD, the right-wing organization making a political statement themselves and his activism is counter to UMC ... AFAIC just another modern-day KKK-style organization standing in the doorway of equal rights, protection and opportunity; and, yet, another tax-exempt organization similar to the Heritage Foundation, etc.

http://www.mediatransparency.org/allinonesearchresults.php?searchString=Institute+on+Religion+and+Democracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_on_Religion_and_Democracy
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1496

http://www.ird-renew.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=278604

Officers, Board of Directors, and Board of Advisors
http://www.ird-renew.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKVLfMVIsG&b=356301

One key board member is Roberta Green Ahmanson, chairman of Pattee Enterprises and wife of Howard Ahmanson (the Dominionist who funded what has become Diebold and ES&S), a banking heir from California. Referring to the liberal perspectives of the liberal leadership and membership of the mainline churches, Roberta Ahmanson said, “The Christian community isn’t just who is alive. Christians believe we are in communion with the living and the dead. We pray each week for the living and the dead, and most of the previous generations are in disagreement with a lot of this stuff. If you take the weight of Christianity for 2,000 years, all that weight is on the orthodox side.”

The IRD has ties to to neoconservative politicians in the Republican Party, and like other GOP-linked organizations the IRD is funded by conservative philanthropist Richard Mellon Scaife.


Rev. John Thomas, President of the United Church of Christ, Denounces IRD Attacks on Churches
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/3/14/41257/7860

~snip~ from his speech:

The IRD - the Institute on Religion and Democracy - is a sophisticated "inside the beltway" organization well funded by conservative foundations and closely aligned with a neo-conservative political agenda. IRD includes on its board intellectual and media figures like Michael Novak, Richard John Neuhaus, George Weigel, and Michael Medved. IRD's stated purpose is "Reforming the Church to Renew Democracy." It describes itself as "an ecumenical alliance of U.S. Christians working to reform their churches' social witness in accord with biblical and historic Christian teachings, thereby contributing to the renewal of democratic society at home and abroad," (emphasis added). The political agenda becomes even clearer when the Mission Statement goes on to say that the IRD believes "that Western representative democracy is, on balance, a good worthy of advancing." The echoes of the Bush administration's foreign policy are not hard to hear. ~snip~


Liberal Denomination Fires Salvos at Right

By NEELA BANERJEE
Published: April 7, 2006


After years of turning the other cheek, the United Church of Christ, among the most liberal of the mainline Protestant denominations, has recently staked out a more pugnacious stance toward the Christian right.

The Rev. John H. Thomas, the denomination's president, has sharply criticized the Institute for Religion and Democracy, a conservative religious watchdog and advocacy group, for supporting groups within mainline denominations that would further a conservative theological and political perspective. And the church has undertaken new advertising and e-mail campaigns to combat more conservative forces.

"I.R.D. is using church members, and even outside groups, to disrupt and ultimately control the mainline to promote its own political agenda," Mr. Thomas said last month in a speech at Gettysburg College.
~snip~

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/07/us/07ucc.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Initech]

34. Why is the AFA criticizing gays for exploiting children?

THEIR FUCKING JOB IS EXPLOITING CHILDREN ON A DAILY BASIS!!! God, these people are so stupid it's unbelievable!