Gay Parents Ready Kids for White House Easter Egg Roll

[Redhots]

Wow 18 pages... I only read the first few though.

So let me put this out here.

If homosexual parents weren't continuously attacked and insulted by many people in this country they wouldn't feel pressuered into wearing those shirts and putting on a show to try and prove they are "normal".

For the record "Normal" is a pretty cliche word.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Wow 18 pages... I only read the first few though.

So let me put this out here.

If homosexual parents weren't continuously attacked and insulted by many people in this country they wouldn't feel pressuered into wearing those shirts and putting on a show to try and prove they are "normal".

For the record "Normal" is a pretty cliche word.

This has been covered. This wasn't about normalcy. This was about pushing an agenda at any given oppurtunity. This was about using children for political gain. This should have been a memorable event for these kids, not because it made the world accept Daddy and Daddy's relationship, but because they got hunt Easter eggs with the President. Intsead they chose to make it about the Mommy and Mommy(or Daddy and Daddy) and caused the President to shy away from a political minefield. I admire the President for staying inside for this event. It kept a children's event from turning into a political travety and minimized the press coverage of the activists.

 

[sitarro]

Wow 18 pages... I only read the first few though.

So let me put this out here.

If homosexual parents weren't continuously attacked and insulted by many people in this country they wouldn't feel pressuered into wearing those shirts and putting on a show to try and prove they are "normal".

For the record "Normal" is a pretty cliche word.

For the record.......bullshit. Another silly group wanting face time on TV. Why should anyone give a shit about these selfish jerks. Their lives are queer(odd) and revolve around sex, no matter what the apologist have to say they are NOT stable enough for raising children.
You can now comeback with an example of heteros that aren't stable and I will say the same. Society is paying for the selfishness of "parents" who shouldn't be allowed to have a dog much less multiple kids.

 

[Redhots]

This was about pushing an agenda at any given oppurtunity.

Somehow I have a hard time believing 18 pages were devoted to discussing if it was appropriate for the parents to wear rainbow shirts, or whatever it was during an easter egg hunt.

Anyway, who cares? I don't think the kids do. Which says a lot about any adult that is getting worked up over this.

Afterall, this is about the kids right?

 

[Redhots]

Why should anyone give a shit about these selfish jerks.

I don't think they're selfish, but I do agree people shouldn't give a shit about what they do.

Their lives are queer(odd) and revolve around sex, no matter what the apologist have to say they are NOT stable enough for raising children.

How did you form that opnion?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Somehow I have a hard time believing 18 pages were devoted to discussing if it was appropriate for the parents to wear rainbow shirts, or whatever it was during an easter egg hunt.

Anyway, who cares? I don't think the kids do. Which says a lot about any adult that is getting worked up over this.

Afterall, this is about the kids right?

I started the thread on that premise, where the conversation went is not under my control. My question to you is the that has been posed to everyone else. Is it acceptable for any parent, gay or straight, to use their children for political gain? Is it acceptable to politicize a children's event, to further your message? Wouldn't have been more appropiate to drop the whole "I'm here and I'm queer" bit for one day? Is it neccessary to show "solidarity" at a children's event? My publicizing the fact that they were going to be wearing a "unifying symbol," they politicized an event that was non-political. What's next? Muslim parents bringing their kids to hut Easter eggs in order to further the teachings of Islam?

 

[Redhots]

Is it acceptable to politicize a children's event, to further your message?

Thats a grey area for me.

For the sake of the argument though I'll say if the children are the reason the event is being politicized then yes.

This fall in my home state of Ohio the issue of whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to adopt might be on the ballot (currently they can).

And here we have a televised (the news reports on it) public family event, one with a very long tradition in American history. Kids hunting for easter eggs on the White House lawn with their parents.

This fall in several states these homosexual parents custody of their children will be at stake. So here they are trying to make people take notice that they are just like "normal" parents. They aren't pedo child predators like some people make them out to be.

It was all done in a very unintrusive way too.

The stakes are very high for them. I can't see how anyone can blame them for trying to continue to bring some small messure of attention to their plight. To show us, and remind us that they are just like us.

That makes some people uncomfortable, but there it is. This is how civil rights movements work.

Staying in the closet and at the back of the bus get you exactly that.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Thats a grey area for me.

For the sake of the argument though I'll say if the children are the reason the event is being politicized then yes.

This fall in my home state of Ohio the issue of whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to adopt might be on the ballot (currently they can).

And here we have a televised (the news reports on it) public family event, one with a very long tradition in American history. Kids hunting for easter eggs on the White House lawn with their parents.

This fall in several states these homosexual parents custody of their children will be at stake. So here they are trying to make people take notice that they are just like "normal" parents. They aren't pedo child predators like some people make them out to be.

It was all done in a very unintrusive way too.

The stakes are very high for them. I can't see how anyone can blame them for trying to continue to bring some small messure of attention to their plight. To show us, and remind us that they are just like us.

That makes some people uncomfortable, but there it is. This is how civil rights movements work.

Staying in the closet and at the back of the bus get you exactly that.

If they were "just like everyone else," they would have taken their kids, took some pictures, eaten some candy, and went home. Simple as that. Instead, they made this thing a national headline. I'm all for equal rights for gays, but this was nothing more than an "I'm here and I'm queer" stunt.

 

[Redhots]

If they were "just like everyone else," they would have taken their kids, took some pictures, eaten some candy, and went home. Simple as that.

Ah, but if they're treated "just like everyone else" there would be no need to put on the colored leis would there?

To many people in postions of power they aren't seen that way.

Otherwise these people wouldn't try passing laws barring them from adopting children not based on their parenting skills, income, or criminal records, but based solely on the fact that they are homosexuals.

So there is the desire, the need, to try to prove that they are "just like everyone else". As much as any of us can be "just like everyone else" anyway.

Like I said before, if you shut up and stay at the back of the bus thats where you'll always be. These children must be very important to these parents for them to care enough to organize this effort.

I'm all for equal rights for gays, but this was nothing more than an "I'm here and I'm queer" stunt.

I'm sure many of the "I'm black and i'm proud" and "I am woman hear me roar" events were seen as "stunts" by the critics of their day as well.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

I'm sure many of the "I'm black and i'm proud" and "I am woman hear me roar" events were seen as "stunts" by the critics of their day as well.

These movements did not carry over into Easter egg hunts. They did not exploit children for political gain. I have to raise the flag on this one.

 

[Redhots]

Seems we moved a whole page there. Edited to add quotes to smooth the transition.

These movements did not carry over into Easter egg hunts. They did not exploit children for political gain. I have to raise the flag on this one.

Heres one for you then.

Did the walkouts that lead to Brown v. Board of Education exploit children for political gain?

 

[CrimsonWhite]

Seems we moved a whole page there. Edited to add quotes to smooth the transition.



Heres one for you then.

Did the walkouts that lead to Brown v. Board of Education exploit children for political gain?

That dealt with children directly. It was about the quality of education the kids were recieving. Also, the walk outs were perpetrated by high school age students. When was the last time high school students hunted Easter eggs at the White House?

 

[sitarro]

What are you guys going to tell the fine members of NAMBLA when they start demanding the same equal rights? Would it be OK for your kids to go to the White House in protest with a NAMBLA member? They could use all of the same arguments, why should they not have the same rights? Who's to say what's normal, right?

 

[Redhots]

What are you guys going to tell the fine members of NAMBLA when they start demanding the same equal rights? Would it be OK for your kids to go to the White House in protest with a NAMBLA member? They could use all of the same arguments, why should they not have the same rights? Who's to say what's normal, right?

Well I'd tell them to fuck off.

Molesting children is against the law. Being gay is not.

Two totaly seperate issues and practices.

 

[Redhots]

That dealt with children directly. It was about the quality of education the kids were recieving. Also, the walk outs were perpetrated by high school age students. When was the last time high school students hunted Easter eggs at the White House?

So you're saying when kids take part in the process they aren't being exploited, but when they aren't they are?

I'm haveing some trouble seeing how these kids are being exploited.

They weren't dressed in "pro gay" shirts and they weren't coached to say "The Defense of Marriage Act is gay". All they did was roll around in the mud and look for eggs oblivious, i'm sure, to the light political overtones their parents added.

I would call the dad back in '04 who had his older son pretend to be a protester tearing up his young daughter's sign at a rally a parent exploiting his kids for political gain.

Also why is using a nationalized family event an improper venue to make a statement about issues that effect families?

I know one of the organizer ladies said "This isn't a protest" , but I think maybe whats at fault here is a bad question. The word "protest" usually brings to mind images of angry people with signs chanting slogans. Which isn't what took place. They were defenitly making a socio-political statement though.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

So you're saying when kids take part in the process they aren't being exploited, but when they aren't they are?

I'm haveing some trouble seeing how these kids are being exploited.

They weren't dressed in "pro gay" shirts and they weren't coached to say "The Defense of Marriage Act is gay". All they did was roll around in the mud and look for eggs oblivious, i'm sure, to the light political overtones their parents added.

I would call the dad back in '04 who had his older son pretend to be a protester tearing up his young daughter's sign at a rally a parent exploiting his kids for political gain.

Also why is using a nationalized family event an improper venue to make a statement about issues that effect families?

I know one of the organizer ladies said "This isn't a protest" , but I think maybe whats at fault here is a bad question. The word "protest" usually brings to mind images of angry people with signs chanting slogans. Which isn't what took place. They were defenitly making a socio-political statement though.

I simply feel that they chose the wrong venue. The national story was just as this thread is named: Gay Parents Ready Kids for White House Easter Egg Roll. Instead of Kids Get Ready For Easter Egg Roll. There is a time and place for civil disobedience. A time honored national event for children just isn't it.

If any of this isn't clear to you, I'd be happy to draw you a picture.

 

[Redhots]

There is a time and place for civil disobedience.

Care to expand on that? How do their actions fit the critera for civil disobedience?

What did they do "wrong" by letting other people know they're gay parents?

A time honored national event for children just isn't it.

Before this story broke I had no idea such an event existed and i'm willing to bet i'm in the majority on this one.

Also I don't see what is so sacred about this event. It seems to be just another photo-op for a president. Do you disagree with this?

 

[GotZoom]

Care to expand on that? How do their actions fit the critera for civil disobedience?

What did they do "wrong" by letting other people know they're gay parents?



Before this story broke I had no idea such an event existed and i'm willing to bet i'm in the majority on this one.

Also I don't see what is so sacred about this event. It seems to be just another photo-op for a president. Do you disagree with this?

Why do they have to point it out to them? If they are gay, yippee skippy. They want to be treated as normal, then act like it.

I haven't seen heterosexual parents running around telling the world what their sexual preference is.

You really never heard about this? I'm going to guess that you are definitely in the minority then. It has been going on since 1878.

Only 128 years.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/tours/spring2006.pdf

 

[Emmett]

Look, I dunno if you believe in what you say or whether you're joshing or whatever. Don't know you well enough. Let's look at it logically and we'll even weigh the stats to your side of the argument. Let's say 30% of child molesters are homosexual (I read that figure recently on one of the many links I've discovered on this forum - it was a biased site, but we'll take their word for it). And let's say there are 1,000,000 crimes a year that fit the definition of child molester (I'd be surprised if it was even a 10th of that, but we'll go that way for argument's sake). That means that 300,000 such crimes were carried out by homosexuals. Now, homosexuals would have us believe they make up 10% of the population (I have a hard time believing this - I reckon I have about 90 good friends and family and about 350-400 people I know casually - about three of them are gay, and I honestly believe it is a cross-section of many communities), but we'll use up to 4% argument that some of the right-leaning posters advocate (again from sites linked to by conservatives on these boards). That means just over 11 million Americans are gay. So if 300,000 homosexuals commit child molestation crimes they make up less than 3% of the homosexual population, which means 97% of homsexuals are not child molesters. And if there were only 100,000 such crimes and homosexuals were responsible for 30% ( thus 30,000) AND they do make up 10% of the population (about 280 million people) then just over 0.1% of homosexuals are child molesters and 99.8%+ aren't. Look, I don't know all the stats but do I judge all Dems by Al Sharpton? All GoPers by Pat Robertson or David Duke? All Baptists by Fred Phelps. Seems to me people take the most extreme example and tout it as the norm. Bollocks I say!

Finally re this abnormal business. Michael Jordan is abnormal. Babe Ruth was. Wayne Gretzky was/is. Abonormal ain't a bad thing, it's a state of mind..

Wow, you threw so many made up numbers out there I am dizzy! Here are some numbers for ya!

100% of homo's are queer!

Every male child molester is a weird sick fuck!

100% of homo's have a psychological problem I have no desire to understand!

There we go!

 

[Redhots]

Why do they have to point it out to them?

Point it out to whom, the 7 year olds? I imagine none of the kids there were the wiser, unless one of their parents pointed it out to them. All they wore were colored leis.

If they are gay, yippee skippy. They want to be treated as normal, then act like it.

Because staying the closet has worked so well in the past.

I haven't seen heterosexual parents running around telling the world what their sexual preference is.

Are heterosexual parents being discriminated against by the state for being heterosexuals?

Also unlike other minorites homosexuals don't wear it on their sleaves because being homosexual crosses all color, gender, and economic lines. So they have to speak up, otherwise you probably wouldn't know.