The lei scheme is definately political. People aren't dumb. Two men or two women holding hands and fawning over their children finding easter eggs will figure it out. It's weird. Want to be apart of society BUT want to separate and make apart also. That's my only complaint. Liberals love to throw cold water on children's fun. I'll bet they didn't consider that this may cause the egg roll to be cancelled. Otherwise, I don't care what gay people do except leave the institution of marriage alone. It's in bad enough shape already.
A decades-long tradition is not going to be cancelled by this president because kids are having fun while people who aren't even in attendance at the event are obsessed with those who do.
I think the article shows that so far, George and Laura are going to go ahead and have the event.
Otherwise, I don't care what gay people do except leave the institution of marriage alone. It's in bad enough shape already.
Well, this is part of their propaganda campaign for gay marriage and all that. Unless they dump the leis and decide to go low-profile, I don't see how you can get around that.
What has little jeremiah and scripter and me all lit up is that, beyond Andrew Sullivan and his position, there is a large contingent of gays actively interested in deconstructing "heteronormality" right down to the ground -- which would include abolishing marriage altogether, or at least society's considerable support for it. I'm single myself, but I am glad society supports marriage, and I'm glad my own parents and my sister's family continue to benefit from that support.
Many gays support expanding the definition of marriage basically to weaken it. Which faction is running the gay movement right now? I don't know -- but society has to do better than simply to react to what they are doing, and must assert ourselves and our right and power to define these things despite their discontent and agitation. That's one of my problems with what they are doing.
Unfortunately, it looks like they have a con-law winner in Article IV of the Constitution, and will be able to use the Supreme Court to ram their wishes down the rest of society's throat by decree, as if we lived in a sultanate instead of a representative republic.
Right now our best chance to avoid that happening looks like it would have to be a Supreme Court finding that Massachusetts's redefinition of marriage is legally or constitutionally defective, because of the high-handed actions of their Supreme Judicial Court and its chief justice (who did not keep the gay orgs pleading in her court at arm's length, by the way), and their maneuvers calculated to prevent the wishes of the People of Massachusetts from being made new law before the SJC decreed theirs.
The rub there is that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly signalled their readiness, in the Lawrence decision that overturned all recent case law, to issue a sweeping new ukase similar to Brown vs. Board and Roe vs. Wade. IOW, "they're at it again!"
"I'll bet they didn't consider that this may cause the egg roll to be cancelled. "
That would give them quite the strategic victory - they could say (and get many people to agree) - look, the White House is so biggoted that would take Easter away from all children than allow equal access.
The Bush Administration is quite correct in their handling.