[Paul C. Jesup]

Mr. Robinson, have a question for you. Do you remember a few years ago about the scandal dealing with the Florida Child Services where the State Government of Florida admited that the Florida Child Services had literally lost over 400 children in their system over a couple of years?

The reason I ask this is that from the logic of 'cause and effect', if you lower the percentage of people who can adopt, the effect will be that more children with be raised (for lack of a better word) by the state and several of these children will probably be lost by the state.

I will state I think those who have broken a felony level law should be barred from adopting children.

And I will agree that having homosexuals adopt children is NOT the ideal situation. But it would be a far worse alternative to have state bureaucrats raise children instead.

[I still care]

A while ago someone posted a truly defamatory statement aginst the Jews. I complained to a moderator and it was pulled in minutes.

Occasionally nuts will wander into FR and think they can spread garbage. We like a good joke as well as anymone, but racism amd such is not allowed here.

This article doesn't pass the smell test.

[Antoninus]

This is why homosexuals want to be able to adopt other people's children. So they can use them as pawns in their continuing appeal-to-emotion effort to foist their disgusting deathstyle on the rest of us. It's no different than when NOW puts a 9 year old on a podium so she can tell the audience how scared she is that she won't have any rights when she grows up.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

All parents should be gay. But homos shouldn't be allowed near kids.

There's nothing gay about homosexuality.

[indcons]

This buffoon's words should be taken with a spoonful of salt. Hs profile says, "John Ireland lives with his partner and son in Los Angeles. If they are able to attend the White House Egg Roll in April, they will do so as a family."

[CougarGA7]

Not the sons and daughters of gay parents

That sentence doesn't sound right in any context.

[Reaganesque]

They urinate on religious symbols, defecate on pictures of relgious symbols, gleefully seek every possible opportunity to profane anything and everything about our most sacred beliefs. Then they have friendly judges override the ballot box and pass laws to enforce their ill-will upon us and then hurl at us a tidal wave of accusations that we are intolerant and hateful. Go figure.

[roses of sharon]

LOL, homosexuals desperately seeking victimhood!

[John O]

from the article: “These lowlife scum should just be mowed down like terrorists,” writes one good Christian.

The complete post by SweetLiberty:

I am starting to feel like these lowlife scum should just be mowed down like terrorists. In a sense they are....cultural terrrorists, who won't rest until they contaminate and corrupt everything sacred to us.

Does anyone else see the liberal bias involved in twisting and misquoting someone's word to make the wrong point.

You can't trust anything that a sodomite writes in regard to sodomite issues

[Indy Pendance]

"John Ireland lives with his partner and son in Los Angeles. If they are able to attend the White House Egg Roll in April, they will do so as a family."

Puke.

[John O]

What is the official FreeRepublic position on homosexuality?

[Navy Patriot]

Seems to me that the whine here is that the gays won't be able to wear pro homosexual billboards where their Sunday best clothing should be.

Of course if they didn't try to turn an Easter egg hunt into a political rally, how would anyone know they're gay? Using children this way reminds me of the cute little Palestinian suicide bombers at the Pali children's events. It's not about the kids.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

So much for homosexuality being a privacy issue. Now they demand you let your tots get an eyeful of homo relationships at the WH Easter egg hunt. That should make for some interesting conversation on the way home. How sad that it has come to this. It was never about privacy as they have had that for a long time. It is about forcing change on those with moral values. Now you've got to talk about homosexuality with your two-year-olds.

[Lucky Dog]

If gay families are not equally welcome there, the message will resonate far beyond its walls.

First, there are no "gay" families in the homosexual sense. However, the quote above from the last sentence of the article is certainly accurate.

It is exactly the message that should resonate.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Curious that "In These Times" would worry about Easter.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Curious that "In These Times" would worry about Easter.

[Pietro]

Just like when the gay groups attempted to force the hand of organizers of the St Pat's parade in Boston they will use the push back as an example of Christian intolerance.

Its unfortunate that some freepers will rise to the bait and provide infamable quotations but how seriously can we take the good intentions of an organization dedicated to undermining "traditional" observances.

Free speech outweighs "tolerance", or at least it should, and if "FamilyPride" or whatever their name is where truly interested in Christian values they would understand that to err is human and to forgive divine.

But then to forgive would not advance their agenda, and ultimately isn't that what this article is all about?

[Colonel_Flagg]

Whose children will be allowed to participate in the White House’s annual Easter Egg Roll on April 17? Not the sons and daughters of gay parents, if the Christian right gets its way.

"Whose children will be allowed to participate in the White House's annual Easter Egg Roll on April 17? The sons and daughters of sodomites, if the radical left gets its way."

Okay, what kind of furor would be created were the lead written this way?

[r9etb]

Hmmmm. Remind me again why these folks think it necessary to make a statement about their rectal frolics at the WH Easter egg roll?

[MNJohnnie]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1560039/posts

For those who are so are acutally intested in the truth here a link to the article this Liberal writer is lying about. As you can see the Author of the piece is lying by omissions