No ‘social issues’ - Pro-life tracts banned at Sacramento Tea Party event

California Catholic ^ | April 18, 2011

[GonzoII]

Bud Reeves, president of the Sanctity of Human Life Network Inc., reports that he was intercepted at a Tea Party rally in Sacramento on Saturday and ordered to stop distributing pro-life pamphlets to attendees.

The event was sponsored by NorCal Tea Party Patriots and held at the Cal Expo in Sacramento. Scheduled speakers, among others, included U.S. Rep. Tom McClintock, Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center and a contributor to Fox News, radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, and Brad Dacus of the Pacific Justice Institute.

“Today I attended the Sacramento area gathering of the Tea Party to hand out prolife tracts,” said Reeves in an April 16 email. “Given that the Tea Party purports to be an organization promoting the U.S. Constitution and all that it stands for, I thought my handing out of a small prolife tract promoting the most important civil right, the right to life, would be welcome. I was wrong. Not long after we started passing out the 7 thousand tracts we had printed for the event, we were told that we must stop the distribution, which was welcomed by most of the attendees we approached and who received the tract.”

Reeves said he asked why and was told, “Because we will not be involved in the ‘social issues.’ I asked to talk to a supervisor. I was escorted up to the stage area and when a supervisor did not appear, I returned to the crowd to continue handing out the tracts. Not long after I heard my name on the P.A. system, asking me to respond. I did so and was met by Mr. Rapini, the organizer of the Tea Party event.

[little jeremiah]

Okay, what is your position on:

Abortion

Euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide

Homosexual marriage

Homosexuals in the military

To mention a few.

[The Citizen Soldier]

your e-mail = your post

[little jeremiah]

Thank you.

That is it in a nutshell. Get it back to the original intent.

[little jeremiah]

It means different things to different people, often based on current events and where they are in life, for example if you are unemployed with a family the tenets of conservationism may be viewed very differently versus someone that is flush with life in all respects. Best is being in a place in life that allows you to not have to select from the different tenets.

What’s your definition and is there no allowance for what life has dealt you or the nation, even temporarily wherein priorities must be considered?

ROTFLOL! What a bunch of meaningless pabulum mush! Please do not ignore my request above, about your POV on a few issues.

[trisham]

"I’ve attended hundreds of tea party rallies and protests in nearly every state of the union including a half-dozen in Sacramento. Traditional pro-life and family values are always well received at every tea party event I’ve ever attended. Don’t believe the weak-kneed RINO sisters or totalitarian control freaks who claim otherwise. They’ve either never attended a tea party or they’re outright lying."

~Jim Robinson

My point was that Jim has had many, many experiences with tea parties and his experience was not yours. It appears to me that there is an effort to misconstrue what the tea parties are all about.

[rbmillerjr]

Technically you are correct about Social Security. However, effectively, all that language does, “ an individual does not have an accrued property right”...is to allow Congress to modify the payments based on what funds are available at a given time.

But, you’re correct, it is not an investment. It is a forcible tax. But we can expect to be paid a benefit and are entitled to a benefit as long as funds are available.

[dforest]

The whole article here is about how a pro life group was told not to hand out pamphlets. I was saying the same as this guy. It is happening and denying it won’t make it go away.

I haven’t been to one since. I am not a wealthy person I thought it was sad that the Tea Party was only about money.

I was amazed at reading about some straw polls months ago of some Tea Party groups who chose Romney as the candidate.

[Nevadan]

re: “More than anything, the tea party is a constitutional movement. The number one issue is a return to the constitution, and that entails not only a rolling back of the out of control government, its spending and taxing, but also it’s overreaching and intrusion into our private lives.

We need to get its nose out of social security, health care and any other business or social issue. No where in the constitution can you find the authority for the federal government to take over social issues such as labor, health care, retirement, abortion, gay rights, gun control, health, education, welfare, religion, the environment, the economy, even the amount of water in our toilets, etc, etc, etc.

It’s much bigger than taxes. It’s about Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness!! It’s about freedom!! It’s about the America we all know and love and fear we are losing!!

High taxes are just a symptom of the disease. The root cause is socialism. The godless socialists and control freaks must be ripped out and never allowed to retake control. And that cannot be done by turning a blind eye to the underlying disease.

God bless America and all of her fighting men and women who have fought and sacrificed all down through our history to secure our freedom!!”

Jim, I agree with you that America faces problems that are much greater than just taxation - we need Spiritual Revival. I’m just saying that the Tea Party struck a chord of resonance among people of all political stripes - that it is a starting point upon which to build and move the country back to true Constitutional government and the ideals expressed in our Declaration.

I’m just afraid that tying an overtly pro-life agenda to the Tea Party agenda will fracture the point of common ground we have established with a great majority of Americans who have never voted conservative before on anything.

Believe me when I say that I thank God for Free Republic everyday. It is the one place conservatives can meet, vet, laugh, rage, and argue constructively amongst ourselves.

I look forward to the day when abortion is a thing of the past and is seen for the holocaustic sin that it is. May God speed that day ever closer. The Tea Party movement could very well be that first step of common ground back to Constitutional government both fiscally and morally.

[APatientMan]

“By forcing the Tea Party movement to take on more (and highly divisive) issues merely dilutes its momentum... and leaves the Right on the sidelines once again.”

I disagree. The definition of “Highly Divisive Issues” is relative - subjective. It’s relative to the type of world we are willing to accept (and pass on to those who inherit what we leave to them.) It’s time to set things right. Once and for all. Or die trying.

That there is a debate over whether it is right or wrong to murder unborn children (or whether we should support a fight for those lives) proves that. We can win the fiscal and social battles - all of them. If we don’t try we are nothing but a ship of fools.

[Nevadan]

re: “’I agree that if the Tea Party tries to “purge” Americans who are pro-life and pro-traditional values from “participating” in the Tea Party, then you would be correct.’

“That was my point with my innocuous post. Glad you finally got it, but that is where you should have STOPPED!”

Reagan Man, that was NOT the point of your “innocuous” post. You said,

“The Tea Party movement will damage their brand if they attempt to purge social issues from their AGENDA.”

You are advocating tying the pro-life “agenda” with the Tea Party agenda. That is far different that “participation”.

The “agenda” of the Tea Party is “get back to the Constitution in regard to spending and taxation” - not stopping abortion, not stopping gay marriage, etc. I believe that adhereing to the Tea Party’s “back to the Constitution “agenda will help lead to stopping unconstitutional spending - that would include spending to fund Planned Parenthood, unions, the NEA, EPA, etc.

As I said before, attempting to force the Tea Party “agenda” to include all the social conservative issues will, I believe, dull the momentum of the movement. Right now, the Tea Party welcomes all who are against unconstitutional government spending and taxation no matter what your political stripe.

[APatientMan]

““Are you a Tea Party supporter?” asked Reeves. “Can you agree with a strategy that ignores that we are killing 3,500 girls and boys daily? Do you think that God will honor a movement that in essence says, ‘Do not mention any of God’s concerns? We are here to make sure that taxes are lowered and government gets smaller.’” “

Amen!

[Nevadan]

re: “I’m just afraid that tying an overtly pro-life agenda to the Tea Party agenda will fracture the point of common ground we have established with a great majority of Americans who have never voted conservative before on anything.”

I want to change the “great MAJORITY of Americans who have never voted conservative before” to a great “NUMBER of Americans who have never voted conservative before on anything.” I do believe that the majority of Americans are conservative, but not enough of them vote to make the difference. We need to bring others into the fold not by capitulation - but by finding common ground we CAN agree on.

[Antoninus]

This is exactly the reason the Tea Party doesn’t get my full support. If you can’t be vocally pro-life, I won’t be on your team. Sorry. I’m not a cheap Democrat.

[Jim Robinson]

I don’t know about you, but I will not be putting God, nor Life, nor Liberty on the back burner. And no one is going to be successful in demanding that I do.

The RINOs and control freaks out there can KMA!!

[sport]

The only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow stripe.

[Antoninus]

Would it have been better to have lost the election in Mass with an unsuitable for that electorate rock ribbed conservative?

Yes. Brown didn't stop Obamacare. He's now a liability who can not articulate a conservative philosophy. He will become the media's favorite Republican--a guy they call to the podium when they're looking for a Republican to bash the conservative wing of the party.

Better a true enemy than a false friend.

[Antoninus]

We need to fix this country fiscally otherwise social issues won’t mean squat.

100% backwards. Fiscal issues don't mean squat because too many people have become immoral. If we fix that, fiscal issues will fix themselves. Read d'Tocqueville.

[misterrob]

Correct but as long as the funds are available and that is the crux of my point. The government has been spending the excess taxes for years, both repubs and dems alike. Now that the reality of socialistic security and Medicare are coming home to roost many people want to live in denial about the government’s ability to make good on its promises.

[little jeremiah]

Better a true enemy than a false friend.

Absolutely.

[misterrob]

Brown was a useful idiot, nothing more and nothing less. He showed the muscle that the tea party movement has when they took a solid seat away from the dems and stopped the Obama march. From that victory came an influx of candidates who moved the repubs more to the right.

Some wars are fought a hill at a time. Take the wins and build on them.