Lautenberg - who did not attend the event but whose statement was read by a staff member - is one of three members of Congress to attack the Department of Justice (DOJ) in general and Ashcroft in particular. The trio of Lautenberg, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) accuse the department of applying a double standard to "DOJ Pride," a homosexual advocacy group of DOJ employees, as opposed to other employee associations.
"I find it particularly outrageous that the Department of Justice, whose mission is to ensure equal protection under the law for all Americans, would discriminate against its own staff members," Lautenberg said in the statement. "The possibility that the department would put the wishes of right-wing interest groups ahead of the civil rights of its own employees is unconscionable."
However, as CNSNews.com reported on June 12, Justice Department officials claim there was no discrimination, only a "miscommunication" with DOJ Pride regarding the request.
"The group was not told that they couldn't hold the event," Mark Corallo, a DOJ spokesman, said. "Any properly constituted employee association can request the use of the facilities for their group's events."
But Frank accused the Justice Department of lying about initially forbidding the event to avoid political repercussions. He said such an alleged lie was actually welcomed."The very dishonesty with which people at the Justice Department have tried to explain away their decision is a good sign," Frank argued, "because they have the good political judgment to be embarrassed at having been caught in that act of bigotry."
DOJ Pride complained when it was asked to pay the same rent for the DOJ "Great Hall of Justice" that other groups are charged when they use the room for events other than official government business.
"As it turns out, DOJ Pride was the only employee association that had received sponsorship from the department over the last two years," Corallo explained. "The government is not obliged to sponsor nor pay for these events."
In a written statement distributed by his staff, Feingold told DOJ Pride and its supporters that he was "honored to join you today," even though he, too, did not attend the event.
"It is unfortunate that this event, which is intended to celebrate diversity, is taking place under a cloud of prejudice and bigotry," Feingold alleged.
Peter LaBarbera, senior policy analyst for the Culture and Family Institute of Concerned Women for America, scoffed at both Feingold's terminology and accusations.
"Two things: One is, it's not a celebration of diversity, it's a celebration of homosexuality," LaBarbera said. "Liberals are trying to steal the words 'diversity' and 'tolerance.'
"The second thing is, I don't really care what Sen. Feingold says about bigotry and tolerance because this is a man who thinks it's intolerant and hateful for a judge not to take his two young daughters to Disney World when there are thousands of celebrating homosexuals at that theme park."
As CNSNews.com previously reported, Feingold criticized Alabama Attorney General William H. "Bill" Pryor, during Pryor's confirmation hearing to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for rescheduling a family vacation to Disney World. Pryor did not want his children to be present during the annual "Gay Days," an unofficial gathering of thousands of overt homosexuals in the children's theme park.
"As far as my family vacation is concerned, my wife and I had two daughters who at the time of that vacation were 6 and 4, and we made a value judgment," Pryor explained, "and that was our personal decision."Feingold questioned whether, in light of Pryor's "record," homosexuals could expect fair treatment if he were to become a judge. LaBarbera believes Feingold's remarks cast much more doubt on the senator's fairness than does Pryor's decision to protect his children from a highly publicized, sexually focused event.
"Obviously, [Sen. Feingold] has decided that the beliefs of millions and millions of pro-faith and pro-family Americans are the moral equivalent of bigotry," LaBarbera said.
He added that liberals' attempts to label those with traditional morals as "prejudiced" or "bigoted" are "more a reflection of their lack of morality than the morality of millions of Americans.
"Our answer to liberals like Sen. Feingold and Sen. Lautenberg is: Morality is not prejudice," LaBarbera argued. "It's not bigotry for people to defend moral beliefs that have existed for thousands and thousands of years.
"They're trying to redefine our basic moral beliefs as rank prejudice," he concluded, "and it's wrong."
E-mail a news tip to Jeff Johnson.
Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.