FAIR is a left-wing "progressive" organization that was pushing "liberation" theology to bost the Sandanistas and other commie latino revolutionarys
Okay, time out here. People are getting confused. There are two organizations called FAIR.
One is Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting, a left-wing "progressive" organization; a FAIR representative shows up on, I think, one of Fox News' shows - I forget his name, Cohen or something, sitting next to Cal Thomas. FAIR is sort of the left-wing equivalent of AIM (Accuracy In Media, the right-wing media watchdog group).
Now, the other FAIR is the Federation for American Immigration Reform. It is this group which Danevogado has been misrepresenting. As usual, Danevogado's reasoning faculties are rather addled. He/she/it does not realize, apparently, that FAIR is a single-issue organization, devoted to the issue of immigration reform. As such, it takes no stand on such issues as abortion or euthenasia.
Danevogado thinks that people are so stupid here on FR that they will not notice the fact that just because a single member of FAIR supports abortion, it does not mean that any of the other members of FAIR support abortion. Since FAIR is a single issue group concerned only with immigration, it cannot, and does not, have any position on the abortion issue. I would wager a fair bet that most of the members of FAIR are against abortion or hold no strong views on the subject; but being for or against abortion is no impediment for supporting FAIR, since FAIR is about immigration, not abortion.
Similarly, gov. Lamm's opinions are his own, they are not the opinions of FAIR. Danevogado wants us to believe that a single comment by Lamm about old people somehow taints FAIR; this is pure Mcarthyism - guilt by association (and very tenous association, at that). I don't know what Lamm's opinions are on euthenasia; I don't know whether his comment was accurately quoted, was intended as a joke, or not. But regardless, it is irrelevent to evaluating FAIR.
Danevogado wants us to believe that a group is "tainted" because he says so; he wants us to believe that the statements or beliefs of a single person somehow represents the views of an entire organization.
Bullocks.
Danevogado is either a brain-dead sycophant of our existing ruling elite, or a paid disruptor. Or possibly a cleverly written AI program. He/she/it cannot reason him/her/itself out of a paper bag, cannnot engage in a discussion without resorting to name calling or using the race card. In short, he/she/it is best ignored.