Friday, March 31, 2006

Gay Advocates target non-churgoers

I received an E-mailing from The Family Foundation. Highlights:


Victoria Cobb, Executive Director
Thursday, March 29, 2006

Information Alert: Homosexual activists coming to your neighborhood soon!

This Sunday, while you are attending church, homosexual activists in Hampton Roads will be going door to door in neighborhoods working to undermine marriage. While you worship God, Equality Virginia, the state's leading anti-marriage organization, will be knocking on doors trying to convince people that supporting traditional marriage is bigoted and hateful. This effort is just part of a plan by those seeking to redefine marriage to "educate" Virginians to vote against the marriage amendment in November.


I'm always wary of blasts from interest groups, so I checked the Equality Virginia schedule of events. And sure enough, they have scheduled a major campaign activity in Hampton Roads to start during Sunday morning church hours.

From the Equality Virginia Web Site Events Page (highlighting mine):

April 2nd: Day of Action (Hampton Roads) Volunteer Opportunity!Come on out for an empowering day of talking to people about our rights!
Date: Sunday, April 2ndTime: 10:00am-2:00pmLocation: 1204 Reardon Circle, Virginia Beach


Now, I've seen campaigns run literature drops in church parking lots during Sunday service, reaching out to the "religious" voters. I throw stuff out on my car, I think people who actually care about religious people should be in church on Sunday, not running around sticking things in people's cars.

But the EV folks aren't targetting church parking lots, they are going to talk to people, by knocking on doors.

And who will they find at 10am on a Sunday morning who are home? Mostly people who are not church-goers. I'm sure this will greatly improve their chances of finding people who will support them.

But if the opponents of the Virginia marraige amendment have any hope of defeating it, they are going to have to find some way to convince those churchgoers to oppose it. And sending people out canvassing when they should be at church will not help convince religious people that the "Equality Virginia" movement is compatable with their beliefs.

I know that some churches believe homosexuality is OK. I know that many gay people are religious. But I'm not the one who decided to target non-churchgoers in Hampton to find support for my views.

Update: Vince over at TooConservative has more thoughts on the letter from the Family Foundation, in his post: Life Is Short, Lets Live It With Some Civility.

Update 2: The folks at Equity Loudoun found me as well, their analysis and comments on both TC's and my posts on the subject are found in the somewhat provocatively named post Yes, Virginia, we’re everywhere. As I said there in more detail in a comment, I do not suggest that all the activists are not churchgoers, simply that I oppose doing campaigning on Sunday mornings, I'm not the only one, and that doing so could rightly antagonize an audience they must reach, or at least not incite to turn out in larger numbers.

And that non-churchgoers are more likely to agree with them than churchgoers will.

To wit, their use of the name "Some Families Foundation" for the Virginia Family Foundation may

8 comments:

Too Conservative said...

Why spend time hating on gays?

Charles said...

I don't know, Vince. Why?

Is this a trick question?

too conservative said...

You're psycho.

Christians who spend time bashing on gays are hypocritical.

Time is better spent helping the poor...or bashing liberals who hate our country.

Don't generalize all homosexuals under one roof.

Charles said...

I totally agree, TC, or alternate TC, or whoever you are. I will point out that the e-mail address for this TC is not the same as for the too conservative who has a blog by that name.

It could still be the same person, but it may also be someone else using the same moniker.

I'll write Vince to find out, I don't want him blamed for other people using his fake name.

I don't believe anybody should bash people for what they are. I don't think we should bash people for being gay, or being liberal.

We should simply point out the destructive nature of acts, policies, positions, and statements.

In this case, the act of a group Equality Virginia, trying to get people to vote against the Marriage amendment, and specifically doing a door-to-door drive while people are at church.

David said...

In that case I shall point out the destructive policies of those claiming to be Christians who are selectively targetting other people of faith with misinformation.

It is distinctly un-Christian to bear false witness. Proponents of this anti-civil union amendment are bearing false witness in a number of ways. They are pretending that it only defines marriage, and trying to conceal that it would take away from the legislature the ability to create civil unions and domestic partnerships, a provision that 59% of Virginians support.

I guarantee you that we will see a continuing escalation in the kind of horrible, salacious lies about gay families that come from anti-gay activists like Eugene Delgaudio as the pro-amendment side gets more desperate to turn out voters. I hate to say it, but this is what we've seen in other states, this will be accompanied by increased violence against our community. You should really think twice about what you are supporting.

Charles said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Charles said...

NOTE: This is a re-post of the comment I just deleted. The deleted comment had a discussion of the bill itself, but I swore I wasn't going to discuss the amendment in this thread, only my opinion on the particular tactic chosen by a group to advocate their side of the argument.

The remainder of my post follows:

It does seem odd that someone who was very adamant not to have others define who were christians, and who weren't, would then you the phrase "so-called christians" in a post.

Call them wrong, argue their interpretation of scripture -- but lets not belittle people's profession of beliefs simply because they come to a different conclusion. That goes for both sides.

While I'm here, TC has verified his authorship here, just like me he has several e-mail accounts and I just didn't recognize the one.

11:26 PM

Bill Garnett said...

I’m 62 and the Jesus I know held out his hand to all – to tax collectors, lepers, prostitutes. Certainly the Bible cannot be said to endorse homosexuality. On the other hand it was certainly not preoccupied with homosexuals either. The message of Jesus to me was clear in that it was about love for each other - non-judgmental love and acceptance. I doubt that the concept of two men (or women) having a long-term committed love relationship was a consideration then.

Much in the Bible is seen today through the prism of a society very unlike ours in many ways and 2000 years ago. Marriage has changed. It’s changed in my lifetime. In Virginia in the 50’s, a man’s home was his castle and he was generally the unquestioned authority figure. A few generations before that, women were even more subservient. Romantic love, being the criteria for two individuals to choose marriage, was more rare than we commonly accept – historians and anthropologists know about this shift in western societies even if it is not often recognized today.

I am not anonymously posting on the Internet. I am open and available – feel free to contact me. And I will explain that homosexuality is generally agreed upon by the medical and scientific community to be a normal variation of human characteristics – across time and cultures.

I understand that people can feel uncomfortable about change and about things they don’t understand. However facts and an open mind and common sense should play a role here. And men of good will must be able to have a civil conversation about contentious issues or polarization will result in our society.

Popular media which reflects our society today constantly shows us that most people long to find their soul mate, fall in love, and have such strong feeling for each other that they desire to make a life long and public commitment. That is universal. We all feel that – gay and straight. And I dare say that most marriages are not at their core, formed out of the drive to have children, so much as out of a beautiful monogamous and mutually committed love.

I ask you – I ask those who oppose gay civil rights, to step back and consider what civil rights do you think that gays should have? In lieu of a civil marriage license, which affords, in addition to a myriad of rights and responsibilities, an opportunity for family and community to celebrate and support that loving relationship, what should be the policy of a civil government that professes that each individual is born with inalienable rights?

And on the issue of children, well the world is full of untold unwanted orphans. I sometimes wonder at those straight couples that will marry and choose to reproduce rather than adopt one of those children – the children of God. And yet some of those same couples will oppose stringently qualified adoption by gay parents.