Skip to comments.
Only gay men have well-behaved kids? (MSM photo gallery run amok)
Reuters ^
| 04-17-06
Posted on 04/17/2006 6:02:02 PM PDT by jdm
MSM:
Gays Raising Kids = Good, Happy Kids


Traditional Family = Unhappy, Screaming Kids


This is from the slide show gallery for the White House Easter Egg Hunt.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: eastereggroll; homosexualagenda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-58 next last
MSM on another witch hunt.
1
posted on
04/17/2006 6:02:04 PM PDT
by
jdm
To: jdm
2
posted on
04/17/2006 6:05:11 PM PDT
by
maine-iac7
("...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time," Lincoln)
To: jdm
This is just a case of kids with their parents not crying and kids being held up by a stranger (even if it is the First Lady) bawling their lungs out.
To: jdm
Ah, the joys of idiot liberal propaganda.
The smirking drive-by apes always push their little "angle."
4
posted on
04/17/2006 6:08:38 PM PDT
by
Reactionary
(The Barking of the Native Moonbat is the Sound of Moral Nitwittery)
To: jdm
Well, one set is being held by Laura Bush, a total stranger.
The other set is being held by Daddy, and .... ummm... daddy's "friend".
5
posted on
04/17/2006 6:12:28 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: who_would_fardels_bear
The first four photos in the slide show are pictures of Laura with the screaming baby. Seems kind of deliberate.
6
posted on
04/17/2006 6:12:36 PM PDT
by
jdm
(Screaming ALREADY POSTED! since 2004)
To: Reactionary
The smirking drive-by apes always push their little "angle." No kidding. You'd think they could give it a rest for even a few minutes, but NOOOO.
7
posted on
04/17/2006 6:13:12 PM PDT
by
SIDENET
(Gonna shake it, gonna break it, let's forget it better still)
To: jdm
All of us REAL parents know that the kids are just saving their bad behavior for their teen years. Better to let them get it out when they're young.
8
posted on
04/17/2006 6:14:45 PM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: jdm
The gays kids don't look happy.. they looked CONFUSED! LOL
9
posted on
04/17/2006 6:16:29 PM PDT
by
divine_moment_of_facts
("Liberals see what they believe... Conservatives believe what they see")
To: SIDENET
Even the Easter Bunny is dressed like a pimp!
10
posted on
04/17/2006 6:17:26 PM PDT
by
jdm
(Screaming ALREADY POSTED! since 2004)
To: jdm
Gays Raising Kids = Gays Raising Other People's Kids.
11
posted on
04/17/2006 6:17:28 PM PDT
by
Alouette
(Psalms of the Day: 90-96)
To: who_would_fardels_bear
"This is just a case of kids with their parents not crying and kids being held up by a stranger (even if it is the First Lady) bawling their lungs out."
That's the way its looks - and the First Lady either didn't take kids from gay couples or the media didn't show it.
12
posted on
04/17/2006 6:17:44 PM PDT
by
gondramB
(Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's.)
To: jdm
No, but it does show that only poofers work as MSM reporters.
13
posted on
04/17/2006 6:20:15 PM PDT
by
pissant
To: gondramB
It's sad. Maybe they don't know what a mommie is?
I'm glad I'm not logged on.
14
posted on
04/17/2006 6:21:56 PM PDT
by
tazman3
To: divine_moment_of_facts
I remember about 15 years ago, I was flipping through channels and saw Oprah with gay parents. After their Son came onstage, Oprah asked, "So do you think being raised by two gay men has made you any different from your friends who were raised by parents who wern't gay?"
The kid answered in one of the most flaming voices I'd heard and waved his hand in front of his face, "Oh NOOOO! It hasn't affected me at ALL!"
My eyes about rolled out of my skull.
15
posted on
04/17/2006 6:23:06 PM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: RandallFlagg
That's why Oprah's show should always come with a projectile vomit alert.
To: darkangel82
I know, I know. I was a bit younger at the time and wasn't yet politically aware.
17
posted on
04/17/2006 6:24:53 PM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: jdm
The colored leis are obnoxious.
18
posted on
04/17/2006 6:35:33 PM PDT
by
fwdude
(If at first you don't succeed .......... form a committee and hire a consultant.)
To: RandallFlagg; SheLion
One of our favorite anti-smokers - Joe Cherner is a major advocate of gay adoption.
He has gone so far as to say he and his "partner" are better parents to their "adopted" daughters than my husband and I are to OUR duaghter - only for the reason we happen to be smokers.
Cherner is nearly as despised in the gay community as he is by smokers.
19
posted on
04/17/2006 6:35:39 PM PDT
by
Gabz
(Smokers are the beta version)
To: Gabz
LOL! The guy sounds like a real winner.
*vomit*
20
posted on
04/17/2006 6:37:32 PM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: jdm
If its Reuters its WRONG.
Note how the homosexuals use the children to advertise how the two men achiev sexual gratification.
21
posted on
04/17/2006 6:40:08 PM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: Reactionary
note how the Reuters push homo propaganda by implying Laura Bush is holding a homosexual fetishists "accessory".
22
posted on
04/17/2006 6:41:23 PM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: maine-iac7
23
posted on
04/17/2006 6:41:46 PM PDT
by
Frwy
To: fwdude
The colored leis are obnoxious.
You mean, "leis of color" :)
To: RandallFlagg
LOL! The guy sounds like a real winner. The things I could tell you about him make your "vomit" comment very tame.
I used to know him only as an anti-smoker..........it was a gay friend of mine that clued me in on him and his other positions.
25
posted on
04/17/2006 6:57:51 PM PDT
by
Gabz
(Smokers are the beta version)
To: jdm
Why didn't they wear rainbow colored crucifixes instead of those stupid things. They look gay. Oops, I forgot!
26
posted on
04/17/2006 7:01:35 PM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
To: jdm
Pretty rainbow colored necklaces... to lure innocent young children to their gay lifestyle?
27
posted on
04/17/2006 7:11:38 PM PDT
by
Kirkwood
To: jdm
Worse, almost all the couples shown were same-sex. Few normal couples were even shown with their children.
I guess we should also complain that they didn't identify opposite-sex couples directly.
And how did the women from Maryland end up with the same last name? The looked like identical twins. Are we allowing sisters to be "same-sex" couples now?
To: jdm
Selfish a$$hole$ trying to squeeze out the kids whose parents are heterosexual. They discriminate just as much as anyone.
29
posted on
04/17/2006 7:14:36 PM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
To: jdm
I'd seriously like to know if any homosexual couples attended that were NOT wearing a lei. By the photos shown, it didn't appear so. It would be a very telling fact to learn that no homosexual couples chose not to wear one - a testament to the homo-agendaist spirit that infects these creatures.
30
posted on
04/17/2006 7:15:46 PM PDT
by
fwdude
(If at first you don't succeed .......... form a committee and hire a consultant.)
To: jdm
more like the kids know their mom and dad and want to be with their parents instead of strangers....
where as the other kids are probably passed around as party favors...
"oh look chip! look what we got! wanna hold it?"
( I know this is in terrible taste... but dang if the media can't bring out the worst in us...)
31
posted on
04/17/2006 7:16:40 PM PDT
by
eeevil conservative
(I'm not racist- I'm an Equal Opportunity Enemy of ALL LAWBREAKING, TAX DODGING, FENCE CLIMBERS!)
One of those male partners in the slide show looked pregnant! :O
To: jdm
Those kids with gay parents are in shock! If my parents were bone smokers I would be in shock too!
33
posted on
04/17/2006 7:53:00 PM PDT
by
martinidon
(Bush won sKerry lost and Soro's is out millions for nothing!)
To: jdm
Freeper on a witch hunt. The story is about gay couples. All the kids are having a great time, except the ones being held be a stranger! So amazingly enough the first lady is holding a crying child while the parents are having a great day at the white house with their children.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Now the actual conspiracy would be if there were some photos of the first lady holding content happy children that were purposefully ommitted from the slideshow, but I can't find any. The whitehouse doesn't even have anything flattering posted
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/images/20060417-2_p041706pm-0057-1-515h.html
34
posted on
04/17/2006 10:48:34 PM PDT
by
Mephari
To: longtermmemmory
"Jimmy, don't come in while Daddy and his friend are jumping on the bed, OK? I thought we talked about that."
35
posted on
04/18/2006 5:06:16 AM PDT
by
Sender
(The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. Old Chinese proverb)
To: jdm
I hate to say it, but this is just plain creepy. Sick and twisted.
Poor kid.
36
posted on
04/18/2006 5:33:40 AM PDT
by
wolficatZ
(The Honeysuckle Weeks Fan Club First Annual Pub Crawl!)
To: Alouette
Gays Raising Kids = Gays Raising Other People's Kids. Lots of people raise other people's kids. Its called adoption or foster care.
To: conserv13
This may shock you, but there is no G-D given "right" to claim other's children for adoption.
For the past 30 years, the number of unwanted adoptable tykes languishing in Dickensian orphanage warehouses has drastically decreased. Ever heard of "Roe v. Wade"?
Gays selfishly choose relationships in which they cannot reproduce, but want to claim "first dibs" on other people's children.
38
posted on
04/18/2006 10:38:00 AM PDT
by
Alouette
(Psalms of the Day: 97-103)
To: Alouette
This may shock you, but there is no G-D given "right" to claim other's children for adoption.God has little to do with it, mostly the state approves adoptions now.
For the past 30 years, the number of unwanted adoptable tykes languishing in Dickensian orphanage warehouses has drastically decreased,
That is true, it has decreased but there are still thousands of kids needing homes.
To: wolficatZ
I hate to say it, but this is just plain creepy. Sick and twisted. Poor kid.What is really creepy is kids aged 5 through 17, who have spent their entire lives in foster care, orphanages, and childrens' homes, and have little if any chance of adoption by heterosexual couples. Under these circumstances, I really don't see a problem with gay couples adopting children.
To: AFA-Michigan; AggieCPA; Agitate; AliVeritas; AllTheRage; An American In Dairyland; Annie03; ...
41
posted on
04/18/2006 11:42:02 AM PDT
by
DBeers
()
To: jdm
The children of homosexual liaisons are sadly condemned to a life of confusion and misunderstanding--at best. All be cause they wanted to "accessorize."
A society that enables this is reprobate.
42
posted on
04/18/2006 11:46:44 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(I don't vote for liberals regardless of their party affiliation.)
To: Labyrinthos
What is really creepy is kids aged 5 through 17, who have spent their entire lives in foster care, orphanages, and childrens' homes, and have little if any chance of adoption by heterosexual couples. Under these circumstances, I really don't see a problem with gay couples adopting children.
To be quite honest, I think that such children have a better chance at leading a normal life in state care rather than as props for homosexual liaisons. The state should certainly not be in the business of helping homosexuals purchase children.
43
posted on
04/18/2006 11:48:19 AM PDT
by
Antoninus
(I don't vote for liberals regardless of their party affiliation.)
To: Antoninus
Having spent most of my younger years bouncing from foster home to foster home, many of which were headed by extremly dysfunctional heterosexuals, I would have preferred to have been adopted by a loving family of any kind.
To: Mephari
The story is about gay couples. -and the innocent children they psychologically abuse...
45
posted on
04/18/2006 12:01:48 PM PDT
by
DBeers
()
To: maine-iac7
Nothing the leftist-oriented media do is accidental. This is deliberate.
46
posted on
04/18/2006 12:05:45 PM PDT
by
BooksForTheRight.com
(what have you done today to fight terrorism/leftism (same thing!))
To: Antoninus
It points out the real issue. Do people whose entire lifestyle is centered around a sexual fetish have any place raising children? The answer is no absolutly not. Anecdotes do not make sound societal policy.
Society has an overwhelmin interest to raise normal healthy children into normal hetersexual adults. Society has zero benefit and future with abnormal homosexual adults.
As a rule, society is at greater risk placing children with homosexuals than leaving them in state care.
47
posted on
04/18/2006 12:13:58 PM PDT
by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: Mephari
Freeper on a witch hunt. The story is about gay couples. All the kids are having a great time, except the ones being held be a stranger! So amazingly enough the first lady is holding a crying child while the parents are having a great day at the white house with their children. Nothing to see here, move along. That about sums it up. Not a shock that a story about the gay parents at the easter egg hunt includes lots of pictures of homosexual couples and their adopted kids...
48
posted on
04/18/2006 12:25:23 PM PDT
by
LiveBait
To: jdm
I like the "quietly crashing the party" B.S. They were very clearly marking their presence with the multi-colored leis. If someone had "crashed" the party in their birthday suit, but saying not a word, we wouldn't say they'd "quietly crashed the party", now would we (especially if they filed a press release in advance of the act)?
To: jdm
The AFP Photographer gave Laura Bush "bunny ears"... this composition is intentional. No doubt about it.
50
posted on
04/18/2006 12:39:32 PM PDT
by
Nice50BMG
(3 books to read this year: The Bible (God), Bringing Up Boys (Dobson), Winning the Future (Newt))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-50, 51-58 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson