MPBN: Critics question Yes on 1 claims

Of course, allowing same-sex couples (0.00 / 0)

to marry will not affect any local school district. Department of Education Communications Director David Connerty-Marin wrote to me earlier today to explain, "The ad is entirely misleading":

I cannot comment on Massachusetts education law or decisions made by local school districts in Massachusetts. Here in Maine, our Learning Results standards and education regulations make no reference to the teaching of marriage in any way. So a change in Maine's laws or definition of marriage places no requirements on local districts regarding whether or how they teach about marriage. Such curriculum decisions are strictly local. Before or after passage of the gay marriage law a district could choose to teach about marriage or not, and to teach about it in any way it deemed appropriate. It simply is not governed by state education law.

---

by: Gerald Weinand @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 21:09:24 PM CDT

Why is someone's religion relevant? (0.00 / 0)

"The Wirthlins are Mormon."

So what?  Why is that in the story?  Bigotry?

---

by: Dan Billings @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 21:33:59 PM CDT

I believe it's relevant for two reasons (0.00 / 0)

one is that it helps to explain the Wirthlins' strong objections to the proposed law, since it's the stance of their church.

The second point is that the Mormon Church has been very active politically on this issue, not just in a religious context.  The background information about the Wirthlins' family & religious connections imply that they may have a more organized agenda than merely being concerned parents.

That seems to be thorough reporting to me, filling in more of the context of the story.

 

---

by: marisol @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 22:08:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A person's religion isn't relevant Dan - but (0.00 / 0)

there membership in Mormon sponsored sponsored groups to defeat equal marriage is. You may find this history of interest, Memo links Mass. couple to Prop 22, Mormon strategy. From it:

Robb Wirthlin, Dick Wirthlin's nephew, along with his wife Robin, introduced themselves to California voters in a Yes on 8 ad as the unwitting parents of a boy who was read the gay-friendly book King and King  in his Massachusetts classroom. The Wirthlins claimed in several interviews to be unintentional players in the debate. They became the embodiment of the traditional family for Yes on 8 and appeared in a $2 million ad campaign central to the proponent's argument that Prop 8 was needed to protect California schoolchildren from being taught about same-sex marriage, which the Wirthlins implied meant gay sex, in second grade.

But Prop 8 opponents did not recognize the Wirthlin name. Steve Smith, campaign manager for No on 8, told the Bay Area Reporter that the campaign learned of the Wirthlin's familial link to the church's strategy, "either very late in the campaign or just after November 4," leaving no time for the campaign to issue a news release or other materials that might have mitigated the Wirthlin's claims.

Robb and Robin Wirthlin, as reported by the Bay Area Reporter October 23, were no small part of the success of the Prop 8 campaign. Smith, while speaking to Stonewall Democrats two weeks ago, said the Wirthlin campaign was "effective," and the No on 8 coalition spent the last weeks of the campaign fighting the issue of children being taught about same-sex marriage in public elementary schools.

Holes in their story

Holes began to emerge in the Wirthlins story almost immediately after they were first introduced by the Yes on 8 campaign. Parents in the Lexington School District in Massachusetts disputed many of the Wirthlins claims to the B.A.R., pointing out that when the Wirthlins moved into the district they were already involved with two groups seeking to ban same-sex marriage. One of those groups, MassResistance, run by Brian Camenker, has been called an "anti-gay hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Lexington parents told the B.A.R. that they suspected the Wirthlins moved into the community following parent David Parker's very public fight with the district the year before, in order to become actively involved in the issue and to join Parker in filing a lawsuit to enforce parental rights to approve all materials used in the education of their son. In fact, the Wirthlins moved into the district just weeks before filing suit with Parker.

Paul Ash, Lexington School District superintendent, told the B.A.R. that the district had made several attempts to appease the Wirthlins and accommodate their religious convictions, but that he "came to the conclusion that they had no intent on settling. At the attempt to mediate prior to the case it was abundantly clear that the Wirthlins and Parkers had no intention of coming to a compromise, that they wanted a public fight. I only saw political campaigns and religious vigils. I never saw any evidence, not even a hint, that there was any intention on the part of these families to work out an agreement."

---

by: Gerald Weinand @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 22:15:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree (0.00 / 0)

that mentioning their involvement in other similar campaigns is legitimate reporting.  

But that's not what is talked about in the story.  It talks about their religion and Mr. Wirthlin's father's involvement in the church.  How is this relevant?

---

by: Dan Billings @ Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 22:36:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sharon doesn't make that (0.00 / 0)

especially clear, so I will:

Robb Wirthlin's father, Joseph B., was not just an apostle in the Mormon Church, but one of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. This is no small matter, as the group wields great power. Further, Joseph B.'s father, Joseph L. was the presiding bishop of the LDS for nearly ten years. Robb's uncle Dick Wirthlin is a major pollster, that worked on the Prop 8 campaign.

Robb Wirthlin comes from LDS royalty.

If we were talking about a scandal in the Catholic Church, wouldn't you want to know if someone very much involved had an uncle that was a cardinal?

The LDS have worked for years against equal marriage for lesbians and gays. And they are now doing the same thing here, beginning with the Mormon backed National Organization for Marriage (NOM). The financial disclosure due 15 October will likely show that Mormon organizations have pumped in hundreds of thousands of dollars more.

Dan, I may have asked you this before, but I'll do so again: how are you going to vote on Q1? Do you see allowing same-sex couples to marry as the ruination of traditional marriage?

---

by: Gerald Weinand @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 06:44:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

If the Wirthlins' religious affiliation was merely coincidental ... (4.00 / 1)

I'd agree that mentioning it would smack of religious bigotry.

That's not the case here.

It's relevant because these are the facts of the Yes on 8 campaign in California:

Jeff Flint - Utah Senator Orrin Hatch's former campaign manager, hired to manage the Yes on 8 campaign in Cali, now busy working for Yes on 1 in Maine.

Richard Peterson - Star of the Yes on 8 ads ... Mormon.

Sonja Eddings Brown - Communications Director for Yes on 8 ... Mormon.

Gary Lawrence - Yes on 8 pollster, Dick Wirthlin protégé ... Mormon.

Glen Greener - Yes on 8 grassroots director, former Salt Lake City police commissioner ... Mormon.

Bart Marcois - Yes on 8 grassroots coordinator, former high-ranking GW Bush administration official ... Mormon.

Marvin Perkins - African-American Mormon who appeared onstage at the Yes on 8 rallies (with the Wirthlins) accusing the LGBT community of being out to "recruit our kids" ... Mormon.

I grew up Mormon.  I (honorably) served a Mormon mission to Brazil.  I admire my tribe's formidable organizational skills.  It is not bigotry to point out that the Mormons won the Yes on 8 campaign in spite of the hapless Evangelicals and Catholics, who could never have mounted the ground game that we did.

The Wirthlins have every right to express their opinion.  We have every right to question the basis of that opinion.  At this point, mentioning that the Wirthlins are Mormon is completely acceptable shorthand for suggesting that perhaps we ought not take their outrage at face value before considering their personal religious beliefs and allegiances.  

That said, if what the Wirthlins have to say is valid, all that really doesn't matter.  But, if it's not, are you suggesting it's off-limits to consider why it's not?

---

by: Chino Blanco @ Thu Sep 24, 2009 at 07:13:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]