AMA with Edwina Rogers


Just a heads up, the new Republican leader of the Secular Coalition for American is now taking questions on Reddit.  Click here to see it.

If this is the first you’ve heard of her, take a moment to familiarize yourself.

Comments

  1. says

    So far, she’s ignoring the toughest questions and repeating the same non-answers over and over again.

    Also, she’s contradicting herself: first denying the Republicans are overwhelingly Christian Reich extremists, then admitting they may have gone a bit to the far right sometimes, and that’s “unfortunate.”

    The more I hear of her, the more full of shite she sounds.

  2. tcsf says

    I can’t get to reddit during work. I hope somebody asks her, “Will you work against
    Republicans who promote the agenda of the Religious Right?” (Opposition to gay marriage,
    opposition to teaching evolution, opposition to abortion, etc.) “Will you do so even
    when this violates Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment?”

  3. John Kruger says

    She is ignoring all the questions that present evidence against her claims that the Republican party is not opposed to reproductive or gay rights. She also avoided elaborating on the canned answer she had about Rick Perry.

    This is just going to be more dishonest blathering.

    I cannot see myself supporting the SCA in its current state.

  4. Zengaze says

    I third that. Do we have a motion to pass?

    I was not inherently opposed to someone from the right being the sca lobbyist. Yes I believe it is possible to be republican and secular, I stand to be corrected but that is my current position.

    But this is a clusterfuck, incompetence, dishonesty, misrepresentation of reality, we are mcCain, and she’s our Palin.

  5. Zengaze says

    I posed two questions on reddit. The first I Opted to see if Edwina had the ammunition to back up her assertions, by asking her to provide any evidence whatsoever to back up her claim that in 1994 the majority of republicans were pro choice………. Silence…………

    Okay so, she talks shit, I’ll try another route, let’s see if I blow trumpets and sound rally if something stirs inside her and she demonstrates passion for the cause of the oppressed:

    [–]Zengaze 2 points 2 hours ago
    i second this, how long are LGBT people supposed to suppress their cry for freedom in the interest of diplomacy, and apologies for your asshole friends in congress? How many more generations of non hetro people are to bide their time and wait for opiions to change through education? The time for liberty is now and was always now, wrap your accommodations and gentle pushing of the fascist bigots in Christian Sunday wear, with the dollar bills LGBT teens are donating to your salary, and shove it.
    perma-linkparenteditdeletereply
    [–]EdwinaRogers[S] 2 points 1 hour ago
    We don’t want people to have to wait for their rights.
    This is an issue that we’re going to be lobbying about and we need as many voices on this issue as possible, so I don’t want anyone sitting on the sidelines. I have to be a diplomat, but everyone should speak out.
    Marriage equality, housing discrimination, employment discrimination, and adoption are all on our list and we’re working on them.

    Really? I was hoping for something along the lines of; This is an outrage to every person of conscience in a western democracy today, especially in our United States, a nation birthed in a document in which the liberty of each and every individual and their pursuit of happiness free from the prejudice of others is enshrined. My fellow republicans hold this document in esteem, and I intend to remind them of it in each and every occasion when the voices of slavery and persecution knock on their door.

    I say fail.

  6. godlesspanther says

    What ER is trying to do here is establish a kind of division of labor. theatheist movement is the radical division. It is our jobs to push a big fat “fuck you” into the fundies’ faces.

    Edwina is head of the ass-kissing department. Catching flies with honey, blah, blah, blah.

    What’s the problem?

    The problem is that we are up against people who think that they are acting in accordance with a magic goo-goo. They cannot, will not be reasoned with. You can’t do anything with them.

    The ass-kissing department is useless. It may have value in some political endeavors — not this one.

  7. Zengaze says

    Something very strange went on there. Edwina replied to my strident comment as you can see above, my comment was to second, and put some fire into what was in my view a very restrained question from a LGBT activist.

    The structure has now been edited, and rearranged, and edwinas reply has been made look as if it was to the tame question.

  8. Chimbley_Sweep says

    I didn’t think it was possible for anyone to be more disingenuous and self-conflicting than S.E. Cupp. Then I read what Edwina Rogers has written.

    I stand corrected.

  9. Kazim says

    Reddit sorts things automatically, not by date, but some kind of alchemical formula that moves posts with high upvotes (and perhaps responses from the OP) towards the top, while otherwise maintaining the time structure. You can change this yourself by clicking on your own sorting preferences. It can be weird to read, but it’s not a conspiracy.

  10. Zengaze says

    Okay well I have a conspiracy theory:

    I kept wondering where the hell edwina pulled the 1994 polling data that indicated 70 per cent of repubs were pro choice from. It appears way to specific for me to have been pulled out of her ass, even though she hasn’t produced it despite being called on it.

    So what was edwina doing in 94? Working for the repubs in the senate, what happened in 94 Romney ran against Kennedy for the mass senate seat, polling at the time told Romney if he maintained his pro life position he’d lose, so he ran on a pro choice platform, even though he was personally opposed to abortion. The polling Said the majority of the electorate in Mass were pro choice.

    Did edwina work on that campaign?

  11. Vall says

    Greta Christina now has an interview with an SCA board member. I think hiring ER was a good move and a perfect fit.

    It is a good move because now I know never to support those clowns. I imagine the next bold move from them will be hiring de Botton to build some sort of temple for all those pro-women, pro-gay Republicans.

  12. Anymouse says

    Then for those who might like to look for conspiracy theory, considering her past job, what is the best way to take down an enemy organisation? From within.

    If Fundamentalist Christians were looking to take down the SCA, putting one of their own in as executive director would be a coup. Divide and conquer.

    And the divisions appear already to have started.

    James in Wyobraska

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>