I am recently married, to a man who has many gay friends and who has even “experimented” with them, and I feel not a bit threatened. Even if one of his friends did sweep him away, the issue wouldn’t be homosexuality, it’d be cheating. But of course cheating isn’t as big a problem for these wingnut men (as long as it’s them doing the cheating)…

Uh-oh; soon you’ll start the same flap as with Petreaus/ “Betray Us”…

Obviously, he’s really talking about the “traditional” form of marriage, which is based on ownership and domination. In which case, yeah, good riddance, I hope it is heading for the ash heap of history.

But for those of us who doing our best to take the best elements of this old human ritual and apply it to a lifelong, committed, loving relationship between equal partners, this “threat to the institution of marriage” is laughable.

Speaking strictly for my own hetero self, my pro-marriage” views take this form: I love my wife, I love being married, it’s the best thing that’s ever happened to me, and therefore, damn it, I want that experience to be available for anyone who wants it. Pretty simple, really.

I’m still trying to find a way that us liberals can encourage the third party run without them realizing that we’re the ones doing it. Because really, that would be like your birthday and Xmas rolled into one. For a full presidential term.

Did anyone happen to hear about this little gem?

“I’m MORE intolerant than YOU are!”
“No, I am!!!”
“Nu-huh!”
“Yuh-huh!”

Then from the moderator:

“YOU CANDIDATES PIPE DOWN- DON’T MAKE ME PULL THIS DEBATE OVER!!!”

wagonjak - You want to bear in mind that these people call their agenda “values” or “family values” because they can’t call it by its right name–sticking their noses into everyone’s private life.

And it never, ever means anything else.

If these people were even remotely “pro-family” in the same sense that normal people are in favor of families, the candidates who came around to court them would be, for example, talking up their support of SCHIP, and how they’re going to fight for vastly increased support for veterans’ programs (instead of shifting the care to their families, which is what happens when–as now–you stiff vets), and how they’re going to fix whatever’s giving America such a craptacular infant mortality rate. (1)

Instead, the candidates have basically come to this disgusting assemblage to assure these genuinely evil people that they’ll be permitted to micromanage everyone else’s sex life.

They’re pretending it’s about paying homage to some poorly defined set of long-standing traditions, but it’s not poorly defined at all. I repeat: It’s almost never about anything else but attempting to gain control over the parts of other people’s lives that are none of their business. In particular, Dobson et al. want the right to tell you who to sleep with, and how, and when.

They can’t say that straight out because, one, it’s bad for their business, and two, when it comes to sex, these sick, crippled losers can’t say anything straight out. But that’s what they want–in fact, it’s what they feel entitled to: Telling you how to run that part of your life.

(1) Forgive the obvious-stating, but if the so-called “pro-life” camp actually gave a flying fuck about the lives of unborn babies, they’d be on the neonate mortality issue like white on rice.