tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post115431315589482373..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1154398948471395962006-07-31T21:22:00.000-05:002006-07-31T21:22:00.000-05:00As always, Savage pens what I wish I could.LPerduehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05628362664340328791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1154362044027479012006-07-31T11:07:00.000-05:002006-07-31T11:07:00.000-05:00Good observation Doug.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-1154358553854577782006-07-31T10:09:00.000-05:002006-07-31T10:09:00.000-05:00It's always fun when the other side of an issue decides to reset their rationale on a pretext. That way, it's usually pretty good sport to poke holes in the pretext and reveal it as a sham.<BR/><BR/>By and large, opposition to gay marriage is based on nothing more or less than opposition to homosexuality generally. In my humble opinion, opposition to homosexuality is based on nothing more substantial than that heterosexuals find homosexuality to be a little bit icky, mostly because we've been socialized to view it in that manner. <BR/><BR/>But, you can't really base a legal decision to deny a class of citizens equal protection of the laws on the fact that other citizens are a little squicked out by the preferences of that class of citizens. So, you get all this nonsense about how heterosexual marriage is all about the children, despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. <BR/><BR/>Just my theory though.Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16655747495179504729noreply@blogger.com