RECENT  POSTS:  » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

01/09/2012

But what if it *doesn't* say that, Mr. Santorum?

by Jeremy Hooper

On his official website, this is the same-sex marriage stance that Rick Santorum's campaign is pushing:

On Same-Sex Marriage:
"If the constitution says marriage is between a man and a woman, then marriage is between a man and woman."
[RickSantorum.com]

Only problem with this, of course? The U.S. Constitution says absolutely nothing about marriage being between a man and a woman. So this one liner is about as transferrable to our real world conversation as Rick Santorum's Iowa "surge" is transferrable to national electability.

But hey, when has fleshing out the merits of this matter ever been in the conservative movement's interest? Brevity is the heart of public confusion.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails