RECENT  POSTS:  » 2006: When Clinton vocally supported her state moving forward w/ marriage equality but Sanders did not » Where art thou, Jeremy? » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight  

« 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