RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » 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'  

« 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