RECENT  POSTS:  » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something. » NOM's new plan? To beat up its org-crushing loss until it becomes a win. » By the time you read this headline, we'll be ten more seconds beyond stagnant anti-gay 'culture wars' » Video: America cannot wait—to purchase American Family Association radio equipment? Huh?! » Huckabee 2016: 'cause church and state aint gonna marry themselves » EEOC does wonky, under-radar thing that could lay groundwork for definitive nondiscrimination protections » Maggie Gallagher, now that you've lost on marriage, might you lose these deceptive ways as well? » Crowdfunding discriminatory business owners: Perfect statement on anti-gay movement's current affairs » The religious anti-gay crowd: They never understood the marriage fight; now they don't understand their loss  

« 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