I never intend to be topical, I want to go deeper than that. But topicality, like greatness, can be thrust upon a man.
Miss USA pageant. Miss California is asked by by Perez Hilton her opinion on gay marriage. She gives the libertarian answer, to paraphrase, It’s a free country, do what you want, but I’m against it. She is excoriated by Mr. Hilton, for some strange reason a homosexual male judging the desirability of females.
Ten years ago this answer would have been considered quite reasonable, perhaps generous, by even such as Perez Hilton. Gay marriage was contemplated nowhere, and considered quite avant. The idea that somebody, somewhere, might want to do this and it would be OK was quite enough to be considered progressive.
That was one lawsuit ago, though. Now it’s an inalienable, non-negotiable human right. Any state where more than 50% of the electorate wants gay marriage, or more that 50% of the Supreme Court wants gay marriage and there is no initiative system, gay marriage will be the law. If the US Supreme Court applies the full faith and credit clause to gay marriage, it will be the law everywhere.
That’s still not enough. It has to be the law in every state, so homosexuals do not need to go to another state to get married. (Under the full faith and credit clause I suppose they can get divorced in their home state.)
Mr. Hilton has on his site various young female celebrities advocating for gay marriage, although if you read closely they are not all exactly doing that, they are keeping it pretty vague, as they do have other people to keep happy.
Allow me to pose a question, should anyone be interested to answer it- is a rectum a vagina? Does the insertion of an erect penis into a rectum serve any useful biological purpose? Might it not in fact be quite the opposite, and pose serious health risks to the persons holding both body parts? It is considered incredibly gross that I should pose such a question, but not that anyone should defend the act not only to be accepted but celebrated.