[hecticskeptic]

What Phil did was take the discussion in a direction that it entirely logical and correct but generally is avoided especially by those who promote homo acceptance… basically, he moved it away from the usual crap of softer open-to-interpretations concepts such as love and commitment and moved it straight to a discussion about sex. Nothing wrong with that and frankly, it is the only way to win this battle… the definition of marriage doesn’t deal with vague concepts.

The most hilarious part of this article is the comments from the GLAAD rep " Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil's lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe….." said GLAAD rep Wilson Cruz. Something tells me that the group specifically mentioned in the Bible as “not inheriting the kingdom of God” is not where I would normally go to find out what is true Christianity and what is not. 1 Corinthians 6:9

[Steve_Seattle]

"What Phil did was take the discussion in a direction that is entirely logical and correct but generally is avoided especially by those who promote homo acceptance… basically, he moved it away from the usual crap of softer open-to-interpretations concepts such as love and commitment and moved it straight to a discussion about sex. Nothing wrong with that and frankly, it is the only way to win this battle… the definition of marriage doesn’t deal with vague concepts."

Exactly. Homosexuality implies a disjunction/dysfunction between one's body and one's emotions. The anus is not a sexual organ, and if some heterosexuals also engage in that sort of thing, it does not change the basic fact of the matter.

I think it is also a matter of aesthetics: to see a wedding cake with two men or two women on top, with all that it implies, is just goofy, it is bad taste. It is stupid.