In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Definition of Words

Bob4419 Wrote: May 13, 2012 10:57 AM
Whatever word lefties use to describe homosexuals doesn't matter so much to me as when they monkey around with concepts that have strong moral content. "Marriage" is one of these, "Human rights" is another. Eleanor Roosevelt included "rights" to physical goods and services in the U.N. Declaration of Universal Human Rights, but this misunderstands the relationship between the material world and the expansiveness of human desire and effort. Among other consequences, the notion of material "rights" would make any poor government, no matter how honest, efficient, and transparent, a criminal government. It's untenable, even aside from the way that material "rights" compel people in some industries to supply the fruits of their labor to others.
Bob4419 Wrote: May 13, 2012 11:14 AM
What the left has done to "toleration" is also appalling. Authentic toleration applies to what one finds repugnant, and depends, like forgiveness, on an emotional counter-intuitiveness. It makes no sense to talk about "tolerating" what one endorses, except collectively, when something tolerated is repugnant generally. The left is all about collectivizing moral concepts, but a side-effect is a lot of people preaching tolerance who are personally intolerant of those with differing views. The left is destroying authentic toleration.

Gay marriage is an issue most Americans simply don’t care about. We have opinions on it, but it simply doesn’t register, especially at a time of high unemployment. But President Obama shoehorned it into the forefront this week because he can’t talk about the economy, jobs, his record, the massive debt he racked up or anything he’s done since assuming office except ordering the raid against bin Laden. And that party was last week, so a new distraction from reality was needed.

To be clear, what the president said means nothing. It won’t change any law anywhere. And the...