. . . religions, like those from the Indian subcontinent. So, if he wants to be proud of it, he has to share it others he'd perhaps rather not.

"Conservatives object to the federal government rendering unto itself the unprecedented ability to redefine marriage." But, clearly no problem having the federal gov't violate the constitution and let some states not recognize the decrees of others. That was the problem in the first place. Republicans and Democrats joined together for the unconstitutional and discriminatory DOMA and conservatives still struggle with it as pay an electoral price as society, in general, has moved on.

You are no longer live and let live? What is the alternative? Back to criminal prosecutions for gays? Back to banning them from open military service (which has happened without the riots and fighting opponents claimed would happen) All people who get older (I include myself) have to realize that they will see what they were brought up with as normal change over time. I never saw my grandparents in shorts or t-shirts. People used to not vote for presidents who had been divorced. Pre-marital sex and protection was abhorred (now even accepted by many conservatives). Life goes on. Personally, I have no problem with gays marrying. If you do, that's fine. But, it is not reason to want to stop living. Life is good. See a therapist (that's...

The answer is that 1) not all gays force it down our throats. Some do so, but certainly not the ones I know. 2) I don't really blame them. When people are stigmatized, seen as weird and immoral, threatened, left out, told they cannot marry the one they want to marry, demonized and until recently banned from open military service and until a decade or so ago, were guilty of crimes for voluntary sex between adults, yes, they tend to act out. When people stop demonizing and stigmatizing so much, I think you will see less gays acting "fabulous."

I don't disagree with that, though I am not 100% pro-life. I still do not have a problem with pre-brain/pre-heart formation abortions (though that may be difficult to tell technologically), and I am not certain I will not change my mind in the future as I have in the past. However, this notion seems also to have also found favor with some new state abortion laws, which of course will be challenged under Roe/Casey. We'll see.

If that is your argument against abortion (you appear to be quoting yourself from an earlier comment), couldn't you also ask "I wonder how many (Hitlers, Al Capones, etc.) . . . . ? I am not making a pro-choice argument, I just think it this is a poor pro-life one.

Thanks for making my point.

cause pain to co-workers or those around them. It is more common on line than anywhere else because it is anonymous.

at how cruel they are. Maybe some of them are children, but sometimes I know they are not. The philosopher Karl Popper wrote that we need to be tolerant, but not of intolerance. It is a gray line, of course and comedy is another thing we do make exceptions for, fair or not. But I don't respect those who are vicious or cruel with others that do not deserve it or wilfully ignorant in order to continue with their mockery, whatever their sexual inclinations. Nor do I have a problem with those who do not want to socialize with those who would deny someone equal rights. They are entitled to their opinion and choice too. I would not ban or fire or punish anyone for having a personal opinion, unless it was violent in nature or so vented as to...

It all depends what you mean by tolerance and what actions or words we are talking about. The few gays I know I consider good people I can trust. As a general rule they seem to me kind and tolerant of others' beliefs and feelings, not angry with straight people and having no need to mock them. I wish I could say the same thing generally about as many heterosexuals. I used to make gay jokes until I realized how painful they were to gays and that you could not tell in advance who your audience was. It's not that I don't have a right to make the jokes, it is that there is no need for it and reason enough not to that it is hurtful. Opinions are one thing, ridicule and mockery another. I look at the comments on TH and am sometimes appalled...

How do you vet rebels? I suppose if there is a long history (several years) of one side showing a yearning for Western values and government you can have an idea. But, short of that, what is the point? Are they vetted by asking if they want Sharia law? We know that a majority of those polled in Muslim countries, sometimes a large majority, want fearsome restrictions on women and appalling penalties for violations of their social code. Democracy shorn of individual rights and gov't checks and balances is merely a dictatorship of the majority controlled by a small group. We need to develop more U.S. energy and get out of these countries, supporting morally and with weapons and money only those few who are really on our side.