If two men or two women want to get married, it is NOT just their private business. It is everyone's business because marriage is a public act, the formation of a social unit. What you do in your bedroom is your own affair, but marriages involve public officials, public ceremonies, public announcements, public benefits, and public recognition. The social unit formed in a heterosexual marriage benefits society: A desirable environment for creating and raising children, the joining of families, the socialization of men, the protection of women, and many others. Gay marriage does none of this: it is an exhibitionistic grab for public recognition and benefits by two selfish individuals who want to rub our noses in their lifestyle.

If two men or two women want to get married, it is NOT just their private business. It is everyone's business because marriage is a public act, the formation of a social unit. What you do in your bedroom is your own affair, but marriages involve public officials, public ceremonies, public announcements, public benefits, and public recognition. The social unit formed in a heterosexual marriage benefits society: A desirable environment for creating and raising children, the joining of families, the socialization of men, the protection of women, and many others. Gay marriage does none of this: it is an exhibitionistic grab for public recognition and benefits by two selfish individuals who want to rub our noses in their lifestyle.

"The strongest argument for this is not that some whites (and Asians) get passed over; these individuals will probably do fine nonetheless." As one of those whites who got passed over and did "fine nonetheless", I resent the extra work I had to do, having to settle for second or third or tenth choices in college, career, and other life opportunities, and for having to pay to have myself kicked in the knackers by government bureaucrats and equal opportunity pimps. Sure I did OK, but I could have done much better and not wasted so much time, effort and money.

That's funny -- as Churchill (Winston, not Ward) observed: I was a liberal in my youth and became a conservative in the 40's (OK -- mid 30's, but math is hard). Does that mean that my brain has shrunk?

Actually, we DO encourage engineers and scientists to come to our country -- just not from Sweden or any other country where they might expect to be paid well. The H1B visa program brings in Indian, Pakistani, and Chinese engineers and scientists who are willing to work for half the pay of an American. I know -- I'm surrounded by them and have seen senior engineers laid off and replaced by ones who can hardly speak English.

The greatest threat to young blacks like Trayvon Martin are not white supremacists like Margaret Sanger but racists like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Eric Holder and Barack Obama. Without their sanction, he would have not expected to be left alone while casing a gated community wearing an outlaw uniform, nor would he have felt license to confront a "white" man who had been following him.

"supercaptivating ship"? It is indeed a very pretty boat, but surely you mean "supercavitating."

"The tax code is at the point that the IRS could probably find something wrong with nearly everyone's tax return if they so desired." This ought to be the most frightening line of the piece, as anyone who has gotten on the wrong side of a small town cop can attest. Most traffic laws seem to be designed to ensure that everyone is breaking some law at all times. I had to change my route to work some years ago after a local cop got a grudge on for me. Just imagine an IRS agent being able to "pull you over" any time he wants.

I'm not sure that Clinton's picking a fellow Southern Baptist was as sound as you make it to be. Clinton failed to get a majority of the popular vote in either election, and the first time by a whopping margin. Most of the Ross Perot voters were protesting Bush (like me -- at least until the last minute), and had Bush gotten only 2/3 of the Perot vote, he would have won re-election.

Why make a correspondingly ridiculous charge to answer the Democrats' ridiculous charge? Because a large proportion of the "independent vote" does not pay close attention to politics, but only gets the occasional talking point or headline. To let only the Democrats have all of the outrageous talking points and headlines is to unilaterally disarm. It seems unworthy and slightly creepy to be fighting at the Democrats' level, but much of the American public has grown into a stupid, lazy mob over the past few decades thanks to the teachers' unions. Before we can change anything, we have to WIN -- even unsportingly.