Yes, we have seen the calls of love and peace from Jackson's fellow pastors in the past couple weeks: a call to beat gay children, teaching of straight toddlers anti-gay songs, a call for gays to be put in concentration camps, calls for genocide. No bigotry or hate at all tehre folks. And Jackson's refusal to address these proposals can only mean that he agrees with them, but doesn't want otosay so.

Equality under the law is the principle that ought to be the deciding factor in all true Americans' minds. Simple as that. If you think your religious doctrine shoul dbe imposed by law on others to the detriment of equality, you don't understand what it is to be an American. Her tone here is softened even from last summer, but make no mistake: Hagelin supports recriminalizing sodomy. She relies on information from groups designated as hate groups for providing deliberately false information. She probably supports that pastor in North Carolina who wants to put gay people in concentration camps like Hitler did.

You'd be upset too if people were calling for you to be put in concentraiton camps. Anyone who isn't outraged by Pastor Worley's remarks is unamerican and morally ocmpromised. Reasonable people already call homosexuality what it is - a trait, that is morally neutral. People who haven't come to that understanding yet and try to prevent legal equality are deserving of social censure.

Maybe gays are better characterized as the new Jews, given the call of Baptist Pastor Charles Worley for concentration camps for gay until they die out.

I read the article. The journalist clearly made it sound like thsoe were pacman's words, and that he was calling for gay people to be killed. It was Ampong's fault, not the fault of people who read it and took it at face value.

It is never a blunder to do the right thing, like President Obama did. The issue at hand is fundamentally about objections to treating homosexuals as equivalent human beings to heterosexuals.

As if that hoary old bigot could ever evolve!

I prefer stupid and man. Plain words for plain ugliness. Here's the truth. Reasonable people unfettered by outdated prejudice have come to accept that being gay is normal, there's nothing wrong with it, and gay couples love each other exactly the same way straight couples do. If you don't get it, it is because you are unreasonable and fettered by outdated prejudice.

The equality I am speaking of is equal protection under the law. You seem to be speaking about something entirely different. The Constitution doesn't guarantee that any marriage, gay or straight, will be happy or successful. But it does guarantee and require that those relationships be treated equally under the law.

I read the article. The argument you and Mr. Hunter advance is, from a consitutional law perspective, wrong. I am a Consitutional law attorney. So instead of me reading the article and getting back to you, why don't you go to law school, spend a couple decades working in this complex field of study, and get back to me. You are out of your depth, and if you think its cutesy to say to a gay person - "You're not discriminated against, you can marry a woman just like any other man", you are not only stupid, but mean. It is about equality. I stand for it. You don't.