@cicerone imposter,
You're the hypocrite. There is no discrimination against homosexuality. There are homosexuals in Parliament and in Congress. There are plenty in Media. In certain occupations it might be an advantage to be homosexual.
Objections to using the word "marriage" to signify a homosexual relationship is not discrimination. Forcing homosexuals to use the term would be discrimination. I bet there are plenty of homosexual relationships which would baulk at being called "married". There are plenty of other motives for this noisy faction's activities besides the emotional declarations of deep love which are easily acted for effect. And there's no chance of it admitting to any of them.
You are quite capable about being skeptical about politicians declaring that they seek to serve the community in selfless devotion to the public weal. Why does your skepticism retreat on this issue?
Which significant group is promoting the teaching of "creationism" in public schools? Insignificant groups are straws for you to grasp at. There might be only cultural tradition driving even insignificant groups.
Why do you wear baseball caps, stetsons and trilbies rather that keffiyehs, shemaghs and ghutras. Why do you wear trousers and suits rather than bishts? Why do you sit on chairs to dinner rather than on the floor? Why do you use cutlery instead of your fingers to stuff gobbets of nutrient into your masticating maw?
Cultural tradition. Far too complex and interdependent a subject to ever be raised in the circles you socialise in. Western dress and dining arrangements have been promoted in our tradition. They signify certain things. So does Creationism. The fact that you surround the word with inverted commas tells us you don't know what it means.
Abolishing Creationism is revolutionary and will have dramatic effects on every damn thing except chemical reactions and physical laws. In fact chemical reactions and the laws of physics will be the only seat of wisdom if Creationism is abolished. And you must seek to abolish Creationism to make the slightest sense. There is no half-way fudged position. The abolition of Creationism is a lock, stock and barrel job.
And I know you're not up for that. You would have no outlet to vent your spleen on if Creationism was abolished. How could you vent your spleen at chemical reactions and physical laws? You would have to sit fuming and unvented until the pressure worked of its own accord.
I feel sure that Mr Romney knows all that. And more. Why don't you simply recognise that he doesn't seek your vote. If he did he would have long since suspended his campaign.
