March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
Salon paid me the honor of listing me among their “usual anti-gay suspects” reacting to the New York law. I’m described as “[r]iffing off long-discredited arguments.” Their examples don’t make much sense, however, unless “discredited” now means “I disagree with this.”
Of course, one can disagree that there will be any consequences to severing marriage’s last link to biology. But on the question of whether most gays will marry or what the number of gay marriages will look like, I’m merely basing that on the empirical facts. Pretty much everywhere gay marriage has been legalized there is a relatively large number of gay marriages as the backlog clears, followed by a decline. Maybe New York will be different, but for now this shouldn’t even be a controversial statement.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?