I hope PA has the numbers to vote this relic out. The tides have turned against bigots like him, and they'll be dragged out to sea sooner than later.

Doubly offensive in Pennsylvania. If you've ever been to the aptly-named Pennsyltucky regions of the state, half the people you meet seem to be inbred idiots.

Shit coming out a bigot's mouth isn't anything new. What bothers me is the interviewer. She desperately wants to play along with him. In so doing, she comes across like a vapid cheerleader, trying to "keep things positive," pleasing everyone at an awkward Thanksgiving meal.

Listen, toots, you're supposed to be a journalist. Ask him to clarify and allow him the freedom to express himself. Bigots aren't interested in everyone being happy, so there's no reason to expect that people will be happy with what they say.

The original reporting on this issue was terrible. The legal team was not making an analogy between the merits of same-sex marriage and the merits of underage marriage. They were only making an argument about standing to intervene in the case. They were saying that the illegally issued marriage certificate did not give them standing to intervene in the injunction against the clerk who was violating the law any more than two twelve year olds (or a brother and sister) who were issued a marriage certificate illegaly would have standing to invervene in a similar case. Regardless of your stance on same-sex marriage, this is a valid and innoffensive analogy. It is about their legal standing, not about their morality or righteousness.

Unfortunately for the govorner, he doesn't seem to understand that either and seems to be actually making an on the merits analogy?

@3: This is the problem with access politics. Journalists will be nice with politicians because those politicians will reward the journalist with better access in the future (the David Gregory school of journalism). If they don't play nice they'll be attacked for "gotcha journalism" and blacklisted.

4, So in the 50's, would it have been a valid analogy for a governor of an anti integrationist state to compare the merits of interracial marriage to the merits of incest or underage marriage?

I compare gay marriage to incense.

@6

Are you still making this ridiculous comparison?

Even if chosen homosexual behavior and non chosen skin color had anything at all in common, the answer would still be yes though.

What would follow yes would be different. 'Yes, anti miscegenation laws are unjust, but we can't ignore the law based on personal opinions. So I'm working to get rid of them'. And yes, neither 2 children nor two members of the same gender may lawfully receive marriage licenses. Nor should they.'

See how easy that was?

@8: your tears are delicious. CRY MORE.

@9 She is a weepy little drama queen isn't she.

The thing I love about these guys is how stupid they are going to look in retrospect, once everyone comes around. They're the equivalent of the crotchety old racists who honestly believe anti-miscegenation laws were holding back the tide of black men stealing all the white women.

Can anybody explain why the lustlab link over in the stranger personals ad almost always goes to a "no such profile" page? What the fuck, web guys? Stop teasing me with vinyl-clad booty and then making me jump through hoops to actually find it. It's been like this for years and occasionally I complain about it in comments, but apparently nobody from The Stranger ever actually tries clicking on those.

Interracial sex and marriage are chosen behaviors. People don't choose what sex they were born.

@ 8 needs more healthy gay sex in his life. Closeted glory holing is warping his tender mind.

@8 Sorry, not chosen, not "behavior". Stop repeating this ridiculous lie.

8, Having sex with or marrying someone of a different race Is a chosen behavior. Gender is not.

Even if chosen interracial behavior and non chosen gender had anything at all in common, the answer would still be yes though.

What would follow yes would be different. 'Yes, anti-gay laws are unjust, but we can't ignore the law based on personal opinions. So I'm working to get rid of them'. And yes, neither 2 children nor two members of different races may lawfully receive marriage licenses. Nor should they.'

See how easy that was?

@17 That won't work. A complete closet case figures actual heterosexuals are just lying to him and they're also secretly resisting that big temptation that's tearing him apart..Is it any wonder he's blue?

If we as a society did a better job of raising our children, and kept the churches from poisoning their impressionable minds with self-hatred, we'd have a lot fewer tormented souls like Seattleblues running around.

@8: "we can't ignore the law based on personal opinions"
This from the guy who freely admits to denying lease renewal to tenants because they're lesbians and who brags that he'll be actively noncomplying with the ACA. Hmm. It's almost as if you only think everyone needs to follow the laws that you happen to like.

@6 No. I think you should read my first comment again. It wouldn't be ok to compare the merits (like I said in my first post, the lawyers were not making a comparison of the merits). But it would be ok to compare the implication of an illegal marriage certificate issued to an interracial couple or an underage couple in a state that had anti-miscegenation laws. Regardless of the merits, either couple would have equal legal standing to challenge an injuntion against the clerk that was issuing illegal marriage certificates. The justness of the underlying law is irrelevant in that discussion.