confidential to Dan: please abandon "confidential to."

It's actually a guest editorial, so don't go all Richard Dawkins on their asses.
The writer's an ass-hat, though. That's like blaming lynching victims for evoking the ire of the KKK in the 20's.
Horrible.
Proof that at least 90% of Xtians are clueless assholes - and I'm being charitble.

I don't understand this post. It's an op-ed by the guy who runs the Family Research Council, a well-known cabal of bigots.

What referendum is this on all Christians?

I mean, here in Portland our Oregonian regularly runs climate change-denying op-eds by some asshat named Gordon Fuchs, who has a PhD. Does that make all scientists climate change-denying asshats?

I certainly don't think so, but Dan Savage might disagree.

I love how this guy implies that there's a choice when he writes...

"Some homosexuals may recognize intuitively that their same-sex attractions are abnormal--yet they have been told by the homosexual movement, and their allies in the media and the educational establishment, that they are "born gay" and can never change. "

But how quickly would he fight against other "choices", such as say...abortion? I guess homosexuals CAN have a choice in their destiny, but women CANNOT. I wish I had the luxury of that kind of rule changing. People who mess with others heads like this should stick to faith based arguments-they always lose in the realm of logic.