Let me see if I understand the issues:
If men are allowed to marry men and women are allowed to marry women, men who marry women and women who marry men are put at some sort of risk by allowing those people who love each other to go on doing what they are doing anyway but doing it as married couples instead of domestic partners. Have I got the facts straight, pardon the expression?
If gay men are allowed to serve in the military with straight men and the straight men aren’t forewarned that the gay men are gay, there might be occasions when both gay men and straight men get dirty and sweaty at the same time and might need to go to the bathroom at the same time... and who knows what sort of mischief might result from their being in there together?
And, of course, it might happen that a lesbian, let’s say a lesbian nurse, might find herself in a situation requiring her to provide medical care for wounded men or women straight, pardon the expression, from the battlefield, and those wounded persons might possibly be fundamentalist Christians who might be damaged if they knew the sexual, pardon the expression, orientation of the caregiver is not heterosexual. Have I got it, pardon the expression, straight?
---------------------
And there is this other thing that is bothering some voters.
Everybody in America with annual incomes up to $250,000 dollars, including even those people who have as much money as God, can have a tax break on their incomes up to $250,000 that may possibly put a little more money into circulation which could if the economists are giving it to us, pardon the expression, straight; and that would be fine all around; but Republicans are insisting that it shouldn’t be done because the people earning more than $250,000 dollars would be asked to pay an additional small percentage of their wealth unless, of course, they continue to use convenient loop holes to shelter their wealth as apparently it is fairly easy for wealthiest Americans to do... so they are saying we should call the whole thing off and stubbornly refuse to give anybody anything even if it would be good for the economy. After all, fair is fair. Rich people are people too. They have feelings and go to the bathroom just like the rest of us, all ninety-eight percent of the rest of us, so it’s just not fair to ask them to do a teeny little bit more to lower the national debt just because they can afford it the way F.D.R. and Truman and Eisenhower and others expected right up to the time when Patron Saint of the Rich Ronald brought to our attention that rich people are being asked to bear much too much of the country’s burden so cut them loose and let the middle group eat cake or whatever the expression is...Have I got that, pardon the expression, straight?
---------------------
And that business with the Black, excuse me, President Obama whose name rhymes with Osama and whose other name happens to be Hussein and is declared because of his long dead African, of all unthinkable things, father by some to be not even an American citizen and worse may be a, forgive my saying the word here, Muslim disguised even to his wife and children and his Mother, god rest her soul, and his old grandmother and grandfather who by some strange biological coincidence happened to be American with papers to prove it and white with a capital W as a Christian which brings up that old suspicion that there are lots of people out there who are not what they seem to be so let’s just settle into a kind of agreement that we won’t ask anybody what his religion is because of that little matter of the Constitution document and we won’t tell anybody what ours is and we’ll just go around guessing what everybody is... Tell me this... Is that the reason the people in the minority in the House of Representatives and the Senate are determined that this president must fail? Is that the straight, pardon the expression, skinny?
