I don't care what you do in your bedroom. Not a bit. Whatever makes you happy-- It's between you and your own conscience.

You and I may not agree, but that's ok. I haven't found a friend yet that agrees with me on everything.

I'm sorry to inform you that you walked right into the MLK quote as planned. See, you don't see homosexuals for the content of their character. All you see is that they're homosexual and base all of your judgments on that one thing. You may experience a lack of appetite for the next few days as you have engorged all of your own words, quite a gutfull at that.

Let's take back the senate and the white house.

Faced with the opportunity to nominate somebody who could actually be able to politically attack Obama on his most vulnerable flank, they instead nominate the guy who invented Romneycare.

Nice job.

McCain all over again.

It worked so well last time......

My guess is that if Obama were to talk about fatherlessness, he would displease the gay lobby. After all, any talk of the benefits of responsible fathering is bound to be viewed as "bigoted" and "stigmatizing" towards children raised by same-sex female coupes (not to mention radical feminists and single mothers). Let's hope we don't reach a point where most government officials don't do anything meaningful to promote fatherhood due to concerns about being labeled "bigoted."

The gay lobby is the only plausible explanation I can find for why the president has abandoned his speaking on fatherhood. If anyone would like to provide an alternative explanation, please do!

Will they be joining you in replacing Obama with the uber-white, uber-rich, uber-Mormon Mitt Romney?

Does this indicate a change in position for NOM on the issue of polygamy?

70% of AA births in this country are out-of-wedlock. 40% overall. Millions of children deprived of a moms and dads because the government fosters a culture that discourages marriage.

The majority of voting Americans in a given year changes each cycle. In 2008 full thirty million evangelical Christians did not vote because they could not support either candidate in good conscience. Obama has spent the last 3.5 years reminding these voters how wrong they were not to show up.

Keep in mind that Obama won by roughly ten million votes in 2008; also keep in mind that the majority of Independents that went for Obama in 2008 are polling at just over 58% opposed.

I said "seems to."

Obama's base is essentially socialist; they want the government to take care of everyone, create large government programs, and do it on the backs of taxpayers.

The biggest obstacle to governmental domination is the traditional family which promotes independence, self-sufficiency and freedom freedom government. Destroy the notion that dads should stay with moms and you create a whole new underclass dependent on the government: single moms and their children.

What actions, specifically, has Obama's base taken to make you 100% sure they believe fathers shouldn't stay with moms?

Yeah, I suppose that if the President had really done virtually everything possible to undermine marriage, he would have gotten a divorce. What are you smokin'?

I will say this in Obama's defense: He has on occasion spoken about the importance of fathers stepping up for their families in the Black American communities. It was one of the things that made me vote for him. But he doesn't say it much these days because his base seems to hate the notion of fathers staying with moms.

NOM joins the long list of empassioned Romney supports who boldly state "well...if Romney is the only remaining candidate I suppose we will support him then I guess."

The President has modeled a strong African-American marriage and family from Day One. That's actually one of the best supports of marriage I can imagine. Please keep an open mind and avoid hyperbole.