In it, but not of it. TPM DC
Schmidt would quickly tell you that he is not advocating that we support 60 year old men in their desire to rape 8 year old boys, but he would not classify his opposition as narrow minded. No! This is a principled position; there is some logic behind it, Schmidt would say.Those principles seem to include the idea that gay marriage is comparable to pedophilia and bestiality. That and extremely unclear writing.
Is Schmidt then going to take his close minded stump speech to the Bestiality Club? Again, his answer would be no, although there are a group of people who embrace this lifestyle.
Schmidt and other gay lifestyle proponents would say that my opposition is based on the slippery slope approach. I say that it is based on principle and that it is no more close minded than their position for gay unions. The difference between me and Schmidt is that I'm not a maverick. I'm guided by something called Christian principles. And I don't need people in California, New York and Washington to tell me what the principles should be.
Smith's blog has since been pulled down, but you can read the cached version here, and the post itself here. As it turns out, support (or otherwise) for gay marriage is shaping up to be a flash point when the committee considers Obama's forthcoming Supreme Court pick later this year. So Smith's musings could shape the line of questioning that nominee faces. Unless, of course, Smith learns that his new boss might actually support a nominee who has "gay tendencies," and quits as a matter of Christian principle.