My own early crusade for same-sex marriage, for example, is now mainstream gay politics. It wasn't when I started.

I think if someone is writing continuously for 10 years and has not changed their mind about something - there's something wrong with them. They're not really thinking.

Don't fool yourself that you're blogging when you're really just putting stuff up online.

What modernity requires is not that you cease living according to your faith, but that you accept that others may differ and that therefore politics requires a form of discourse that is reasonable and accessible to believer and non-believer alike. This religious restraint in politics is critical to the maintenance of liberal democracy.

I can barely remember what I wrote yesterday, let alone 10 years ago.

Some of this is unavailable to the male-female union: there is more likely to be greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman; and again, the lack of children gives gay couples greater freedom. Their failures entail fewer consequences for others. But something of the gay's relationship's necessary honesty, its flexibility, and its equality could undoubtedly help strengthen and inform many heterosexual bonds.

When Bush says that Abu Ghraib was the work of a few, he forgot to mention that he was one of them.