>Finally, I think anyone who is a practicing Catholic, anti-choice AND pro-welfare reform deserves to have their sexual peccadilloes widely known. The hedonism he has belatedly decided is all right for himself is not an activity he would make possible for women. Where's women's right to privacy in his scheme of things? In the back alley or the obstetrics ward. The heck with him I say -- what goes around comes around.
The problem with this is that, even if the story is true, Sullivan's hypocrisy isn't a good argument in favor of the right to privacy--or the right to choice. It's a good argument not to lend him credibility, but there are a hundred Andrew Sullivan's waiting to pop up where that one falls. ----------
no, it's yet another example of sexism.
kelley