Wow, last time I thanked the AFA for their support in bringing me the various issues I might have missed. I had compared them to a well-trained office assistant/researcher. Today they have done themselves one better. They no longer simply report amusing tid-bits of news, they have taken it upon themselves to create the news.

Case in point: The AFA, referring to themselves as a "coalition of religious groups" has written a pledge for would-be Presidents to sign. In this case the coalition is the American Family Association, American Family Radio, Christian Family Network, etc. This is the equivalent of your local Sears Roebuck calling itself a coalition of retail groups (The Sears Automotive Association, the Sears Bed and Bath Association…. but I digress).

Even though the pledge is bogged down with self-important legal sounding lingo, but it’s actually unconstitutional, and a blatant contradiction of the Presidential oath of office. There are also a few carefully worded phrases that are obviously digs at the gay and lesbian community.

The gist of the pledge is this: Marriage is a union between one man and one woman. I will defend this against any attempt (judicial or legislative) to redefine it to include same sex relationships.

I will oppose all efforts to place children in homosexual households. I pledge to oppose the promotion of homosexuality as normative in America’s public school.

Ironically, it concludes with: "I will honor the spirit and intent of nondiscrimination policies and law to oppose federal legislation that would expand them to include special legal protections based on sexual behavior or preference."

The irony lies in the fact that heterosexuality is a sexual behavior or preference. This negates every other clause of this pledge.

Denying marriage to homosexuals establishes marriage as a special right for heterosexuals. I for one would support legislation that denied special legal protections based on sexual behavior or preference.

As morose as I obviously find this "pledge", it’s obscene that presidential candidates have actually signed it!

Pat Buchanan has signed it (no surprise there), as has Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer, Steve Forbes, Orin Hatch and Dan Quayle. George W. Bush has not signed it, nor has John McCain. Only Al Gore and Bill Bradley have actually refused.

What truly annoys me is that a group, be it religious or secular, can, for want of a better term, "blackmail" would-be presidential candidates into signing away their right to establish policy. If a candidate acquiesces to the will of the group, they are endorsed. If they refuse, for any reason, they are labeled as having embraced everything the group opposes. This is wrong.

In my humble opinion, any group that attempts this kind of blackmail is beneath contempt, and any candidate who gives in to this kind of extortion is certainly unworthy of my vote.