When Legislators Debate Anal Sex

Forget state budgets, education or social services. For one New Hampshire legislator, it's less about the issues that actually impact people on a day-to-day basis, and more about describing graphic displays of anal sex and how gay marriage will result in classrooms full of anal sex education.

Does someone have a slight fixation?

The legislator, State Rep. Nancy Elliott, waxed on about how gay marriage threatened to bring universal anal sex to students across the state.

"We're talking about taking the penis of a man and putting it in the rectum of another man and wriggling it around in excrement. And you have to think, would I want that to be done to me?" Rep. Elliott says, clearly showing her inexperience with the subject.

Is this what taxpayers really pay legislators to debate?

Rep. Elliott's tirade has less to do with reality, and more to do with the tired talking point that gay marriage means that schools will have to teach children about gay sex. That's so far from reality it makes Avatar's Pandora look like a next-door neighbor. But stoking fear is about all Rep. Elliott has left to do at this point.

Last week, New Hampshire legislators abandoned an effort to put a ballot question before voters, which would have put the state's same-sex marriage law up for a vote. Meaning that what was done to same-sex couples in California and Maine won't happen in New Hampshire.

That was two defeats in a row for opponents of gay marriage, who saw a similar effort fail to gain traction in Iowa. What do you do when hit with two staggering defeats in one week?

Apparently if you're Rep. Elliott, you make a spectacle of yourself and show just how childish anti-gay legislators can be when they don't get their own way. Meanwhile, if folks are looking for a health teacher, here's hoping they stay clear of Rep. Elliott, and the person who taught her about the ins and outs of sexual intercourse.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons