What does Mitt Romney think "discrimination" means?

Only in a media culture where claims must be presented without examination of their veracity, lest the presence of facts be considered a liberal bias, could we get this ridiculous headline: Romney against bias to gays despite opposition to gay marriage.

Gov. Mitt Romney said Monday he opposes discrimination against gays and lesbians despite his ongoing battles to outlaw same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, including a pending lawsuit.

…"I'm not in favor of discrimination of any kind including people who have a different sexual preference than myself," Romney said during the brief interview. "At the same time I'm very committed to traditional marriage between one man and one woman and believe that marriage should be preserved in that way."

…"I don't think there's any conflict between feeling that all people deserve respect and tolerance and that discrimination is wrong and a belief that marriage is between a man and a woman," Romney said Monday.

Sure, sure—no conflict at all. Except for the inconvenient little fact that "a belief that marriage is between a man an a woman," in spite of its positive-sounding spin, still doesn't really mean anything legally aside from denying rights to same-sex couples, i.e. discriminating against them. So, in fact, there is some conflict and Romney is in favor of at least one kind of discrimination.

That makes Romney a dissembling twit and the headline a lie. Romney isn't "against bias to gays" despite his opposition to same-sex marriage; he makes inaccurate claims to be against bias disproven by his opposition to same-sex marriage.

Romney's playing an infuriating little game whereby opposition to same-sex marriage can't possibly be considered discriminatory because marriage isn't meant to be for anyone aside from one man and one woman in the first place so not extending it to gays isn't discriminatory, by gum, it's just the way it has to be by definition, that's all. (And hence granting it would be granting "special rights.") Such reasoning, of course, is manifest bullshit, the same kind of rubbish spewed by defenders of all manner of discrimination, right back to slavery, because freedom was only meant for certain people.

If Romney wants to stake out a position in opposition to same-sex marriage, that's his prerogative, and he can use any rationale he wants—it's against his religion, it betrays tradition, it's politically expedient, whatever. But he should at least be honest enough to admit what it is, which is discrimination, plain and simple. And if he can't speak the truth, then we must do it for him.

(PEEK-ed.)