tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1447912188067272511.post1335768728506278753..comments2009-11-16T16:09:24.842-08:00Greg Stacy .noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1447912188067272511.post-56613307808955359252009-11-16T16:09:24.842-08:002009-11-16T16:09:24.842-08:00@ Greg - it really wasn&#39;t necessary for you to respond to &quot;Anonymous&quot; clearly logical people get your point and anonymous must be illogical and idiotic otherwise they would have not been ashamed to say their name...........Freda Smithnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1447912188067272511.post-68341949213602950952009-11-11T20:24:42.772-08:002009-11-11T20:24:42.772-08:00They obviously weren&#39;t intentionally advocating equal rights for gay couples. I don&#39;t even know how many gays were advocating for gay marriage back then, it was a different world. My point was that, divorced from context and seen in light of recent headlines, the sequence played like a very sweet PSA for gay marriage. (And I&#39;d guess that most of the Sesame Street people wouldn&#39;t have a big problem with that.) I wasn&#39;t trying to &quot;degrade&quot; anybody.Greg Stacy .http://www.blogger.com/profile/12772862053429244544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1447912188067272511.post-5864770493981105402009-11-11T19:20:57.624-08:002009-11-11T19:20:57.624-08:00It&#39;s obvious to anyone who has been around any length of time to know the reason why they did not mention marriage as being between a man and a woman, is because that is the only type of marriage deemed acceptable at the time. All other &quot;marriages&quot; at the time (e.g. polygamy) were deemed inappropriate, so those forms were not discussed.<br />You should quit trying to degrade Sesame Street into something that was never intended.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com