In that case, Leo, I will withdraw my comment to that effect. In a similar spirit, perhaps you can explain your own comment:
" you have no rational observation to make, just a desire to impose a negative label on what is positive and rational, and to which you have no answer."

What precisely was it in reference to?

Thanks, Craig. I am none the wiser, as to the basis of your remark, but will consider that we have a fresh, blank page on which to work.

To clarify my remark, I suppose I had pigeonholed you with Julian, and ascribed his method to your comment. I also see you as a supporter of same sex “marriage, so see no validity in your situation. Consequently I saw “obsessive” as a label dreamt up to avoid showing that you had no valid comment. I acknowledge that I have seen enough of your posts to know better, but I did not direct sufficient attention to it.
I see that you may have simply regarded my post as obsessive, and made the comment in a conversational style.
I take intense care with my posts, which I do not see as obsessive, so my answer was also on the basis that I considered your description of my presentation to be flawed.

Your expectation of success of the “ marriage” scam is by no means assured. We may be observing the beginning of a long and intense contest, which will determine whether the surprise win of the homosexual lobby will be sustained, when the opposition gathers and concentrates its resources on righting the situation.
Time will tell. Best Regards.

Leo, there is nothing surer than the eventual implementation of laws that give homosexual couples equivalent rights to cohabit as married couples.

So let's just get it over and done with and do something more interesting.