Even more interesting would be a panel discussion video taped with Brown, and any two Roman Catholic theologians, priests, or bishops he can get to participate and people like Michael Eric Dyson, Barry Lynn and Episcopal Bishop Robinson.

The whole argument is whether or not specific groups of religious leaders can force government to accept their doctrinal positions on matters of public policy. There is no evidence that any of the states nor the District of Columbia has had to deal with same sex couples attempting to force churches to conduct marriages for them. I know that there have been religious services in the District and quite possibly elsewhere, but like heterosexual marriages they have been at the discretion of the religious person involved.

Whichever day it is. However often it comes up. So sorry. Can’t make it.

As for his son, since Dan didn’t invite the Browns’ children, I assume that he won’t be present. Which is a good thing.

My point is, there was such opportunity for bringing out the heavy guns here, and instead he surprises us with class.

Make us proud, Dan.

I see this as a total win-win for Savage. Brown likely will chicken out, not wanting to acknowledge the humanity of Savage’s family or equate it to his own (aside, I also find it interesting Dan did not mention if his teenaged son would be at the dinner – my guess is not). If Brown does decide to do the debate, he will lose, because he doesn’t have a moral leg to stand on.

Should this debate happen is Savage going to be willing to continue acknowledging Brown’s humanity by remaining polite? Or will the discourse slip into typical Savage buffoonery?

This is a great story that I’m eager to follow to its end. Let’s see if Brian is a big enough man to accept, since it was his challenge to begin with.

Perfect!