"He doesn't want to get married," ..... he wants to get out of jail!

The reporting on the Matthew Limon case continues to frustrate me. (Well, not so much the reporting alone, but the pacing, the length of time for this case to proceed), but I realize this stuff takes time, but I am also aware of someone's freedom still waiting until everyone sorts through their own agendas and timetables before he might, and it is still a might, get out of jail before his original 17 year sentence. The most recent info - Associated Press story - discusses Kansas's Attorney General Phill Kline's claim that Kansas's marriage and other sexcrime laws are in danger in this case, not merely the "Romeo and Juliet" law. The ACLU, keeping its eyes, no doubt, on bigger prizes, is keeping their arguments broad enough so that perhaps they might get more than simply Matthew's freedom.

I just wish folks would get it - regardless of where you stand on "gay marriage" there is a huge difference, in reality and in law, in GRANTING A RIGHT TO MORE PEOPLE (expanding the legal defination of marriage) and CRIMINALIZING ACTIVITY that doesn't harm anyone (consensual sex between 2 teens of the same gender).

What frustrates me about the news article is that it basically has both "sides" comment on each other's "true" goals, with little or no independent investigation into the actual briefs that each side filed with the court. One little footnote is mentioned, but can't the AP get a hold of the briefs, and have a legal writer analyze what they say? The AP writer considers the story to be the confrontation between the Atty General and the ACLU, not a young man's freedom hanging in the balance. It's shameful.