"Greensboro safe for anal intercourse;" self-proclaimed straight men's preoccupations with anal sex

Greensboro blogger Dr. Joe Guarino on Greensboro city council's recent resolution, adopted 8 to 1, opposing the proposed amendment to the North Carolina state constitution that would permanently enshrine prohibitions against same sex domestic unions:

"[C]ouncil members are apparently determined to make the city of Greensboro safe for anal intercourse.".

I once asked Dr. Guarino if he has any committed gay couples as friends. He wouldn't say. I suspect he doesn't, because when one does, it becomes impossible to think that mature loyal adult love is restricted to people of opposite genders; it becomes impossible to reduce one's understanding of gay couples to a dehumanizing abstraction of sex acts.

The fixation with the physiology—the ins and outs, if you will—of gay sex, however, gets a lot of attention from self-proclaimed straight men opposed to equal rights for gay people.

North Carolina Pastor Patrick L. Wooten, Sr., a driving force behind the proposed amendment to the North Carolin constitution, discussing his opposition to gay unions:

"His anus had become a gaping hole." 

Contributor to the Greensboro Guardian, Tim Duncan writing at Conservatives Underground:

"Homosexuality is destructive to self because it uses the human body in ways that it simple was not intended to be used by nature and nature’s God."

Guarino, again: 

"[O]ral or anal intercourse has not been sufficient to seal a marriage in our legal tradition. It has had to be vaginal intercourse, or else the marriage has been at risk of annulment."

Supporters of domestic unions for gay and lesbian people talk about things like human love, commitment, and legal equality. Only among the straight opponents does anal sex take on significance. Not only is that kind of weird but it leaves one wondering how that is an argument in favor of impinging on the rights of lesbian couples. Maybe it's not an argument at all, just a preoccupation.