All the answers to Anne's problems are right in the article. Mother and son are both going through a difficult time, and as another writer said, this is all about power. But you have to remember who is the adult here, and as an adult she has to have to wisdom to see the truth. The truth is rather unpleasant and what an adult does is learn to deal with it.

It is true that Will & Grace was groundbreaking in that it was the first sucessful, highly rated comedy with gay characters. The reason it was so successful was that it was watered down so the audience was not too challenged with new things, and yes, the writing was very funny. Keep them laughing.

But Will and Grace were intimates in every way but sex. Will and Jack were seen kissing more women than men. Jack even had a son, and married a woman, not to mention some suggestive flirting with Karen. That's all not very gay behaviour.

I never saw myself in Will & Grace, or anyone I know. And frankly they seemed more like spoiled rich kids from Southern California than New Yorkers.

Protestants call it a censer, when they mention it at all. For a Catholic it is called a thurible. You should know that before you go hell bent on a crusade to stop it.

I am wondering if some of you were to young in 1979 to remember the actual events.

jeffrey writes:

"Not quite - the shah was dying - in fact, had Carter not agreed to offer medical aide, the hostages would never had been taken - and has America protected the royal family - like we had for many years, the revolution might've failed."

True, the hostage taking was set off when the US agreed to take the Shah in for medical care, but the revolution had already happened and the Shah's medical condition was not the cause of it. As to weather Carter's criticism of the Shah's human rights record was a factor that brought him down, it's just so much claptrap. The Shah was installed by the US and UK after they overthrew a democratically elected government so he was never very popular with his people.

Fanella writes:

"The shah's unpopularity was due to his liberalism. He wanted to reform the country and make people more western. He was duly punished for this. The people wanted to return to their religion, and they got what they wanted."

The Shah's unpopularity was due to the fact that he turned Iran into a police state. The revolution was originally backed by the liberal middle class. It as only later that the Islamic extremists took it over.

Fanella wrote:

"The shah targeted groups whom he thought might overthrow him, groups he thought were his enemies"

Well you could say the same thing about Saddam Hussein, or for that matter Joseph Stalin.

Fanella wrote:

"Liberals are committed to the notion that the US is the worst thing on earth"

This is a ridiculous and inflammatory statement. It's like saying conservatives are racists. I find it personally offensive and doesn't belong in place like this.

Something they may not have considered is the data gathering method. In the past any young man would have been just to embarassed to admit to what was called "impotence". Now, not only is it more acceptable but there is a cure. But further than this, Viagra etc. are used recreationally by those who have no real medical problem but just want to enhance their sexual prowess. This may be why doctors are seeing a sudden increase in young men reporting erectile dysfunction. My understanding is this condition is is not verified by any test but only based on what the patient reports. Pretty easy to fake.

I have to chuckle to myself. George W Bush, saying both sides of this argument are too extreme and stating a moderate nuanced position. This from the man who said you are either with us or with the terrorists. Maybe Bush will learn something from this, that everything isn't black and white, that each side has some things right and some things wrong. Maybe I'm wrong, but it is a nice thought.

This book tells Black people to eat better, get exercise, get an education, stay away from crime, organize for workers rights and generally take responsibility for themselves ... So isn't this what everyone from Oprah to Cosby to Jesse Jackson has been saying? In fact aren't these just the lessons of life everyone should follow, and the same lessons self-help gurus of any race have been teaching for centuries?

This has to be one of the stupidest, pointless things I've read in Salon. I expect to read hard news and well reasoned opinion, but instead I get this proposal that you can't possibly be serious about. I guess dreaming about a day of peace and love is a good diversion from looking at the worsening situation our country is in.

As a gay man who has been around for many years I need to get this clear. In my experience, gay men do not particularly favor leather pants. Leather vest -- gay. Leather chaps -- very gay. Leather harness -- off the scale. But pants, well no more than straight guys. You see, leather pants don't show off the basket very well.