Elephantman’s original comment makes an interesting point with, “Aren't there plenty of Democrats who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act? Who support ‘Don't Ask Don't Tell’? Who oppose the normalization of homosexual marriage? Are those Democrats deserving of special consideration because they are Democrats?”

I think the difference is that the issues you cite were compromise and stop gap measures. For DOMA, in 1996 under Clinton, it was expected that some state would soon legalize gay marriage and that other states would then be forced to recognize the gay marriages from that state. DOMA slowed the issue down to allow states to work out the issue of same-sex marriage on a state-by-state basis. Given the fact that the country, a decade later, still isn’t united around gay marriage, DOMA seems reasonable (if not necessarily constitutionally sound).

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was also a Clinton compromise. The Department of Defense officially made homosexual status and conduct grounds for discharge in 1981. Clinton campaigned on repealing this ban. However, there was such an outcry from some very vocal groups that ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ was a reasonable compromise.

Clinton’s views and policy regarding gays aren’t so different from the rest of the county’s. He campaigned on repealing the ban on gays in the military. He urged Congress to pass the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Yet in still, in a June 1996 interview with gay magazine The Advocate, Clinton says, “I remain opposed to same-sex marriage. I believe marriage is an institution for the union of a man and a woman.”

The ambiguous message is clear, “marriage sounds like something that should just be between one man and one woman, but let’s try to stop harassment on the basis of sexual orientation and treat homosexuals with the dignity and equality they deserve.”

Democrats aren’t perfect, tending to talk out of both sides of their mouths on the issue of gay marriage. But at least Democrats actually sit down and meet with homosexual advocacy groups. Six of the Democratic presidential candidates (including the front-runners) attended the August 9 forum sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign. Republicans refused to do the same.

Republicans refuse to meet with gay groups, closet their gay members and try to enact gay marriage bans, including a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. A 2006 Gay Marriage Ban Amendment vote got 49 supporters—all but one of these supporters was a Republican (Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska). Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, who would probably have been better served getting his own house in order, led the 2006 charge against gay marriage.

Democrats need to develop some spine, but they are the party willing to work with gay advocacy groups. And they're not the ones trying to codify discrimination against gays into the Constitution.

I'm no legal expert but wouldn't his sentence have been predicated on his guilty plea, which is usually given 'unreservedly' and under oath?

Yep, Larry Craig is 100% guilty because he pled to such. You can't plead guilty and then take it back or say you only pled to make things "easier."

Craig is guilty of a crime. He admitted it and pled. And people can complain all they want that Craig wasn't worth going after, but what he did was a crime. Either go after people for the crime or take the law off the books.

“Why must every homosexual be against DOMA etc? Is it to support fellow gays or because every gay must want a homosexual marriage?”—To support not just fellow gays but our fellow human beings. DOMA is insulting because two people of the same sex, no matter how loving and committed, cannot be recognized by the State in the same way a drunken, abusive Vegas pairing can be.

“Is it possible for a gay man to sincerely believe that he should marry a woman and raise a family?” –Yes, it’s possible, but it sounds like there’d be a lot of self-hatred in it.

“Is it also possible for that gay man to believe that only heterosexual child producing couples should be enjoy the label ‘married’?” –Yes. For example, one could believe marriage is just the sort of government-sanctioned traditionalism, patriarchy and narrowly-prescribed gender roles that one’s very homosexuality challenges.

“[Can] Craig's conservative beliefs can be internally consistent with his orientation [?]” –Yes. You can believe something is wrong but still do it anyway (other examples include lying, jay-walking, eating grapes at the grocery store and adultery). You continue to do these wrong things because you deem them “not-that-wrong” or you believe you’re struggling against these temptations, but, as a human being, sometimes fail. The problem is less Craig's conservative beliefs and more his high horse.

There’s no official gay checklist (although it sometimes seems there is). But I think anything that puts you on the self-loathing list is a definite no-no.