My argument is simple which is that for several thousand years in Western civilization marriage has been the union of one man and one woman. Research is overwhelming that children need mothers and fathers.

People love westerns worldwide. There's something fantasy-like about an individual fighting the elements. Or even bad guys and the elements. It's a simpler time. There's no organized laws and stuff.

I very much feel that marriage is a sacrament and that sacrament should extend... to that legal entity of a union between what traditionally in our Western values has been defined as between a man and a woman.

We also learn that this country and the Western world have no monopoly of goodness and truth and scholarship we begin to appreciate the ingredients that are indispensable to making a better world. In a life of learning that is perhaps the greatest lesson of all.

I think Russian people are learning that democracy is not an alien thing it's not a western invention.

It is true that the aristocracies seem to have abused their monopoly of legal knowledge and at all events their exclusive possession of the law was a formidable impediment to the success of those popular movements which began to be universal in the western world.

To that class we may leave it to refine the vernacular dialects of the country to enrich those dialects with terms of science borrowed from the Western nomenclature and to render them by degrees fit vehicles for conveying knowledge to the great mass of the population.

Western civilization unfortunately does not link knowledge and morality but rather it connects knowledge and power and makes them equivalent.

Foreign Ministry guys don't become agents. Party officials the Foreign Ministry nerds tend not to volunteer to Western intelligence agencies.

Well I've been reading a lot about the fifty years since the Second World War about Western foreign policy and all that. I try not to let it get to me but sometimes I just think that there's no hope.