The lovely and talented Jane Galt contemplated giving up meat, gave a reason to do it, and being the analytical sort, promptly came up with a fistful of reasons not to do it. There are, I believe, valid points on both sides of this particular issue, but this is not going to be a piece on vegetarianism: it's a piece on romance, of all things, and it stems from a comment to her post, which read as follows:

Are you dating a liberal?

She answered this way:

Short answer: No. And the last time I did date a liberal, it, if anything, drove me farther from the left. I'm contrary like that.

Longer answer: As romantic as it would be to give up meat for someone, this is crazy talk. I was a vegetarian for several years; that's why I flirt with going back to it every time I see something like this. And giving up opinions for someone else is not just crazy; it's undignified.

"Something like this" refers back to the argument in that earlier post. What's interesting to me, though, is the idea of "giving up opinions for someone else": is this even possible?

Inevitably, when you mention couples on opposite sides of the political spectrum, someone will bring up James Carville, a leader in the Clintonista brigades, and Mary Matalin, last seen running a fledgling conservative imprint at Simon & Schuster. If you ask either of them, they'll tell you "We don't talk politics at home," and maybe that's even true, though to me it seems more than a trifle improbable: everybody talks about their work, and these two work in politics. At some point something is going to be said. Perhaps they're just better than most of us at smoothing over the rough spots.

Or it could be something else entirely. The other day I said something to the effect that "While it's not absolutely essential that a couple be