A good stand against bad arguments
He doesn't say anything all that new, at least for those of us who are forced to dignify the "culture war" onslaughts that rage against us. But it's still nice to hear New York Times editorial page editor Andrew Rosenthal making a case against the absurd:
I'm baffled by pretty much every aspect of the campaign against marriage-equality. The argument that same-sex marriages somehow threaten those between a man and woman is absurd, unless of course you’re worried that closeted individuals will feel motivated to leave their spouses. I have never seen evidence demonstrating that the marriage rate between men and women is affected by the marriage rate between men and men, or women and women.
Then there is the argument that it is somehow an abomination in the eyes of God. I’m not going to be the arbiter on that one, but it has nothing to do with the civic institution of marriage, which constitutionally must be free of those considerations.
Perhaps the most ridiculous argument against marriage equality is the one voiced most recently by David Bates, a Republican member of the New Hampshire legislature – that homosexuality is a choice, and thus same-sex marriage is not a civil rights issue.
KEEP READING: Another Bad Argument Against Marriage Equality [NYT]
comments powered by Disqus