Dagger in hand

A man of prodigious fortune, coming to add his opinion to some light discussion that was going on casually at his table, began precisely thus: "It can only be a liar or an ignoramus who will say otherwise than," and so on. Pursue that philosophical point, dagger in hand.

--Michel de Montaigne, Of the art of discussion.

Stab back: cmnewman99-at-yahoo.com


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Tuesday, February 24, 2004
Any takers?:

If you are one of the thoughtful opponents of same-sex marriage whose opposition is based on policy reasons having nothing to do with prejudice, I could really use your help. See, I'm open to the argument, or to the possibility that a compelling argument exists--I just honestly don't get what it is. This disturbs me, because I generally like to think I understand both sides of important questions like this. If you're willing to help me out, here's what you can do:

1) Please explain what you regard as the purpose or purposes of the institution of marriage, and list both the rights and the responsibilities that you regard as essential to implementation of these purposes.

2) Please explain what would prevent same sex couples from exercising the rights and fulfilling the responsibilities you have identified, or else explain why their doing so would be detrimental to the purposes behind the institution.

Thanks in advance for your time and effort. Since I don't believe in posing questions I'm not prepared to answer, I'll be working on my own responses too. (Just don't hold your breath.)

[I earlier posted these same questions, along with some basic thoughts on equal protection, here, in a place far more likely to be seen than my obscure little angle of the blogosphere.]

Update: Well, here's one response to question 2).

But seriously, here's a good answer to both questions. I find it ultimately unpersuasive, but it will take me some work to explain why.

Well, not that much work.

Ah, now here's an answer I need some time to chew over.

Comments: Post a Comment