Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Maggie Gallagher's New Hampshire Opus

English: Maggie Gallagher at the Cato Institute
If Ms. Gallagher tried real hard her discourse might rise to the level of cognitive dissonance. Maggie has a tough job in trying to impose Roman Catholic canon law on US civil law. Nevertheless, National Organization for Marriage is touting a piece written by Gallagher titled Why Libertarians Should Oppose Same-Sex Marriage. It is undated but the preface suggests recency:
Ron Paul, the de facto head of the libertarian wing of the GOP, has argued it is a state’s right to define marriage as it chooses. Here’s the case for why states should choose to support the traditional understanding of marriage and repeal same-sex marriage.
Thereafter, Maggie indulges in some remarkable leaps of faith     pun intended.
1. Government did not create marriage and has no business redefining it.
It most definitely is and has been the role of government, not to define marriage, but to determine the conditions of recognition. States have differing laws regarding things like the age of consent and residency requirements. Over time, the recognition has changed. In some locales, Mormon plural marriages were legally recognized. Slaves could not marry in the South but escaped slaves could marry in the North.  Loving v. Virginia is a classic example of changing the criteria for acceptance. Marriage equality most certainly does not redefine marriage. If Ms. Gallagher wants to be taken seriously she will have to drop the disingenuous demagoguery.
2. When marriage declines, government expands.
That warrants one huge "huh?" The logical fallacies include selective observation as well as a confusion of correlation and causation.
  • The rooster crows.
  • The sun rises.
  • The rooster causes the sun to rise.
3. Gay marriage has no economic benefits.
This is based on Maggie's further, and intentional confusion of correlation and causation. Marriage equality yields more marriages. More marriages yields more ceremonies and celebrations. More ceremonies and celebrations yields increased revenues for the hospitality industry. The simple logic is undeniable.
4. The Slope Really Is Slippery
At least Ms. Gallagher admits the rhetorical defect. She goes off on another version of "suppose someone wants to marry their dog?" Marriage equality has absolutely nothing to do with marrying multiple people, pets, plants or appliances.

As I said. NOM has a difficult burden. They are acting as an auxiliary of the Roman Catholic church in a country that persists in honoring the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Enhanced by Zemanta

1 comment:

  1. I'm not sure that our country actually is all the interested in honoring the establishment clause of the First Amendment. At least not since the 1950's when we added the words "in God we trust" to our money and added the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance.


Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.