Wednesday, August 6, 2014

NOM has run out of bad arguments

Brian S. Brown - National Organization for Marriage
Brian S. Brown
National Organization for Marriage has never had a coherent argument in support of their endeavor to ban same-sex marriage. NOM is merely a proxy for the Catholic Church expressing a religious objection. They have tried numerous theoretical and illogical themes and they have been dismissed by every court that has heard a marriage case since United States v. Windsor. NOM issued a press release today verbosely titled “National Organization for Marriage Urges Appellate High Court to Rule in Favor of Traditional Marriage; Calls on US Supreme Court to Grant Review of Utah Decision.”

First the obvious. Whatever the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals does it won't be because of NOM's press release. Hopefully it, too, will follow the Windsor precedent and strike down same-sex marriage bans. If they do not it is certainly not a ruling “in favor of traditional marriage.” The zero-sum construct (gays win — marriage loses) is a rhetorical device of NOM's own making. NOM has failed to ever demonstrate a connection, let alone one that is adverse to opposite-sex marriage.

Brian Brown continues:
We urge the 6th Circuit Court of Appeal to issue a ruling overturning the lower courts and upholding the right of voters and legislators to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. While they are not physically present in the courtroom in Cincinnati, the votes of 8.7 million citizens are at stake in this hearing to determine the constitutionality of traditional marriage in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. Voters passed marriage amendments by overwhelming margins in these four states — nearly 8.7 million votes were cast in support of these four amendments, amounting to a combined 65% of the vote cast. It's time that the votes of millions of Americans be respected and upheld.
It is argumentum ad populum which is fallacious per se. The premise is that because a lot of people believe something then it must be so. Moreover, the electorate voted that they do not like marriage equality. That is not a ruling on the constitutional merits which is the standard that the 6th Circuit will apply. Later on, Brown adds:
Utah is the first of many states that will be asking the Supreme Court to reverse the lower court rulings and uphold the right of voters and their elected representatives to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, which it is in reality and has been since the dawn of time.
Voters have the right to express their will at the polls. In order to be binding it has to be constitutional. So far that has not been the case. As for "the dawn of time," Mr. Brown is incorrect because, for most of human history, marriage has been between one man and many women. It is another logical fallacy that something is true today because it was true in the past. As I said, NOM lacks a coherent argument to support marriage discrimination.

This idiotic press release has no real purpose. It is frivolous. Presumably it is intended to convey the message that NOM is still relevant. I have my doubts about that given that over seven years they have accomplished virtually nothing.

No comments:

Post a Comment

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

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