Loggerheads

Doug Grow illustrates a couple of the most irritating lefty conceits of late; "I just don't get it!"

He's talking about the pro-marriage - read "anti gay marriage" rally" - at the Capitol today:

A s is often the case, I'm perplexed.

Wednesday at the State Capitol, there will be a "Stand Together for Marriage Rally." Sponsors say they expect thousands to gather in support of the notion that marriage should be limited, by constitutional amendment, to a woman and a man.

My knee-jerk assumption: In a few years, we'll look back at events like this and wonder what all the fuss was about.

Now, I'm not entirely sold on the amendment, as-is. I'm not opposed to civil unions for gays. Truth is, I favor getting government at all levels out of the "Marriage" business, but that's a utopian ideal that'll never happen as long as there's money to be dragged out of the institution of marriage (and dissolution).

Let's count the conceits:

That assumption is based on the fact that any of us older than 30 have accepted all sorts of changes that once were hyped as potentially ruinous to the culture.

Conceit Number One: "My pet issue is on par with slavery."

We grew up being taught that women shouldn't be members of the Kiwanis Club, black men couldn't be quarterbacks, gay people shouldn't have civil rights. Then change happened. And we thrived because of it.

That gays would move out of the closet to legally binding relationships seems like natural progression.

"Legally-binding relationships?" Sure.

But I'm guessing for the vast majority of gay marriage opponents, it's not abut "legally-binding relationships"; it's about Marriage.

"Historic inevitability," is the phrase that state Sen. Scott Dibble, DFL-Minneapolis, uses to describe the phenomena of social change.

Dibble, who is gay, wants to believe that Wednesday's rally is less than it seems.

"I do believe this country has been on a constant journey to enhancing liberty," he said.

Conceit Two: "No real, rational people oppose us". And not only do many very eminently rational people oppose the idea of gay marriage, but over 2/3 of the voters do, consistently, in states as disparate as North Dakota and Oregon.

Slavery has been abolished, Dibble said. Women have won equal rights to men. Gays have won civil rights.

Conceit Three: "Opposing my belief is the same as keeping humans as property, or depriving people of the right to participate in the politica process". And yet this ssue is about definitions, in this case "what is marriage?"

If you believe "It's something that people who love each other do", then I suppose the "one guy, one gal, raise a biological familily" school of thought is perplexing indeed; and to the guy/gal/kids school, so is the "all you need is two people, gender indeterminate, who love each other" school.

Yet, he fears that this "Stand Together for Marriage" rally represents something more than a short-term social fad. He fears that cynical political and religious leaders are using fear of gays to create a political base that will have staying power.

Number Four: "It's a conspiracy". No. It's a mass movement based on a deeply-held ideal; people who believe that gay marriage cheapens marriage just as surely as slavery cheapens the ideal of liberty.

"We've seen this country stampeded before," he said.

That's Five: "Our opponents are mindless cattle, capable of being stampeded'.

I love this next part:

It doesn't take much looking to discover that this rally represents a huge constituency. Ministers ranging from Daniel Henderson, at the massive and usually apolitical Grace Church in Eden Prairie, to Bob Battle, a black pastor with civil rights roots at St. Paul's Berean Church, are lined up in support of this event.

And what does this tell Doug Grow and Scott Dibble?

Apparently not enough to disturb any of the conceits.

Posted by Mitch at April 20, 2005 05:20 AM | TrackBack