MARRIAGE AS NORM: Mark Barton replies to Maggie Gallagher

Maggie G.: I think I've said what I can on this.

Mark B.: I'm surprised you would think that, when it seems you could, easily, answer my question and say who exactly your norm is supposed to be normative on. Moreover, this is something that you can usefully say, to advance the debate, because the appropriate argument for me to make next depends critically on your answer. Is it all people? Is it all people who aspire to be sexually active (without regard to sexual orientation)? Is it all straight people? Is it something else? I have different responses in mind for each possibility, and the if-then routine is tiring for me and doubtless tedious for the readers.

Maggie G.: I'm not seeking an exemption from you on charges of homophobia.

Mark B.: I'm not sure what you mean by that. All I know is that this is marriagedebate.com and that any homophobic beliefs you might have are relevant if and only if your arguments against SSM implicitly depend on them, inadvertently or otherwise. If your anti-SSM arguments were clearly independent of homophobic assumptions, it would be an ad hominem fallacy for me to speculate. But they're not clearly independent, in part because you've been resisting clarifying basic details.

Maggie G.: I'm seeking to focus people's attention on whether same-sex marriage will hurt marriage as a social instituiton. Because if it will do what I think it will, it is a disaster for my country, and yours.

Mark B.: I put it to the readers that if you genuinely can't tell us basic stuff like who the norm you're promoting is supposed to be normative on, it's implausible that you could have thought through the issue carefully enough for your predictions to be worth anything.
posted by Eve at 8:17 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home