BACKWARDS THINKING: Marty McKeever replies to Gabriel Rosenberg

Several comments by Gabriel Rosenberg highlight the reverse-psychology being used by SSM advocates:

...this sounds like awful governmental policy to me, the idea that we should pressure people into opposite-sex marriage.

Does the creation of an incentive to action automatically create a disincentive to inaction? In the given scenario (actually, the status quo), is the government actually pressuring anyone to do anything? Mr. Rosenberg would like you to believe that holding a carrot on a stick in front of a mule is the same thing as whipping that mule from behind. Surely the mule can tell the difference...

Channeling people into having more babies, though, is probably not even a legitimate governmental interest.

(Aside, tell that to the Japanese: see story). In light of our current debate over Social Security, it is a rather odd thing to say that the concern over the number of future citizens and taxpayers is not a "legitimate government interest." It might be easy to say so, but where is it written? Should the state be unconcerned about the number of young people who will be paying to support their elders?

It is clear from a number of court decisions that we possess the right as individuals to make our own decisions with regards to marriage and procreation...
It does not have an interest though in pressuring an individual to procreate.

Correct. The mule is free to follow the carrot, or not -- unlike the whip, which leaves him little choice. But no one is being punished for marrying, or for not marrying, or procreating, or for not procreating. Freedom of choice still reigns supreme.

...couples who have children in same-sex relationships are still denied marital recognition (incidentally doing a great deal of harm to the child)

Mr. Rosenberg would have you believe it is the State that has inflicted a great deal of harm on the children of same-sex couples. This is proven to be disingenuous spin by his earlier statement that the courts have ruled that we have the right to make our own decisions regarding marriage and procreation. The parents presumably knew what they were getting themselves into (it is, after all, the status quo), and have no right now to blame anyone else for their own choices. If the children are being harmed, is it really the fault of the state?

The carrot is still there, and equally available for all, regardless of sexual orientation. It seems Mr. Rosenberg and his ilk are the ones holding the whip.
posted by Eve at 9:39 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home