Polar Opposite

[sleigh]

Orson Scott Card on the horror of same-sex marriage.

Almost needless to say, we don't agree. Card's bottom line: same-sex marriage is the end of democracy, and justifies violent overthrow of the government. "Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn."

Marriage has only one definition, and it is in Card's personal dictionary and nowhere else.

Comments

[smofbabe.livejournal.com]

There are really spectacular logical fallacies in this one, besides the obvious basic premise. Every time I hear someone say that gay marriage threatens "the institution of marriage" I wait to hear how but never do. Even they seem to realize that the whole "no begetting children" thing doesn't work because they you'd have to ban childless heterosexual couples too. So I searched for it in Card's essay and this appears to be his rationale for why marriage needs to be heterosexual: "When a heterosexual couple cannot have children, their faithful marriage still affirms, in the eyes of other people's children, the universality of the pattern of marriage." So, there we have it: The reason why you need universal heterosexual marriage is so that it can be affirmed that heterosexual marriage is universal. Right...

[sethb.livejournal.com]

My personal favorite is his claim that the government can't redefine "marriage"; therefore, it still consists of one man and four women, so he's in rebellion against Utah for outlawing that.

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

Right. The rhetorical leaps in his argument are truly stunning.

[barondave.livejournal.com]

See my LJ on Card's essay, A response to Orson Scott Card (http://barondave.livejournal.com/170135.html). Terrorism aside, his arguments don't hold water. Of course, sphincter conservatives aren't speaking to the head, but to the clenched buttocks.

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

OK, that made me spurt my tea through my nose!

[ontology101.livejournal.com]

I often refer to these folks as "constipated." Seems we think alike on this matter.

Anne

[maiac.livejournal.com]

"The reason why you need universal heterosexual marriage is so that it can be affirmed that heterosexual marriage is universal."

That's the best summary of the "defense of marriage" fallacy I've ever seen.