Daylin Leach: Moral giant; master debater December 8
A friend passes along a clipping from this weekend’s Times Herald, in which the ‘Cooler’s beloved Daylin Leach tackles a recent Star Parker column called “Sodom in the Nation’s Capital“.
Admitedly, this is not one of Parker’s more tightly constructed columns, however, her point is clear: gay marriage hurts the institution of the family, and the collapse of the American family is at the root of most of our inner city problems. Anyone who has read Parker more than twice will recognize this theme as it is a common thread that runs through most of Parker’s columns.
I have transcribed Daylin’s full response and it is available below the break. It’s worth a read just to bask in the feigned outrage over the word “Sodom” in the title of the column and to watch him conjure up his very own morally relative God out of thin air then insist that his that his morality is the only right way to live, while complaining that Star Parker has no right to insinuate her religious beliefs on the rest of the world. Apparently, because Parker does not worship the lollipop and gumdrop God of Daylin’s imagination, she is neither entitled to her first amendment rights either.
The gay marriage question is one on which people of good conscience can disagree and though I am against it, I can certainly understand the opposing point of view. And if Mr. Leach had bothered to address the real issues behind the defense of marriage, I would not have a problem with his response; indeed I would simply chuckle at his ridiculous make believe God and no-one-is-ever-wrong-but-bigoted-conservatives religion and go on my way.
But what Leach does here does not in any way address the concerns of those who believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman; what he does here is simply smear anyone who opposes gay marraige as a homophobe–a knuckle-dragging bigot whose arguments are not worth addressing. For someone who claims to be “very involved” with this issue, I find it hard to believe that Daylin does not fully understand the opposing point of view on this issue. Rather than address those concerns, he instead resorts to the lazy liberals weapon of last resort: shout your opponent down with charges of bigotry.
Here’s Maggie Gallagher in a classic column from the Weekly Standard on why it is important to keep the institution of marriage intact:
In other words, while individuals freely choose to enter marriage, society upholds the marriage option, formalizes its definition, and surrounds it with norms and reinforcements, so we can raise boys and girls who aspire to become the kind of men and women who can make successful marriages. Without this shared, public aspect, perpetuated generation after generation, marriage becomes what its critics say it is: a mere contract, a vessel with no particular content, one of a menu of sexual lifestyles, of no fundamental importance to anyone outside a given relationship.
The marriage idea is that children need mothers and fathers, that societies need babies, and that adults have an obligation to shape their sexual behavior so as to give their children stable families in which to grow up.
Which view of marriage is true? We have seen what has happened in our communities where marriage norms have failed. What has happened is not a flowering of libertarian freedom, but a breakdown of social and civic order that can reach frightening proportions. When law and culture retreat from sustaining the marriage idea, individuals cannot create marriage on their own.
(…)
THE PROBLEM with endorsing gay marriage is not that it would allow a handful of people to choose alternative family forms, but that it would require society at large to gut marriage of its central presumptions about family in order to accommodate a few adults’ desires
Just because a person believes that marriage should be between one man and one woman (a view the majority of Americans hold, by the way) it does not make them homophobes. Indeed, even some gays I know do not believe in gay marriage. If you want to argue for gay marriage, do it honestly and bravely. Don’t hide behind charges of “homophobia.” It is cowardly, intellectually lazy, and fundamentally dishonest.
And really no surprise at all, the “argument” coming from whence it does.
Comments, compliments or complaints?
