Comprehensive Reponse to All Arguments Against Gay Marriage

From Aaron Swartz: The Weblog:

Gay marriage seems to be a popular political issue, but I have not heard one legitimate reason why it shouldn’t be allowed and mandated by the courts. Essentially, I see no difference between gay marriage and interracial marriage. In Loving v. Virginia the US Supreme Court struck down laws that banned interracial marriage. Can anyone explain why laws against gay marriage should be treated any differently?

To see how this comprehensive response works, let’s try it on a letter by Sen. Cornyn [via Volokh]:

[O]nly one kind of relationship has received such historic and multicultural elevated status in law, culture, and morality: the traditional marital union of two people of the same race. That is not because other kinds of relationships are unimportant, but rather because stable unions of two people of the same race are the strongest foundation mankind has ever known for ensuring the healthy upbringing of children. A wealth of social science research and data attest to this fact.

It does not disparage other kinds of relationships for society to recognize that children are raised best when they are raised by two people of the same race. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine an institution that has enjoyed such overwhelming consensus as traditional marriage. The traditional institution of marriage has existed as such throughout human history, across numerous and diverse cultures, countries, and civilizations as well as party lines, and in the laws, judicial precedents, traditions, and historical practices of all states.

One response to “Comprehensive Reponse to All Arguments Against Gay Marriage