Why do some gay marriage advocates refuse to argue with supporters of the traditional definition of marriage, and instead label them as haters.* Fifteen years ago, maybe even ten, only a handful of people in this country would think that marriage referred to anything but a monogamous union between one man and one woman.
That includes some people with otherwise “spotless” (in the eyes of liberal gay groups) records on gay issues. Many of those include champions of state recognition of same-sex civil unions (and other pro-gay legislation), just so long as they’re not called marriage.
Even Barack Obama has defended social conservatives who favor the traditional definition of marriage. Heck, he favors such a definition himself.
A reader e-mailed me an article which showed how politicized, how politically correct, our discussion of same-sex marriage has become. Jonathan Lopez, a student at Los Angeles City College, says a “professor called him a ‘fascist bastard’ and refused to let him finish his speech against same-sex marriage during a public speaking class last November, weeks after California voters approved the ban on such unions.”
When Lopez complained, the professor threatened to have him expelled. That student is suing.
Instead of responding to the student with argument, the professor responded with ad hominem attacks. Not a very good education in public speaking in my view.
It wasn’t just the professor. Two students were “‘deeply offended'” by Lopez’s address, one of whom stated that “‘this student should have to pay some price for preaching hate in the classroom.’” Now, if Lopez used inflammatory language, he would certainly have demonstrated himself to be a poor public speaker and an immature young man. And he may well have been preaching hate.
If, however, Lopez merely made the case for the traditional definition of marriage, that can only be defined as hate if you believe it hateful to hold that sexual difference can define a social institution. It seems, alas, that some advocates of gay marriage, define all opposition to their cause as hateful, even when the opposition is based on a longstanding definition of an ancient institution.
As I’ve said so many times on this blog, it’s long past time for advocates of same-sex marriage to stop badmouthing their adversaries and to start making the case for the social change they seek. And it’s time for the leaders of that movement to denounce the mean-spirited rhetoric of those, like Mr. Lopez’s professor, who would rather insult than argue.
*To be sure, some supporters of that traditional definition can be called haters, but not all, not even most.