Referencing a post on the Corner where Maggie Gallagher takes New York Times columnist Frank Rich to task for calling gay marriage opponents “bigots”, Glenn Reynolds echoes a point I’ve been making about the rhetoric of some gay marriage supporters:
Unlike Maggie Gallagher, I favor gay marriage. But it seems to me that in this — as in other areas — those pushing the “bigotry” meme are in fact more interested in calling others bigots than in accomplishing anything.
This goes to something Dale Carpenter has said about how gay activists see gay marriage as a “trophy in the cultural wars.” While gay activists see it as a trophy, liberal pundits use it as a club with which to attack social conservatives.
Why do so many refuse to acknowledge the legitimate objections some people have to state recognition of gay marriage and hesitate to challenge them on the level of ideas? Why do they resort to name-calling as a means of discourse?
Their preference for slurring gay marriage opponents parallels the way they and their peers respond to the Tea Parties. Instead of listening to their adversaries’ arguments and acknowledging the sincerity of their concerns, they treat them as a bully treats the defenseless kid on the playground.
They think they can get away with it because the MSM encourages their insults. And doesn’t hold them to account for their mean-spirited attempts to demean their adversaries.
Our society could gain by a serious discussion of gay marriage. Gay people in particular would benefit from such a conversation. Yet, the supposed advocates of this change would rather score points in some imaginary contest with conservatives than make a point about the social benefits of extending the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples.