Why Gay Marriage is not Inevitable!

NRO has an excellent piece on the subject.

Maggie’s Top Eight Reasons Why Gay Marriage Is Not Inevitable

1. Nothing is inevitable.

We are talking about the future here. It’s weird to have  “reporting” that something that has not yet happened will certainly happen. The future is never inevitable.

2. Young people are not as unanimous as most people think.

In California, the young-adults vote split 55 percent to 45 percent. Is it so hard to imagine 5 percent of those young people changing their minds as they move through the life cycle?

3. The argument from despair is bait and switch.

They are trying push the idea that gay marriage is inevitable, because they are losing the argument that gay marriage is a good idea.

4.  Progressives are often wrong about the future.

Here’s my personal litany: Progressives told me abortion would be a dead issue by today, because young people in 1975 were so pro-choice. They told me there would be no more homemakers at all by the year 2000, because of the attitudes and values of young women in 1975. Some even told me the Soviet Union was the wave of the future. I mean, really, fool me once shame on you. Fool me over and over again . . . I must be a Republican!

5.  Demography could be destiny.

If there is one force that directly contradicts the inevitability argument, it is that traditionalists have more children. Preventing schools and media from corrupting those children is a problem, but not necessarily an insoluable one. Religous groups are increasingly focused on the problem of how to transmit a marriage culture to the next generation (see the USCCB’s recent initiatives).

6. Change is inevitable.

Generational arguments tend to work only for one generation: Right now, it’s “cool” to be pro-gay marriage. In ten years, it will be what the old folks think. Even gay people may decide, as they get used to living in a tolerant and free America, they don’t want to waste all that time and energy on a symbolic social issue, anyway. (I know gay people who think that right now). I am not saying it will happen, only that it could. The future is not going to look like the present (see point one above). Inevitability is a manufactured narrative, not a fundamental truth.

7. Newsflash: 18-year-olds can be wrong.

Should we really say “Hmm, whatever the 18-year-olds think, that must be inevitable,” and go do that? I mean, would we reason like that on any other issue?

8. New York’s highest court was right.

From Hernandez v. Robles:

The dissenters assert confidently that “future generations” will agree with their view of this case (dissenting op at 396). We do not predict what people will think generations from now, but we believe the present generation should have a chance to decide the issue through its elected representatives. We therefore express our hope that the participants in the controversy over same-sex marriage will address their arguments to the Legislature; that the Legislature will listen and decide as wisely as it can; and that those unhappy with the result — as many undoubtedly will be — will respect it as people in a democratic state should respect choices democratically made.


12 Responses to Why Gay Marriage is not Inevitable!

  1. […] here to see the original: Why Gay Marriage is not Inevitable! « The Black Cordelias AKPC_IDS += "4486,";Popularity: unranked […]

  2. Robin says:

    In respect to the number 5 above – are you serious? The R.C church does more to currupt and frighten children than any secular organisation world-wide.

    Watch both Fry and Hitchens tackle the R.C church and show it for what it really is a homophobic sexually obsessed organisation that has much both today and historically of which it should be totally ashamed.

    I would not let my beautiful children near a R.C school or church, thank goodness for organisations like the ‘British Humanist Association’ that are finally taking on and winning the argument against state funded religious based schools is not the troubles in Northern Ireland a warning to us all?.

  3. thefrenchchick says:

    “Enlightened thinking and alternative views should be encouraged.”

    Robin, no one here has shot you down for expressing your opinion. How about explaining why you are so vehemently anti-Catholic?

    As I have said before, I am one of a large number of Catholics who volunteer my time to teach adults how to better protect their children from child sexual abuse. The work I do has not only been approved by the Roman Catholic Church, it is mandated by the Roman Catholic Church in th USA that all those working with children (both paid and volunteer)attend a session.

    And the “troubles” in Northern Ireland happened IMO because two groups of people were too stubborn to sit down and truly talk to each other openly and honestly about their expectations and beliefs. I truly believe that open, honest dialog could have prevented much of the tragedy there. And that is the fault of both parties. It takes two to start an argument.

  4. Nan says:

    Robin, I have no idea who Fry is, but I’m sure he’s as biased as Christopher Hitchens; the Catholic church is neither homophobic nor sexually obsessed, though there may be members of it who are. The church is just the entity everyone loves to hate. Anti-Catholicism is popular the world round. If you focus on the church as the only abuser, your children are at a higher risk; teachers, scout leaders, youth sport coaches, camp counselors, lawyers from big firms are abusers, the list goes on and most abusers are relatives

    I just took the training that frenchchick teaches, but I don’t think she was the teacher; I unexpectedly went through training for a program in which I may encounter children but in any case, all volunteers must take the training. It’s brutal. You end up learning about behavior of adult abusers and of children who have been targeted for abuse.

    Secular humanism can never replace an actual belief system.

  5. Robin says:

    Dear Frenchchick,

    I’m encouraged that you feel honest open debate is needed – I agree; my feelings are not just anti-catholic I dislike any organisation that claims it is the only holder of the ‘truth’.

    Nan: I note some of the great debates on this site: the person using the name ‘Morse’ whilst obviously no catholic and clearly an academic has been ‘threatened’ with his comments being withdrawn – that would be a grave mistake on your part as ‘truth’ comes in many forms, the cathlic church trys to control and regulate ‘truth’ is so very educationally backward and frightening.

    I have issues with all faiths and beliefs that are not inclusive and dispite how you may both personally feel the catholic church is not inclusive – it labels homosexual people for example ‘morally disorded’ and your pope calls homosexuality a ‘moral evil’ as Stephen Fry rightly argues that’s simply not nice! ‘it really isn’t’

    I wish not for my children to be brought up in an organisation that whilst claiming its billion followers (many of whom are very poorly educated)simply does not allow freedom of thought, expression, enlightened thinking.

    I’m afraid I have to agree with ‘Morse’ who I sure you find a pain on this site – but (s)he speaks for many I’m afriad when talking of the dangers of controlling people often through fear – hence why many catholics begin their ‘catholic faith’ in childhood before they are confident enough to say ‘no’.

    Re Child abuse; may I refer to the word of Hichens.


  6. Morse says:

    Dear Robin,

    I thank you for your kind words but I think you flatter somewhat..re academia my typing ability or inability often lets me down I’m afraid – I’m still a fountain pen and paper person.

    I was/ am still ordained in the U.K and in the 60’s we hoped for a critical orthodoxy but that seems not now to be likely. Christianity was in change across europe as was everything, excellent books like ‘With Love to the Church’ Monica Furlong, J.T.A. Robinson has revolutionised metaphysical thought in the pews with ‘Honest to God’ ( although Universities had long undertaken such a revolution )

    ‘non-realism’ thought progressed through to the 80’s when Cupitt published the ‘Sea of faith’ where he rightly points out that super-natural thought passed away in the mid-late 18th C.

    This was a turning point and a group of ‘radical clergy’ came together to begin a network of non-realism; Anglican, Roman, free Church, all christian but persons who had long given up the super-natural.

    However; the media got wind and published an article entitled ‘the godless vicars’ shock waves were to follow and a member was actually tried for heresy – the only person last century.

    We continue to push for a reform of Christianity in many ways and mediums but its sad that today that fundamentalism is rising in Christianity ( the theologically dreadful Alpha) perhaps as a result of the Islamist threat.

    Why this site? – well to be fair I well tolerated really given my obvious dislike for any belief system that claims it alone has the ‘truth’ or the only line to some super-natural being…

    You are of course correct in saying that to deny ones right to free speech is a most dangerous road and persons should be warned; some of what I have said has been removed – on other sites too; again that is all the more reason to be a dissenting and critical voice when faced with fundamentalism in religious though.

    I hand- on- heart wish not to ‘turn’ people from their religious views for that would by default make me into the kind of person I academically dislike; it moreover about challenging pre-suppositions and belief systems in a safe arena; if however someone passionately hold to a particular belief then they should expect to be challenged with full force – and should not complain.

    In many ways I perhaps should not be so critical – but there is a lot to be critical about as I care passionately about all people being able to discover the ‘truth’ for themselves and thus I share your opinion of state funded religious inculcation in schools.

    I spend my time now writing and speaking/ lecturing / preaching on reform in Christianity and hold fast to my Cupittean philosophy.

    Rev’d Dr ‘Morse’

  7. Nan says:

    Robin, Morse is out of line in suggesting that someone querying how to best for a Catholic to present information on Catholicism to a stubborn Lutheran should just stick with the Lutherans. It had no bearing on the conversation.

    It would behoove you to actually learn about the Catholic church as there is no attempt to sanitize truth; if that were the case, any information related to any sort of controversy over the last two millenia would’ve been suppressed, which clearly isn’t the case. It is however, true that others distort the truth; look at the way Protestants accuse Catholics of adding books to the Bible, when the truth is Martin Luther removed books of which he didn’t approve and changed phrasing that didn’t meet his needs.

    Any church that preaches complete inclusiveness is either lying or has no doctrine; homosexuality is disordered and homosexual acts are sins that cry to heaven. This is in Scripture and was in the Old Testament.

    The Catholic Church brought you universities and education. Enlightened thinking is a nice way of embracing Sin.

    You’re unenlightened regarding the church; many Catholics rejected the Faith as children or young adults, many others converted as adults. It isn’t like you think, Catholics get you at a young age and you just don’t know any better. Catholics have doubts just like anyone else, but many return to the faith after having doubts or after living life through the spectrum of some other religion, that doesn’t preach truth.

    The Catholic Church doesn’t control people through fear; Christian denominations try to prevent people from seeing the truth about Catholicism through fear as do secular humanists.

    The only reference I can find from Hitchens regarding child abuse is as it relates to Catholic Priests; he ignores the fact that sexual abuse by priests is no greater than that in the general population and that 60% of abuse is done by family members.

    I reiterate, you do your children a disservice by focusing on the alleged evils of the Catholic Church.

  8. Nan says:

    Other than Biblical reasons for considering gay sex to be disordered, it kills as our systems were not designed in the manner in which they’re used under those circumstances; gays also sexualize children and current “safe” schools czar, Kevin Jennings, is chief promoter, an organization that promotes sex between men and boys and when working in a school failed to report child abuse in the case of a 15-year-old boy who told him about sexual activity with strangers.

    Oh, and this. A prominent attorney who raped a 15-year-old boy after grooming him for a year. Normalizing this sort of thing is part of the gay agenda.

  9. Fr. J. says:

    Links to the debate over Catholicism are spam. They are off topic and designed to divert attention from this post. This is why they are deleted and will continue to be so. If you would like to dedicate a blog to your own interests, you are welcome to do so.

  10. Alpha-Omega says:

    Of course!
    nothing is inevitable.
    It’s not like, one day, you’re going to die.
    Medical science to the rescue!
    Or that you’ll be taxed for anything.ever.

  11. roczag says:


    […]Why Gay Marriage is not Inevitable! « The Black Cordelias[…]…

  12. Russian bride…

    […]Why Gay Marriage is not Inevitable! « The Black Cordelias[…]…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: