Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Conservatives Refuse To Predict Dire Consequences For Same-Sex Marriage

Jim Burroway

August 20th, 2009

Townhall.com is probably the last place one would expect to find an article supporting arguments made by proponents of same-sex marriage, but Steve Chapman is mystified that no one who opposes same-sex marriage is willing to take him up on his challenge. His challenge is simple: We now have five states with same-sex marriage, with a sixth one (Maine) pending a November referendum. (By the way, have you donated lately?) Most of the others offer no recognition of same-sex unions whatsoever.

Chapman believes that this presents perfect laboratory conditions: an experimental condition and a control group. He writes, “in the next few years, we will have a chance to compare social trends in the states permitting same-sex marriage against social trends in the others.” So Chapman contacted three conservative opponents to same-sex marriage — Maggie Gallagher, Stanley Kurtz, and David Blankenhorn — and asked them to offer their predictions:

You would think they would react like Albert Pujols when presented with a hanging curveball. Yet none was prepared to forecast what would happen in same-sex marriage states versus other states.

Conservatives often predict catastrophic consequences for states that recognize same-sex marriage. Maggie Gallagher has even likened it to the end of civilization.Stanly Kurtz started a cottage industry blaming the decline of marriage in Scandinavia on same-sex marriage. But when put to the test, none of them will stand behind  their statements. What does that tell you about their convictions?

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

Ben in Oakland
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

I’m sure they would have the courage of their ocnvictions– if they had any convictions.

I don’t believe they do. What they have are bigoted outlook and a cash cow.

Alex
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Looks like conservatives have found another consequence for accepting homosexuality: TORNADOES!!!!1!

http://www.desiringgod.org/Blog/1965_the_tornado_the_lutherans_and_homosexuality/

Penguinsaur
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

They dont make predictions, everyone knows that, they take anything bad that ever happens and blame that on gay marriage. Then refuse to ever acknowledge that the ‘moral’ bible belt is full of pregnant teenagers and highschool dropouts.

Christopher Waldrop
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Penguinsaur, I think they do acknowledge that the Bible Belt is full of pregnant teenagers and dropouts, but they blame this on a permissive atmosphere that seeps in from other places. Because, let’s face it, if a teen gets pregnant and drops out of school in Alabama, it must be because Belgium recognizes same-sex marriages.

Chris McCoy
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Penguinsaur said:

They dont make predictions, everyone knows that, they take anything bad that ever happens and blame that on gay marriage. Then refuse to ever acknowledge that the ‘moral’ bible belt is full of pregnant teenagers and highschool dropouts.

Classic example of Confirmation Bias.
Blame everything bad on the Gay, and give credit to G-d for everything good.

timothy kincaid
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

I believe that’s a Chicago Tribune article. Chapman is on their editorial board.

Jason D
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Good call Chris, I welcome you to point out the logical fallacies as you see them, as it makes the discussion that much more concrete and intelligent when we can identify the flawed reasoning by name.

William
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

It’s probably very wise of them not to make specific predictions. Too many of them have done that in the past and have been left looking right screwballs when their predictions are later resuscitated and quoted. Just a couple of examples:

Back in the 1970s Tim LaHaye, in his ridiculous book “What Everyone Should Know About Homosexuality” predicted that, as the result of accepting homosexuality, within another generation there could be no grandchildren.

In the 1980s Rhodes Boyson, a British right-wing Tory MP, said in a parliamentary debate on the notorious “Section 28” that the supposed “promotion” of homosexuality could mean “the end of creation as we know it”.

A few years ago, on the “PM Programme” on BBC Radio 4, Eddie Mair interviewed an American “family” campaigner (whose name I can’t remember) and asked her why she was opposed to gay marriage. The substance of the conversation went like this (I can’t claim that it’s verbatim):

Eddie Mair: Why are you against gay marriage?

“Family” Campaigner: I believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

Eddie Mair: So if they introduce gay marriage, what do you think will happen?

“Family” Campaigner: It’ll change the definition of marriage. I believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

Eddie Mair: Suppose that they don’t call it marriage. Suppose that they call it something else. What do you think will happen?

“Family” Campaigner: I believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

Eddie, with his impeccable politeness and his lovely, soft Scottish voice, can usually provoke interviewees into enlarging on what they’ve said – and often, I suspect, into saying things that they later regret – but he couldn’t get any further with that lady. Anti-gay campaigners are bad at learning lessons, but that’s one lesson that most of them clearly have learnt.

TonyJazz
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Don’t forget that Orson Scott Card predicted a revolution to overturn the US government as a result. …and that was one of his kinder predictions.

David C.
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

OSC has only recently become an anti-gay industrialist. It will be interesting to hear a recent, competent interview of him in a more open forum.

Gabriel Arana
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

What’s interesting is that even in the filings for the federal challenge to Prop. 8, the defense is fishing for ways to substantiate the claim that gay marriage is harmful.

Because it’s a courtroom, outright lies like “your children will be taught about homosexuality” are out of the running — it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

Emily K
August 20th, 2009 | LINK

Yes but OSC’s misunderstanding of homosexuality has always been a part of him. He likens the pedophilia in “songmaster” to bisexuality and homosexuality.

Of course, homosexuality and bisexuality have to do with relationships between sexually mature people.

Dan
September 15th, 2009 | LINK

I think the real reason that opponents of same sex marriage are so determine to reverse same sex marriage in places like California and elsewhere and do so as quickly as possible is because they know that their wild claims about the end of the world, society falling into chaos are total garbage. If a hand full of states permit same sex marriage and then the sky doesn’t fall, gods wrath is not unleashed, and society barely sees the change it will bring to light that their claims are garbage. Thus it will make it even harder to try to defend their bigotry and homophobia which is deep down what their opposition is based on because there is no secular, logical, or legitimate reason to keep gays and lesbians from marrying.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.