The full debate is here. You’ll see why the Paterno reference is relevant to the question of motives.
— Joel Pollak (@joelpollak) June 27, 2013
The debate comes down to this: is differentiating between straight and gay couples prima facie evidence of bigotry? Few in our history thought so; even President Obama (supposedly) didn’t think so until last year.
Even if you’re not making a moral case for traditional marriage, and just the case for the convention itself (which is what I chose–though perhaps the moral case is implicit in that argument, too), is that evidence of bigotry? Or does it just reflect what Evan Sayet has pointed out–the liberal intolerance of distinctions?
Those hurling charges of “bigotry” are themselves vulnerable to that charge when it comes to the questions of polygamy, pedophilia, or incest. Unless they are willing to let go of all taboos altogether, their arguments must, in the end, be similar to those used to defend traditional marriage today. So why not stick with that?