Was Rick Santorum right?Eugene Volokh, a supporter of gay marriage, has quotes showing that those who were against the Equal Rights Amendment were right when they argued that it would lead to gay marriage. Here's one example: "Discussion of [the ERA] bogged down in hysterical claims that the amendment would eliminate privacy in bathrooms, encourage homosexual marriage, put women in the trenches and deprive housewives of their husbands' support." N.Y. Times, July 5, 1981 (excerpt of a book by Betty Friedan).And this is what Volokh says: But this decision -- and the Hawaii decision cited by the concurrence, which has since been reversed by the Hawaii voters -- shows us that we shouldn't lightly dismiss plausible, facially valid textual arguments (the text bars discrimination based on sex, and the marriage laws do treat people differently based on their sex) as "canards," "scare tactics," or "hysteric[s]." The anti-ERA forces, much as I probably disagree with most of them on many things, have proved prescient.Today, we having some of the same arguments. Those against gay marriage argue that it could lead to the legalization of polygamy, incest, and beastiality, while proponents of gay marriage dismiss this argument as hysterical and their opponents as bigots who think all gay people like to have sex with minors or animals. As I have said many times, I'm in favor of gay marriage. But I don't think that the arguments of those who don't favor it should be readily dismissed. Much to their chargin, their slippery slope argument about the ERA has been proven right, and it's not inconceivable that they could be right again in the slippery slope argument they are making now about gay marriage. I for one think that it's a risk worth taking, but I'm not going to call people homophobes or religious nuts if they choose to differ. UPDATE: This Volokh post, above the other one I cited, is even more striking. |
Comments:
Post a Comment
