The Corner

Gays, Sullivan, Igno-Cons Etc

Two views:

As a gay modcon, I have to reluctantly concur with your observations. OTH, ain’t nobody perfect nowhere. You raise issues Andrew doesn’t spend much time on, and vice versa. All I can add in his defense, though, is that things always look different to minorities than they do to majorities. It’s just an unfortunate fact of life. From AS’ (and my) point of view, hypocrisy on gay equal rights is screamingly awful, but to a straight person who is clueless on what it’s like to be gay in America, it is equally possible to ask, “what’s the big deal?”

Ah, life–where’s the manual?

And…

Jonah,

Andrew Sullivan is “on a tear” about Paul Cameron, all right. Like you, I know nothing about Cameron in general, but I would note that the Heritage Foundation database he is incensed about cites exactly four of his articles, all published in a reputable academic journal called Psychological Reports, which is found in countless university libraries (including the fairly modest one at my university). Surely Heritage is not responsible for investigating everything about Cameron’s life, non-academic writings, and opinions on public policy, just because it cites his peer-reviewed work in psychology.

As for Virginia, here is the full text of the law recently passed that has Sullivan so outraged:

A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable.

This can be hardly be said (in Sullivan’s words) to be a law that “voids civil unions of any kind, under any name.” Only those that “purport” to “bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage” are “prohibited.” The legislature clearly wanted to head off any effort to create civil unions that are gay marriage in all but name. And if they’re against gay marriage, why not?

Exit mobile version