mk, on Wednesday, December 10th, 2008, 12:43 PM, said:
agree 100%, i think huckabee handled himself well, despite the logical fallacies. of all the uber contrived late night talk shows with guests i feel like stewart might be the most likely to ambush someone, but i'm sure they agreed this would be a topic of discussion.
It's tough to make a really good argument when you're obviously on the wrong side. The only way to really defend the anti-gay-marriage position without resorting to unsound and invalid arguments is to say something like:"Listen, I don't like gay people. They kinda gross me out. My Faith tells me homosexuality is a sin, and even though I've discarded some of the other vestigial notions of morality set forth by the Old Testament, I've decided to hold onto this one because: fags are grodie. Seriously. It makes me uncomfortable and I don't like the idea of some guy teaching my kids and then going home and making out with some other dude. I truly believe nasty stuff like this needs to be kept as far away from me and the people I care about as possible."But, you know, that just wouldn't play very well. So people start from the conclusion "Homosexuality is Wrong" and work backwards, trying to make arguments that strengthen that position."Homosexuality is a choice." Because, you know, if it weren't I'd have no real leg to stand on."Marriage is a sacred institution." Nevermind that, at this point, marriage is basically contract and property law."Civil Unions accomplish the same thing for homosexual couples." Well, separate but equal has an awesome history in this country."Hollywood liberals...." I get it. Nobody gives a fuc
k what Sean Penn has to say. But: irrelevant.The only way to WIN the argument is to appeal to the worst side of people, hope the people you're talking to already agree with you, or make fallacious arguments and hope nobody took Intro to Logic in college.Wang
I mean, RAAAAAAWWWR!