As promised, Part 2. This might be more disjointed than Part 1 — because I’m watching Tottenham vs Arsenal at the same time. The joys of multi-tasking…
*** *** ***
As I posted in a comment, my main intention behind this series of posts is to get self-professed liberals opposed to s. 377A to think critically about their own position. This is, if anything, the only trait which distinguishes us from fundamentalist homophobes — and hence, a trait which we must steadfastly preserve.
Over time, I suppose that as we get used to the rhetorical exchanges, and as our positions harden, we increasingly use the various ‘flawed’ arguments as shorthand for what we mean (as pointed out by MG, in response to Part 1). By ‘flawed’ I do not mean that these arguments are false outright, only that they are one-dimensional. I think it is important, lest we get caught up in rhetoric, to tease out the propositions implicit in the arguments we make as liberals. The results may surprise some of us… but at least we understand what exactly is at stake.
Let’s go back to one particular ‘flawed’ argument I mentioned in Part 1:
Continue reading ‘The Flaws of the Pro-Gay Position (Part 2)’
