2008 Woodie Awards
Letter: Reader responds to gay marriage letter written by College Republican
Issue date: 11/27/07 Section: Editorial/Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
11/27/07 - To the Cigar,
In the Tuesday, Nov. 20 issue of the Cigar, Jonathan Hansen offered up a bombastic tirade against what he believed to be the looming threat of gay marriage. While I am not gay, and I strongly support equal rights for people of all walks of life, my opinion on the subject is not the matter I wish to bring forth. Rather I wish to address the manner in which Mr. Hansen, presumably speaking on behalf of the College Republicans, presented his argument against gay marriage.
To begin, the tone was needlessly crass and extremely inconsiderate of those affected by the subject at hand. Referring to homosexuality as "an adult fetish" is not only extraordinarily disrespectful, but it clearly shows that the author neglected to consider the opposing point of view.
I think most homosexuals, as well as reputable authorities in psychology, sociology and medicine would not come close to referring to homosexuality as simply "an adult fetish." A fair and level-headed consideration of the opposing view is needed to develop a sound and respectable argument. In addition, adopting an intolerant tone is certainly no way to conjure support for your point of view.
Aside from the tone, the overall argument was poorly constructed and served only to illustrate Hume's claim that "reason is the slave of the passions." I do not wish to patronize, but I think that most people can see that this article was nothing more than an impassioned diatribe with little merit. If you wish to put forth a sound argument, regardless of your opinion, you should at least support your claims with solid evidence and reasoning. Claiming that "gay marriage would, at worst, create a complete breakdown of society as we know it," is far too broad and without any support, is simply a futile cry.
If that is the opinion you hold, you need to find solid support. Why would gay marriage result in the "breakdown of society?" How about your claimed support from sources within history, sociology, anthropology and psychology? I suggest you give specific examples and focus on particular arguments within that broad scope.
Be sure that you offer reasons and not argue in a circle. Critique your own arguments and as always consider the opposing view. Hell, you could (and maybe should) write a full-length thesis on the subject if you feel so strongly about it. Essentially, all I am encouraging is the use of effective critical thinking and writing skills used in a civil and academic manner befitting a college student.
Perhaps this is why most people are so sick of the endless bickering between political parties. When representatives of any perspective cannot give sound, well thought-out arguments, reasonable people of any level of education will, and ought to, simply turn away. So I suggest that Mr. Hansen re-write his article in the manner proposed, not because I support his point of view, but because I wish to see fruitful debate on these issues, rather than the senseless volleys of attacks and insults to which we are unfortunately accustomed.
Derek Brockmann
In the Tuesday, Nov. 20 issue of the Cigar, Jonathan Hansen offered up a bombastic tirade against what he believed to be the looming threat of gay marriage. While I am not gay, and I strongly support equal rights for people of all walks of life, my opinion on the subject is not the matter I wish to bring forth. Rather I wish to address the manner in which Mr. Hansen, presumably speaking on behalf of the College Republicans, presented his argument against gay marriage.
To begin, the tone was needlessly crass and extremely inconsiderate of those affected by the subject at hand. Referring to homosexuality as "an adult fetish" is not only extraordinarily disrespectful, but it clearly shows that the author neglected to consider the opposing point of view.
I think most homosexuals, as well as reputable authorities in psychology, sociology and medicine would not come close to referring to homosexuality as simply "an adult fetish." A fair and level-headed consideration of the opposing view is needed to develop a sound and respectable argument. In addition, adopting an intolerant tone is certainly no way to conjure support for your point of view.
Aside from the tone, the overall argument was poorly constructed and served only to illustrate Hume's claim that "reason is the slave of the passions." I do not wish to patronize, but I think that most people can see that this article was nothing more than an impassioned diatribe with little merit. If you wish to put forth a sound argument, regardless of your opinion, you should at least support your claims with solid evidence and reasoning. Claiming that "gay marriage would, at worst, create a complete breakdown of society as we know it," is far too broad and without any support, is simply a futile cry.
If that is the opinion you hold, you need to find solid support. Why would gay marriage result in the "breakdown of society?" How about your claimed support from sources within history, sociology, anthropology and psychology? I suggest you give specific examples and focus on particular arguments within that broad scope.
Be sure that you offer reasons and not argue in a circle. Critique your own arguments and as always consider the opposing view. Hell, you could (and maybe should) write a full-length thesis on the subject if you feel so strongly about it. Essentially, all I am encouraging is the use of effective critical thinking and writing skills used in a civil and academic manner befitting a college student.
Perhaps this is why most people are so sick of the endless bickering between political parties. When representatives of any perspective cannot give sound, well thought-out arguments, reasonable people of any level of education will, and ought to, simply turn away. So I suggest that Mr. Hansen re-write his article in the manner proposed, not because I support his point of view, but because I wish to see fruitful debate on these issues, rather than the senseless volleys of attacks and insults to which we are unfortunately accustomed.
Derek Brockmann