Friday, August 06, 2010

Spurious argument

Letter to LA Times on gay marriage:

After 54 years of marriage to the same woman, I must be near the top of the list of people who have credentials to talk about this subject. I don't want to hear anyone who has not been married for at least half a century to the same person talk about how sacred or meaningful the institution of marriage is. That would reduce the noise level to a whisper.

Charles Weisenberg

Beverly Hills

Sorry, Mr.Weisenberg, it doesn't work that way. While I congratulate you on your long marriage, it doesn't give you any extra authority on whether gay marriage is right or wrong—it certainly doesn't give you any authority on whether it's constitutional (the issue that was before the court). There are no "credentials" needed to have an opinion on the issue.A lifelong bachelor has as much right to comment on the subject as does Mr.Weisenberg.

Taking Mr.Weisenberg's argument to its logical conclusion, no non-veteran can discuss the war in Afghanistan, no one who hasn't played baseball can weigh in on whether it should have instant replay, and no man can have an opinion on abortion (actually a common argument, sadly enough).

I'd love to ask Mr.Weisenberg a question: how many years would one have to be married to earn "credentials" to discuss the subject? 10, 20, 25,30? Now we're really getting into the realm of absurdity.

No comments: