Mark Steyn’s lead post at NRO today was an argumentative (and organizational) trainwreck. Here’s just one of the fallacious lovelies. Steyn observes that lefties have in the past been against marriage, as a kind of anti-bourgeois bit of posing. And now the lefties want marriage for homosexuals, now as a kind of ennobling and civilizinginstitution. He poses the dilemma for them:
Which of these alternative scenarios — the demolition of marriage or the taming of the gay — will come to pass? Most likely, both.
I like the fact that you can have an inclusive ‘or’ in ordinary English, but this one seems wrong. First, it seems that the two features are at least prima facie inconsistent — if marriage is demolished, then it won’t play the taming function it’s supposed to play. Right? Second, are those the only two options or consequences? How about gay unions going on as they have for years and years, but now with legal protection from the state?