4 ms·

How is gay marriage analogous to Mardi Gras in this context? Marriage provides certain federal and state benefits. By denying it some people, you are denying a

How is gay marriage analogous to Mardi Gras in this context? Marriage provides certain federal and state benefits. By denying it some people, you are denying a certain class of people those benefits. If you cancelled or banned Mardi Gras, you would be denying the benefits of Mardi Gras to everyone equally. The only way your argument makes sense to me is if you banned Mardi Gras only for gay people. If you ban it all together, you aren't denying any particular group their rights.

exodust 12y ago
Depending on what country you're in, the federal and state benefits can be there for couples whether married or not. This is the tricky thing about this debate. I don't equate such benefits with marriage. That's a detail for the country and state. I prefer to argue for equivalent or largely similar benefits for gay couples. That in my mind would be the more appropriate way to achieve equality. The analogy I outlined was about having an opposing opinion on something that is "owned" by the gay community, such as mardi gras, and expressing that opinion without being labelled a bigot. That's all I was doing there. Society's current obsession with political correctness prevents opposing expression of views from attracting accusations of deeper animosity. I find the racism debates equally stifling. I could list a lot of admirable qualities about Chinese people and their culture. But can I list things I don't like without being called racist? These days you end up accused of being the "I'm not racist but..." guy if you happen to mention anything that isn't tightly wrapped in political correctness, or bundled in skilful parody and comedic wit - which is out of reach for most of us. So we end up just sounding racist if we say we don't like X, Y or Z about this or that country or this or that community.

exodust 12y ago

Depending on what country you're in, the federal and state benefits can be there for couples whether married or not. This is the tricky thing about this debate. I don't equate such benefits with marriage. That's a detail for the country and state. I prefer to argue for equivalent or largely similar benefits for gay couples. That in my mind would be the more appropriate way to achieve equality. The analogy I outlined was about having an opposing opinion on something that is "owned" by the gay community, such as mardi gras, and expressing that opinion without being labelled a bigot. That's all I was doing there. Society's current obsession with political correctness prevents opposing expression of views from attracting accusations of deeper animosity. I find the racism debates equally stifling. I could list a lot of admirable qualities about Chinese people and their culture. But can I list things I don't like without being called racist? These days you end up accused of being the "I'm not racist but..." guy if you happen to mention anything that isn't tightly wrapped in political correctness, or bundled in skilful parody and comedic wit - which is out of reach for most of us. So we end up just sounding racist if we say we don't like X, Y or Z about this or that country or this or that community.