The movement advancing same-sex marriage has of late been preoccupied with preeminence more than debate, better thriving in the echo chambers of Ivy League classrooms and judges’ chambers than the dialectic of town halls. But a culture of self-congratulation is hardly the context for honing the art of persuasion. What passes for an argument these days—at least in the mind of newspaper editors—is truly astounding.
Today’s Star Tribune published this letter to the editor from Minneapolis resident Robert Alberti :
The lowest temperature this year was minus 22 in January, while on Tuesday, the high was 103 — a range of 125 degrees. We Minnesotans take that incredible diversity in stride like few other places in the world.
Can’t the state that tolerates these temperature differences also embrace a wide range of marriage types? Passing a constitutional amendment to restrict marriage to heterosexual unions would be like passing an amendment restricting the weather to 68 degrees and sunny.
Both amendments would be futile and would undermine what makes Minnesota one of the most special places on Earth: our diversity in all things.
(Via: Mark Shea )