How Liberals Argue

Here is the New York Court of Appeals' decision holding that the state need not sanction same-sex marriages as a matter of constitutional law. Note that the court -- New York's highest -- does not hold that same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, but simply holds that the state's legislature could have a rational basis for limiting marriage to the union of one man and one woman. This is very basic constitutional law, under which courts defer to legislative decisions on matters of social policy where the decision has a "rational basis." In other words, the New York Court of Appeals simply said that what should be obvious -- since no one thought that sanctioning homosexual marriage was a necessary aspect of civil society for, oh, EVER! -- namely, that reasonable people could conclude that marriage should be between one man and one woman.

Here, on the other hand, is the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean, lambasting the decision. His statement, in its entirety, reads:

"As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal.

"As that essential process moves forward, it is up to the State legislature to act to protect the equal rights of every New Yorker and for the debate on how to ensure those rights to proceed without the rancor and divisiveness that too often surrounds this issue."

This is the mode of argument that apparently represents the height of leadership and thinking in the Democratic Party ca. 2006. They want a "debate" without "rancor and divisiveness." But if you have the temerity to disagree with them, you are "bigoted." In other words, what he's saying to the New York Court of Appeals -- and, remember, this is New York, not Utah -- is that their conclusion is irrational, i.e., beyond the pale of reasoned debate, unnecessary to meet on the merits. And, if the New York state legislature concludes that marriage should remain between one man and one woman, they will be bigots and homophobes.

Put bluntly, the leadership of the Democratic Party is afraid of democracy. They know that they will lose if things they hold as being beyond debate -- abortion on demand, homosexual marriage, affirmative action, etc. -- are ever put to real voters for democratic decisions.