Debate: Should the Gay Lobby Use the Courts to Impose Gay Marriage on the Nation
It’s not a debate about whether gay marriage is good or bad, or whether the Constitution can reasonably be interpreted to require gay marriage, but rather a debate about whether using the courts (as opposed to legislatures) is a good strategy for the gay lobby.
It will be at noon today, in the Appellate Courtroom of the new Law School building.
Arguing “yes:” Laura Beth Nielsen, Associate Professor of Sociology, Northwestern University.
Arguing “no:” our colleague Steve Engel.
We expect it to be a good debate. We know little about Nielsen, but Engel is extremely well informed about gay politics, and we expect him to do a fine job upholding his position.
At first glance, it seems good that there is an actual debate. Most of what goes on at Marquette having anything to do with homosexuality is one-sided indoctrination.
In another sense, however, it continues the pattern of bias, since the debate will assume that gay marriage is a good thing, and merely contest how the gay lobby should go about getting it.
This is the first of a series of events this year at Marquette that will deal with “GLBTQ” issues.
What will follow if this is really a university where all points of view can be heard? A debate on whether it is reasonable to interpret the Constitution to require gay marriage.
And a debate on whether gay marriage is in fact a good thing.
Given Marquette’s track record on gay issues, we are skeptical. But this, at least, should be a good debate.