{"id":12,"date":"2011-02-24T21:32:52","date_gmt":"2011-02-24T21:32:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.patheos.com\/community\/slacktivist\/?p=12"},"modified":"2011-02-24T21:32:52","modified_gmt":"2011-02-24T21:32:52","slug":"cricket-cricket-tumbleweed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/","title":{"rendered":"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed."},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

It\u2019s extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were discussing in the previous post. Finding himself in a position of having to defend an absurd stance, he chose instead to stop, turn around and start over anew.<\/p>\n

And so yesterday the attorney general and President Barack Obama let it be known that since the Defense of Marriage Act was indefensible, they would no longer try to defend it.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s big news. What\u2019s most telling here is that this forward-moving reversal arose from the Justice Department, which had been tasked with the unenviable job of providing valid and compelling legal arguments for inequality under the law. Like everyone else who has tried, they found that impossible. And unlike many others who are still trying, they decided to stop faking it and just admit that the Constitution and particularly the 14th Amendment really don\u2019t allow for that sort of unequal treatment.<\/p>\n

Bravo.<\/p>\n

Ed Whelan, president of the cleverly named Ethics and Public Policy Center, spoke for opponents of marriage equality everywhere yesterday on NPR\u2019s All Things Considered<\/a>, saying: \u201cThere are lots of reasonable arguments to be offered in defense of the Defense of Marriage Act.\u201d<\/p>\n

This is what we\u2019ve come to expect from the incredibly shrinking opposition to marriage equality: 1) the assertion that there are \u201clots\u201d of excellent, terribly important arguments in support of a legal ban against same-sex couples getting married, and 2) the failure to mention what all those \u201clots\u201d of excellent, terribly important arguments might actually be.<\/p>\n

Nowhere was this made clearer than in the legal battle over California\u2019s Proposition 8. U.S. district court Judge Vaughn Walker overturned the state\u2019s ban of same-sex marriage and in his decision on the case, Perry v. Schwarzenegger,<\/em> Walker noted the lack of arguments in support of the ban and its codification of inequality under the law. The judge didn\u2019t criticize the substance of Prop 8 proponents\u2019 arguments, he simply shook his head at the absence<\/em> of them.<\/p>\n

Attorney David Boies, who successfully argued against Prop 8 in the case, pointed out why this is so:<\/p>\n

It\u2019s easy to sit around and debate and throw around opinions \u2014 appeal to people\u2019s fear and prejudice, cite studies that either don\u2019t exist or don\u2019t say what you say they do. In a court of law you\u2019ve got to come in and you\u2019ve got to support those opinions. You\u2019ve got to stand up under oath and cross-examination. And what we saw at trial is that it\u2019s very easy for the people who want to deprive gay and lesbian citizens the right to vote, to make all sorts of statements in campaign literature or in debates where they can\u2019t be cross-examined.<\/p>\n

But when they come into court and they have to support those opinions and they have to defend those opinions under oath and cross-examination, those opinions just melt away. And that\u2019s what happened here. There simply wasn\u2019t any evidence. There weren\u2019t any of those studies. There weren\u2019t any empirical studies. That\u2019s just made up. That\u2019s junk science.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

That junk science and gaping lack of evidence is what Whelan refers to as \u201clots of reasonable arguments.\u201d By \u201creasonable\u201d there, he means arguments that can be made to sound reasonable when one is a guest on a cable news shoutfest \u2014 a place where imaginary \u201cstudies\u201d can be cited and actual studies can be distorted with impunity, knowing that the TV host will never challenge you on it and the TV audience won\u2019t easily be able to double-check your claims. But as Boies noted, those insupportable claims don\u2019t cut it in court, where one has to testify under oath. And when called on to testify under oath in court, the proponents of inequality under the law who seemed so animated on cable TV suddenly grew very, very quiet.<\/p>\n

JUDGE: Can you present any evidence that recognizing that same-sex couples have the same legal rights as other couples would harm the institution of marriage, or harm children, or harm the common good, or harm public health?<\/p>\n

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE OPPONENT: [cricket. \u2026 cricket. \u2026 tumbleweed.<\/em>]<\/p>\n

That silence, I think, partly accounts for the generational chasm that seems to have opened in two of the vanguard groups opposed to equal legal rights for GLBT people: Republicans and evangelical Christians.<\/p>\n

Polls of both groups continue to show a large disparity between the antigay views of older members and the lack of such sentiment among younger members. Those younger Republicans and evangelicals recognize the need for non-sectarian legal arguments in support of nonsectarian legal discrimination, and the lack of such arguments from their older counterparts is a big part of the reason that older, antigay Republicans are now seeing, for example, their own daughters recording videos on behalf of New Yorkers for Marriage Equality<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Another component of this generational divide is that younger evangelicals and Republicans tend to have friends, acquaintances and co-workers who did not hide their GLBT identity the way the older generation\u2019s friends, acquaintances and co-workers were forced to hide theirs. The younger generation thus knows<\/em> people, and knowing them, they know that these people are not the dangerous bogeymen that the older generation makes them out to be. The younger generation has learned that what the older generation has to say about this issue cannot be trusted \u2014 it is objectively not true.<\/p>\n

The older generation of anti-gay evangelicals says that this amounts to a disturbing \u201cmoral relativism\u201d on the part of these younger Christians, but what the younger Christians see is an immoral and deeply ingrained dishonesty on the part of these older evangelicals who continue to bear false witness against GLBT people. The \u201cmoral relativism\u201d they see is the older generation\u2019s willingness to say false things in pursuit of a political agenda \u2014 the ends-justifies-the-means reasoning of those who think lying about GLBT people is somehow justified in pursuit of the supposedly greater good of \u201ctraditional values.\u201d<\/p>\n

The older generation of antigay Republicans and antigay evangelicals has slowly come to recognize that they cannot rely solely on sectarian religious arguments to make the case for denying legal equality. They realize that they can\u2019t just quote Leviticus, that they will need to come up with compelling, rational, nonsectarian reasons that trump the fundamental fairness of equal protection under the law.<\/p>\n

But they haven\u2019t quite yet come up with what those reasons might be \u2014 at least not any that they\u2019d be willing testify to under oath. (Sure, there are plenty of people like Tony Perkins who are willing to go on cable TV and make stuff up, but ask him to repeat his scary stories in court and you\u2019ll again hear nothing but crickets in the distance.)<\/p>\n

This fumbling about for a nonsectarian argument is itself a reason that the antigay lobby is rapidly losing any pretense of credibility. It has become glaringly obvious that theirs is a sectarian, religious claim desperately seeking a nonsectarian excuse, meaning that whatever purported legal argument they eventually concoct will be hard for anyone to take seriously. It will be clear to all that they haven\u2019t arrived at a conclusion based on the compelling logic of nonsectarian reasoning, but that they started out with sectarian biases for which they later latched onto dubious arguments as a mask.<\/p>\n

Those dubious arguments \u2014 if they ever come up with any \u2014 clearly aren\u2019t worth the expense of taxpayer money it would have taken for the Department of Justice to try to defend. Paying government attorneys to defend the indefensible in court would be a classic example of the \u201cwaste, fraud and abuse\u201d everyone says they want to eliminate from the federal govenment.<\/p>\n

Kudos to Holder and Obama for recognizing that and for refusing to continue playing this absurd game of pretending this is an argument between two legal, constitutional or rational viewpoints.<\/p>\n

People like Ed Whelan will continue to tell reporters that \u201cthere are lots of reasonable arguments to be offered in defense of the Defense of Marriage Act,\u201d while failing to make any of them or even to say what they might be. And the pretense that these arguments remain unsettled will likely continue for some time. But these arguments have not been settled only because they have never been formulated or stated or defended. Advocates of equality under the law have made their argument and stated their case. Advocates of inequality have not and, it seems, cannot.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013 \u2013<\/p>\n

Update:<\/strong> Southern Baptist Hierarchy spokesman Richard Land was just on NPR arguing that \u201celites\u201d in the courts may consistently find no basis for legally enforced discrimination, but that \u201cthe people\u201d have supported excluding GLBT people from equal protection in numerous elections in many states. So Land\u2019s argument is that majority rule should not be subject to the rule of law and that the majority, by virtue of outnumbering the minority, should be free to discriminate against that minority if that\u2019s what the majority votes to do. This is Land\u2019s idea of \u201cdemocracy.\u201d<\/p>\n

So now you know why Richard Land does not count himself among the egg-headed elites with their fancy Constitution and laws and whatnot.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were discussing in the previous post. Finding himself in a position of having to defend an absurd stance, he chose instead to stop, turn around and start over anew. And so yesterday […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":111,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\nCricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"slacktivist\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Fred Clark\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/\",\"name\":\"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\"},\"description\":\"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/\",\"name\":\"slacktivist\",\"description\":\""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e\",\"name\":\"Fred Clark\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"Fred Clark\"},\"description\":\"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.","description":"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.","og_description":"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/","og_site_name":"slacktivist","article_published_time":"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00","author":"Fred Clark","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Fred Clark","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/","name":"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00","dateModified":"2011-02-24T21:32:52+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e"},"description":"It's extremely unlikely that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder reads this blog, but yesterday he came to exactly the sort of realization we were","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/2011\/02\/24\/cricket-cricket-tumbleweed\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Cricket. Cricket. Tumbleweed."}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/","name":"slacktivist","description":""Test everything; hold fast to what is good."","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/0173c85e46e7e0951fef5752bed78b6e","name":"Fred Clark","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/e23731809f5a2c785d0416fc4211a51e?s=96&d=identicon&r=pg","caption":"Fred Clark"},"description":"Fred Clark is a graduate of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary (now called Palmer Seminary), of Eastern College (now called Eastern University) and of the fundamentalist Timothy Christian High School (still fundamentalist and still called Timothy Christian High School, but not really thrilled to have a snarky, liberal, tree-hugging, pro-choice, pro-GLBT, peacenik, commie, evolutionist as such a vocal alumnus). A former managing editor of Prism magazine, Fred worked in the parachurch nonprofit world for a decade and then for a decade in the newspaper biz. He began blogging in 2002. In 2003 he began writing a review of the best-selling Left Behind series. Eight years later he still hasn\u2019t finished reviewing the second book of that series and the experience has left him a broken shell of a man. Fred knows the difference between the possessive \u201cits\u201d and the contraction \u201cit\u2019s,\u201d and he is acutely bothered when others mistakenly confuse the two, yet he himself just kind of instinctively types the apostrophe whether or not it belongs there. Some feel this is his greatest hypocrisy, but those who know him better know better. He\u2019s guilty of much greater hypocrisies. Jesus loves Fred far more than Fred loves Jesus, but he at least has the decency to recognize the unfairness of that lopsided relationship and he has long wished that he were better at maybe kind of sort of doing something more to correct that some day. A Baptist, an amateur, a Gen-Xer, a Gemini and a Mets fan, Fred lives in Southeastern Pennsylvania with his wife and two teenage daughters. You can reach him via email at slacktivist at hotmail dot com.","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/author\/fredclark\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/111"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/slacktivist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}