Texas senator John Cornyn and Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank spiced a Senate Judciary Committee hearing yesterday by getting into it on the issue of gay marriage.
For what it’s worth, I am not sold on gay marriage, but conclusory statements such as those made by Senator Cornyn yesterday do little to advance the political debate over gay marriage. What is his basis for the statement that gay marriage will undermine the institution of marriage? Statistical evidence? Scientific evidence? Or is his statement based on religious opposition to gay marriage? I do not know the basis for Senator Cornyn’s opposition to gay marriage, but the only way to have a productive political debate is to support one’s pronouncement on the issue with a persuasive (or even non-persuasive, if that is the case) basis for such pronouncement.
This related story deals with an issue that has the divorce lawyers salivating.
Houston's Clear Thinkers
Longtime Houston attorney Tom Kirkendall's observations on developments in law, business, medicine, culture, sports, and other matters of general interest to the Houston business, professional, and academic communities.
For what it’s worth, I am not sold on gay marriage
Big T– is this you speaking here? Was there ever any doubt? just checking?? There is an interesting article written by Jonathan Rauch in this month’s Atlantic Monthly. He is apparently gay and is advocating for a federalist approach to the issue rather than a constitutional one–an experimental state by state trial basis. Could be interesting for your bloggers.