When I point out that legal recognition of gay marriage entails the expansion of a morally indefensible state institution Chip Gibbons of Binary Circumstance likens me to a slaveholder:
Your position is like a plantation owner in the south keeping his slaves, while fighting any effort on the part of the slaves to keep whites as slaves. If blacks had been able to keeps whites as slaves, a lot more whites would have thought that slavery was a bad idea. When heteros are forced to pay my bills and are forced to surrender their freedom to the state, then more of them will figure out that maybe state interference in private lives isn’t such a good idea.
When state-defined and supported marriage is abolished entirely (heterosexuals will not allow that to happen anymore than slaveowners would allow the abolition of slavery), then I will no longer have to defend the efforts of same-sex couples to partake of that corrupt, slave-owning institution. But heterosexuals are not going to give up their claim on a right to have the state sanction their marriages and provide them with special benefits.
Actually I’m a consistent abolitionist. Gibbons claims to be an abolitionist but defends the expansion of the institution he knows should be abolished. To paraphrase: “Since slavery isn’t going away today, let’s get us some slaves.”
Gower:Why, the enemy is loud; you hear him all night.
Fluellen:If the enemy is an ass and a fool and a prating coxcomb, is it meet, think you, that we should also, look you, be an ass and a fool and a prating coxcomb? In your own conscience, now? – Henry V