Emotivism Run Amok

Some excellent points made:

KET’s debate on gay marriage was revealing.

First, it became apparent that when marriage is defined merely as the union of two persons without any regard to gender, the standard of who can enter such unions becomes limitless. When asked whether incestuous or polygamous relationships could enter into marital unions, no satisfying answer was given by either Mr. Hartman or Rev. Penwell. Both deflected the question, insisting that there is no groundswell of support for such unions. This is intellectually dishonest.

Secondly, Mr. Hartman’s chief argument for gay marriage was not the well-being of children, but emotivism—that gay couples ought to be happy and entitled to the same benefits of heterosexual marriages for the sake of cultural validation and stability. Emotivism is the reigning ethic for today. Emotivism expresses right or wrong as a collection of either positive or negative feelings. If something evokes a positive emotion, it is good. Emotivism casts off any knowledge of objective right and wrong and exchanges such notions for euphoria.

Over and over, Mr. Hartman appealed to the polling evidence that suggests approval for same-sex marriage is on the rise, and a dramatic rise at that. Using such phrases as “being on the right side of history” and accusing opponents of same-sex marriage as “gasping for air,” Mr. Hartman deploys the “myth of inevitability”—a clever rhetorical ploy that insists history is unidirectional. When people use the “right side of history,” it often means “their side of history.” To hold this, it assumes that history is always unidirectional—a belief, according to Jonah Goldberg of National Review—that requires large amounts of hubris to maintain.

Let’s dissect the “inevitability” language and see if it comports with reality.

The youth of America are always more liberal than older generations. We would expect youths to have such an opinion on gay marriage. Their opinions are inherently rejectionist and rebellious by design. Wait, though, and see what their opinion is once they themselves get married and have children and recognize the volatility of family life and the needs of children to be raised by their biological parents.

There are tremendous polling problems in how the gay marriage polling is conducted: If the polling question “Should gay marriage be illegal?” is asked, you get a difference result than “Should marriage be defined between one man and one woman?” And what we see, over and over in 32 states, that every time a marriage amendment is put on the ballot, traditional marriage wins overwhelmingly. North Carolina’s vote was 61% to 39%. The result was a larger margin of victory than was polled prior to the election.

Depending on the poll, you get different results—like this one, which says 62% of Americans believe marriage ought to be defined as between one man and one woman. There are also polling discrepancies. How people poll versus how they vote is disparate in the gay marriage debate. (C.f. Huffington Post: Gay Marriage Polls Not Reflected in Votes).

One could likewise believe that the abortion culture in America is inevitably stacked towards the pro-choice community for good. It sure felt like this in the 1970s. It felt that way until recently when polls began indicating that younger generations are more likely to be pro-life as technology has given insight into the intricacy of unborn, nascent life. Give it a few more years or decades, and we’ll see America’s slaughter of the unborn become less and less the inevitable reign that it is today.

The momentum behind gay marriage is a political mirage conveyed by coastal and media elites. But remember, the cosmopolitan disconnect so evident in Manhattan, NY would be unsellable in Manhattan, KS. To say that gay marriage is inevitable based on polling is an act of political theatre meant to rally and unite a base trying to claim a victory.

Third, whatever is novel and whatever is glamorized is always given momentum in the polls. We see this throughout television where gay culture is photo-shopped to be glamorous and trend setting. But ask yourself: Does television paint a clear picture of actual society? Do the two dads on Modern Family who gleefully dote on their children depict actual statistics? No. In fact, gay men are less desirous in choosing to raise children together, as studies indicate.

And in a groundbreaking study released this week, extensive research confirmed that children fare better when raised in stable, heterosexual households, which refutes the meme that childhood outcomes are not dependent upon gender.

Lastly, even liberal media outlets see that gay marriage is far from “inevitable” andmaybe the youth of America aren’t as accepting as we originally thought. When enough false tropes are trotted out, tropes like “Americans believe there are more homosexuals in the U.S. than Catholics,” the remedy to the problem is not more argumentation, but a sobering encounter with reality.

End quote.

 [Red, original, bold is my emphasis]

~  The Family Foundation of Kentucky  

John MacArthur discusses homosexuality and "gay marriage" on a panel on "The Larry King Live" show: