Mark Steyn may have written his best column ever — this one about fairness and gay marriage

I know I’ve said before that this or that column is Mark Steyn’s best column ever, but this time, I think he’s really done it — the best column ever.  Why?  Because he’s perfectly managed to reveal the faulty reasoning behind a couple of liberal arguments.  What he does is point out that liberals engage in faulty reasoning when they play everything off the backdrop of America’s Jim Crow laws — laws that were aberrant and out-of-step with the entirety of human history:

If the Right’s case has been disfigured by delusion, the Left’s has been marked by a pitiful parochialism. At the Supreme Court this week, Ted Olson, the former solicitor general, was one of many to invoke comparisons with Loving v. Virginia, the 1967 case that struck down laws prohibiting interracial marriage. But such laws were never more than a localized American perversion of marriage. In almost all other common-law jurisdictions, from the British West Indies to Australia, there was no such prohibition. Indeed, under the Raj, it’s estimated that one in three British men in the Indian subcontinent took a local wife. “Miscegenation” is a 19th-century American neologism. When the Supreme Court struck down laws on interracial marriage, it was not embarking on a wild unprecedented experiment but merely restoring the United States to the community of civilized nations within its own legal tradition.


Yet, beyond the Court, liberal appeals to “fairness” are always the easiest to make. Because, for too much of its history, this country was disfigured by halfwit rules about who can sit where on public transportation and at lunch counters, the default position of most Americans today is that everyone should have the right to sit anywhere: If a man self-identifies as a woman and wants to sit on the ladies’ toilet, where’s the harm? If a woman wants to be a soldier and sit in a foxhole in the Hindu Kush, sure, let her. If a mediocre high-school student wants to sit in a college class, that’s only fair. American “rights” have taken on the same vapid character as grade-school sports: Everyone must be allowed to participate, and everyone is entitled to the same participation ribbon.

In just two pithy paragraphs, Steyn has clearly revealed the fallacies underlying the relentless Progressive demand that we have a “fair” society.  These demands are at odds with tried-and-true, universal principles such as “equal protection under the law,” justice, and biological reality.

Again, I’ll say that this does not mean that the various states, in order to further socioeconomic goals, should not extend to two-party gay partnerships the same benefits and burdens it confers on two-party straight partnerships.  Those are legitimate state goals.  What is not legitimate is to pervert human history and to deny reality.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. says

    Bookworm, I browsed the site MrConservative today. I have to admit that I much prefer to read your postings here, and hence I have a suggestion. Perhaps you can bring the outlook of your blog here to the niche you occupy there. Otherwise, the 3 writers featured there all look the same. I am also a bit unclear on what additional product or service MrConservative offers, that cannot be found on bigger sites such as Townhall and Hotair? Blaze is a project of Beck and it is mainly Beck’s personality that drives the viewers in. Breitbart does some original reporting every now and then, at least it did previously, and it hence it earned its unique space.  Anyway, best of luck to you.

  2. says

    Most of those laws were created by Democrat aristos. Conveniently, a lot of the people who fought in the War of the States for the Confederacy didn’t really care about slavery, nor owned slaves, or were like Robert E Lee and hated slavery. Yet they fought the same, because their masters and commanders at the top told them they had to.
    One wonders who “those people” would be now.
    The Left has a habit of creating problems and then capitalizing on them. I wouldn’t go too far into lalaland believing Leftist promises of a solution.
    The gay community are merely tools and slaves to the Leftist cause. Much as other groups are. They were never intended to be anything more.

  3. Charles Martel says

    One thing that’s certain about the left is that whatever it gets its hands on it turns into a shambles. Though the left despises the free market, it pays a weird Bizarro-style* homage to the market’s “creative destruction” by hammering at existing structures without really having a successor state of affairs in mind.
    Just as Marx couldn’t quite figure out how to get to a stateless society (although monsters like Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Bill Ayers have been happy to take up the conceptual challenge), trousered apes like Lena Dunham and Barney Fwank vaguely figure that the Orgasm–unbounded and unfettered–will suffice as an organizational principle. Surely sodomy, promiscuity, bastardy, vaginal monologues, abortion, and ersatz marriage (gay first, polygamy and incestuous later) will lead to the perfect society!
    *Bizarro was a deliciously inept creature, the result of a Lex Luthor experiment gone awry, who tried in his own pathetic way to imitate and outperform Superman. (Similar to when basket cases like California try to outperform Texas, or the old Soviet Union tried to compete with America.) Everything he touched came out wrong, even though he believed he was operating from the purest and noblest of intentions.

Leave a Reply