Last week Evan Wolfson and I debated on The Economist website. I have some regrets: the moderator's comments were not forwarded to me. I can easily answer his argument: "why do we let infertile couples marry?" I did not answer it because I was responding to the arguments that Evan presented, which were all I was presented with.
I'm most proud of the fact that as the debate progressed more people supported our position. Many of the commenters on their blog are just appalled - appalled! - that even a third of Economist readers support our views. That's our achievement.
I was helped by Evan Wolfson resolute refusal to engage ANY argument. I can understand gay marriage advocates who argue their view of marriage is superior to my own. Understand at least the disagreement.
But Evan is totally committted to the intellectually absurd idea "there are not arguments for marriage."
If you want to follow the debate check it out here.