John Corvino's New YouTube Series on Marriage Equality


He only legitimizes NOM's arguments by publishing books and holding public debates with its members.
Christopher Hitchens debated conservative Christians. Progressives go on TV to debate conservatives. John debates Maggie and he's good at it—read the damn book.

Not so, in formal debate it is powerful to give some ground in order to craft an even better rebuttal. "even if you are correct about X, your conclusions are still wrong because..." Classic rhetorical maneuvers.
"not only are they getting the history wrong, they are failing to engage the real issue"

Impressively precise and powerful presentation. Well done.
#3: I've seen the video; he didn't do a particularly great job. And I'm certainly not going to be spending my money on something that will benefit Maggie Gallagher.
Also, he can't pronounce the words "bestiality" and "polygyny."
"You might not believe in divorce and remarriage, but you still have to treat Newt Gingrich and his third wife as married. You might think of Mormonism as a cult, but you still have to treat the Romneys as married."

I love this guy. What's he doing later?

And oh look, it's Dingo's turn to be the tiresome troll today.
The Guardian's dreamy Harry Enten did an optimistic survey of marriage equality's chances at ballots around the country this November.…
@1: As he mentions at the end of the video, almost half of Americans are opposed to SSM. Denying the reality that a high percentage of the voting public believe they're legitimate doesn't help the cause. Challenging their talking points directly may help.
@7. It is called a LIBRARY. It is free. It has books in it that you can borrow, read, then return.
Intelligent, well spoken men are just so hot. me, maybe.
Thanks for posting the series, Dan. You got me again. I listened to them all, including the excerpts of his talk. When I got to the end, I wept.
Ew! Did he just double-dip that chip in the guacamole?
And, progressive peoples of faith continue to engage with conservative ones. Because it is the only way to reach those who are willing to open their minds and consider that their cherished long held beliefs might be wrong. Sometimes engaging is an exercise consisting of repeatedly banging your head on the wall, often you come away with a lump, but sometimes the wall gives just a bit. I'd rather not turn my back and take the headache.

Just my $0.02.
You got me on "polygyny," Dingo. (You learn something new every day.) But my pronunciation of "bestiality" is both acceptable and common in the U.S.--not that we talk about it very often. :)
Wow! John Corvino is on slog! John, I just sat and watched all of your videos. Fantastic. Exhilarating, even, seeing the careful, point-by-point, decimation of every single anti-gay marriage argument out there. Is it okay that I'm sort of in love with you, now?
Corvino is at a distinct disadvantage in any conversation with Gallagher because her baseline is a deliberately disingenuous conflation of theology and layman's language. She knows perfectly well that "natural law" means two different things and she encourages the audience to understand it in layman's terms while she argues from it theologically. She also deliberately plays on people's misunderstanding of the church's role in marriage, which is and always has been in this country a civil contract. She's very clever but one of these days someone is going to call her on it. It's the same sort of deliberate misunderstanding/misrepresentation used by people who argue against Darwin's "theory" of evolution: many of them know that "theory" in scientific terms doesn't mean what it means in layman's language, but they allow and encourage their audience (or congregation) to think they understand what's being discussed.

I have to say I give Corvino major credit for even bothering with her. I watched a "debate" the two of them had while the book was in preparation, at some college in the Midwest, and her body language was incredibly rude and disrespectful, along with a sneering and dismissive vocal affect. As an official old guy, I wanted to reach through the screen and pinch her ear, as my own mother would have, and hiss into that ear "sit up straight young lady and stop acting like a brat"; alternatively, I could have just sent her a note suggesting that her mama raised her better, although obviously her mama didn't. Had I been in Corvino's chair, civility would have been maintained for the event but it would have been absolutely the last collaborative endeavor with her.