Comments on: Michael Steele: single gays are cheaper http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/ rhetorics, compositions, technologies, literacies, sexualities Tue, 27 Mar 2012 21:32:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Michael http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/comment-page-1/#comment-19393 Michael Mon, 18 May 2009 01:06:57 +0000 http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/?p=1301#comment-19393 Matt, I think you're right that this reveals that perhaps Steele realizes that an ethical/moral argument isn't as salient, so the argument needs to be made in economic/prudential terms. Perhaps it also makes clear the extreme cynicism of the Right. Matt, I think you’re right that this reveals that perhaps Steele realizes that an ethical/moral argument isn’t as salient, so the argument needs to be made in economic/prudential terms. Perhaps it also makes clear the extreme cynicism of the Right.

]]> By: Kyle Bella http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/comment-page-1/#comment-19388 Kyle Bella Sun, 17 May 2009 23:19:06 +0000 http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/?p=1301#comment-19388 Yeah, it's yet another asinine reason not to support LGBT rights. Yeah, it’s yet another asinine reason not to support LGBT rights.

]]> By: Matt http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/comment-page-1/#comment-19356 Matt Sun, 17 May 2009 06:09:57 +0000 http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/?p=1301#comment-19356 According to Steele's logic, we should de-fund ALL partner benefits. Those husbands and wives from heterosexual marriages are costing us money too! Actually, this mode of argument also almost seems like an admission of the general weakness of their position; once they say "well we can't do that because it'll cost too much," it seems like another way of saying "we should do it, but we don't want to/can't" (I know that's not what he's saying, but it could come across that way). Once you go there, it's not hard to say "but we spend that much money on X, why not on this?" etc. According to Steele’s logic, we should de-fund ALL partner benefits. Those husbands and wives from heterosexual marriages are costing us money too!

Actually, this mode of argument also almost seems like an admission of the general weakness of their position; once they say “well we can’t do that because it’ll cost too much,” it seems like another way of saying “we should do it, but we don’t want to/can’t” (I know that’s not what he’s saying, but it could come across that way). Once you go there, it’s not hard to say “but we spend that much money on X, why not on this?” etc.

]]> By: Michael http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/comment-page-1/#comment-19346 Michael Sun, 17 May 2009 01:46:14 +0000 http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/?p=1301#comment-19346 It seems that FAIL is the thing Steele is best at. It seems that FAIL is the thing Steele is best at.

]]> By: Kyle Bella http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/2009/05/michael-steele-single-gays-are-cheaper/comment-page-1/#comment-19345 Kyle Bella Sun, 17 May 2009 01:13:12 +0000 http://michaeljfaris.com/blog/?p=1301#comment-19345 I can only respond by saying: FAIL. I can only respond by saying: FAIL.

]]>