Dan Savage vs. Brian Brown: The Dinner Table Debate

Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, and Dan Savage, writer of the Savage Love column, met at Savage's home in Seattle for dinner and a debate over same-sex marriage and the Bible.

• Category

  News & Politics

[Tonytrekdax]

I must say that both debaters and the moderator did very well. It’s one of the few times I’ve watched a debate on such a heated topic discussed reasonably. Ultimately I side with DAN SAVAGE

[wfmkk]

Speaking of fundamentally wrong, "gay marriage" ideologues are generally clueless about logical reasoning.

If you want to change the definition of marriage, then you need to explain what the fundamental purpose of this "new and improved" marriage would be.

What is the fundamental purpose of marriage?

Why does the state care about the unions of couples?

I look forward to ridiculing your attempted answers.

[rhopographer]

Beyond Dan Savage's amazing rhetoric...

I *love* his stuffed buffalo head.

[Christopher Fremin]

Powerful Dan Savage!

[Marly Duran]

There is something fundamentally wrong with people who won't support same-sex civil unions. Dan Savage is so right and his arguments are rational and well said. The opposers are just picking bits of the bible to justify their position, when I doubt even 1 of them actually lives by everything the bible says. It is bullshit. Letting gays marry won't hurt anyone else's marriage.

[Marly Duran]

I'm at 22 minutes, and Brian Brown is debating things that weren't even said by Dan Savage, like that LBGT are hating and wanting to kill Christians.

[wfmkk]

(continuing)

With dystopian zeal, the queer script declares that our individual genetic makeup shall be transcended by advanced technology. The queer subculture thumbs its nose at nature and defiantly bleats, "Fuck sex!"

urbandictionary*com/define.php ?term=genderfuck

Marriage shall be torn from its historic link to procreation and turned into a perverted political tool. Dissenters shall be reflexively attacked as "bigots" — because "progress" demands a brave new world of gender ambiguity.

[wfmkk]

Postmodernism claims that there is no objective truth — because all apparent realities are only "social constructs" that are subject to change. In other words, reality has no limits — which is a very convenient premise for propaganda.

So a tenet of the queer activist script is that gender is a social construct. That means we can be (supposedly) whatever we want to be — male or female or even something else. Never mind that sexual complementarity is essential to who we are as a species.

[snappycatchy]

Wow, I did not expect Brown to go into a defense of slavery.

[vidhead85]

When Dan set down the book of sociological research that contradicts Brown's position, Brown looked at it and didn't even bother to pick it up as if it would "gay" him up