It is unfortunate, but true, that conservatives (and Christians) tend to have a reputation for being unable to think for ourselves.  We’re viewed as puppets who blindly repeat what we’ve been told, with no consideration for whether we have a reason to believe what we’re saying.  The big problem is, this perception is far too often based on reality.  Conservatives are often notoriously bad at presenting sound arguments.  Since the principles we’re arguing are usually quite sound, it’s important that we be able to argue themwell!

It’s also important to be able to recognize when someone else is twisting our arguments.

I recently came across an especially useful example.  Information is Beautiful has a great chart showing all of the major types of fallacies, with examples.  Most of these are excellent, and I think the chart is beneficial.  But I’d like to draw your attention to the example for “appeal to tradition.”

“Marriage is between one man and one woman; therefore homosexual marriage is wrong.”

The biggest problem with this example is that it’s imprecise, so it can actually be read several ways.  If we assume they meant, “marriage has always been between one man and one woman; therefore homosexual marriage is morally wrong,” then it is, indeed, an appeal to tradition.  However, it’s also a straw-man argument – at least in many cases.  If you are actually making this argument, then please continue reading, so you can learn to make a sound argument!  At least for my part, though, I would never say this; it’s absurd.

Even apart from the silly appeal to tradition, it confuses two separate arguments, attempting to meld them into one.  The first half of a legitimate argument could actually be read in the original statement, ‘though I don’t believe it’s what the writer intended, nor do I believe it’s the most natural reading.  That would be:

“Marriage is defined as the union of a man and a woman; therefore a homosexual union is not marriage.”  That is an argument I would make.  The listener and I might still disagree, but there is no fallacy in the argument.  The question of whether homosexuality is morally wrong is still a separate argument.  Whether or not homosexuality is morally acceptable has absolutely nothing to do with what is or isn’t  “marriage.”  (At least not in that particular order of cause-and-effect.  Whether or not homosexuality is morally wrong could, potentially, form the basis of an argument for or against a particular definition of marriage.  But a particular definition of marriage does not form the basis of an argument for whether or not homosexuality is morally wrong.)

Others will take us much more seriously if we can argue our positions coherently, rationally, and soundly.  It is essential that we learn to think critically, and teach our children to do the same.